Airplane Performance and Design

AIRPLANE PERFORMANCE and DESIGN
Dr. Randal Allen
2012 Randal Allen, PhD

1
Phases of Airplane Design
Conceptual
Design
Preliminary Design
Detail Design

2
Conceptual Design
Major
drivers are
Aerodynamics
Propulsion
Flight performance.
The first-order question is
Can the design meet the specifications?
If so, then the next question is
Is the design optimized, i.e. is it the best design that meets the
specifications?

3
Preliminary Design
Serious
structural and control system analysis and design take
place.
Substantial wind tunnel testing will be carried out, and major
computational fluid dynamic (CFD) calculations of the complete
flow field over the airplane configuration will be made.
At the end of the preliminary design phase, the airplane
configuration is frozen and precisely defined.
The drawing process called lofting is carried out which
mathematically models the precise shape of the outside skin of
the airplane, making certain that all sections of the aircraft
properly fit together.
4
Detail Design
The
airplane is now simply a machine to be fabricated.

The precise design of each individual rib, spar, and section of
skin now takes place.
The size, number, and location of fasteners (rivets, welded joints,
etc.) are determined.
Manufacturing tools and jigs are designed.
At this stage, flight simulators for the airplane are developed.

5
7 Pivot Points for Conceptual Design
Requirements
Initial
weight estimate of the airplane

Critical performance parameters
Maximum lift coefficient
Lift-to-drag ratio
Wing loading
Thrust-to-weight ratio
Configuration layout (shape/size of the airplane on a drawing)
Better weight estimate
Performance analysis (does the airplane meet/exceed the reqts?)
iterate steps 3 to 6
Optimization (is it the best design?)
6
Requirement Aspects (1/4)
Remember
thrust required and power required are associated

with the airframe, while thrust available and power available
are strictly associated with the power plant (engine/motor).
Range
Propeller
L
cD
Takeoff
sLO
ln
W0
W1
distance
1.44W 2
g SCL , MAX T D r W L 0.7V
LO

7
Stalling
Vstall
velocity
2W
SCL, MAX
Endurance
Propeller
E2
CL3/2
cCD
Maximum
VMAX
S 1
2 W1
W0
velocity
T
W
A
W MAX S
W TA

S W MAX
CD ,0
1/2
4CD ,0
eAR

8
Rate
of climb
Propeller
W /S
1
P
( R / C ) MAX
0.8776
CD ,0 L / D 3/2
W MAX
MAX
Maximum
MAX g
CL, MAX nMAX

2 W / S
Maximum
Rmin
turn rate
turn radius
2
W
gCL, MAX S

9
Maximum
nMAX 12 V2
Service
load factor
CL, MAX
W /S
ceiling
W
H 19,867 ln
PA,0 MAX
2 W
1/2
1/4
0.7436CD ,0
3/4
eAR
Cost
Reliability
and maintainability
Maximum size
10
Design of a Propeller-Driven Airplane

11
Requirements
1.
Maximum level speed at midcourse weight: 250 mph

2. Range: 1,200 mi
3. Ceiling: 25,000 ft
4. Rate of climb at sea level: 1,000 ft/min
5. Stalling speed: 70 mph
6. Landing distance (to clear a 50-ft obstacle): 2,200 ft
7. Takeoff distance (to clear a 50-ft obstacle): 2,500 ft

12
Initial (gross) Weight Estimate (1/2)
W0
Wcrew Wpayload
1 W
We
0.62
W0
Wf
W0
/ W0 We / W0
(empty: historical data for 19 propeller-driven airplanes)
0.159
Crew:
(fuel: see Anderson, section 8.3.2, pp. 400-405)
1 pilot at 170 lb
Wcrew 170
Payload:
5 passengers (5 x 170 lb) and luggage (6 x 20 lb)
Wpayload 970
13
Initial (gross) Weight Estimate (2/2)
W0
Wcrew Wpayload
1 W
/ W0 We / W0
170 lb 970 lb
1140 lb
(1140 lb)(4.525) 5158 lb

1 0.159 0.62 0.221
Note:
For each 1 lb increase in passenger weight, there is 4.525

lb increase in gross weight
Wf
Wf
W0
W0 (0.159)(5158 lb) 820 lb
Aviation
gasoline
Density
820 lb
145.4 gal
5.64 lb / gal
Minimum
needed fuel capacity

14
Critical Performance Parameters

Maximum Lift Coefficient
lift coefficient CL,MAX
5-digit NACA airfoils preferred over 4-digit NACA airfoils
because the maximum camber is closer to the leading edge
(0.15c), which implies a higher cl ,MAX
Wings are usually thicker at the root then taper toward the tip
While stall may occur at the root, the tips are still in the flow
for effective aileron
cl ,MAX 1.6
Assume root is NACA 23018
cl ,MAX 1.8
Assume tip is NACA 23012
Use the average cl , MAX 1.7
To assist in takeoff and landing performance, trailing edge
flaps are added cl ,MAX 0.9
Maximum
cl ,MAX 1.7 0.9 2.6 CL,MAX 0.9 cl ,MAX (0.9)(2.6) 2.34
15

Wing Loading
loading W / S
Wing loading plays a role in stall velocity, landing distance,
and maximum velocity.
Consider each requirement then determine based on
strongest constraint
Stall velocity requirement (#5) of 70 mph = 102.7 fps
W 1
1
ft 2
2
lb
Vstall
CL, MAX (0.0023769 slug
)(102.7
)
(2.34)
29.3
(sea level)
s
ft
ft
S 2
2
Landing distance requirement (#6) of 2,200 ft
Wing
W
41.5 ftlb2
S
The
stronger constraint is
W
29.3 ftlb2
S
W
5159 lb
2
176
ft
29.3 ftlb2 29.3 ftlb2

16

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
ratio T / W
Consider each requirement then determine the ratio based on
strongest constraint
P 119 hp
Takeoff distance requirement (#7) of 2,500 ft
P 363 hp
Rate of climb requirement (#4) of 1,000 ft/min
Maximum velocity requirement (#1) of 250 mph P 303 hp
The stronger constraint is P 363 hp
Recall for a propeller-driven aircraft, the power-to-weight
ratio is the performance parameter and is often quoted as
power loading (the reciprocal of power-to-weight ratio).
Thrust-to-weight
P 363 hp
0.07 hp
lb
W 5158 lb
W
lb
14.2 hp
P

17
Summary
Minimum Needed for Conceptual Design
Maximum lift coefficient

Maximum lift-to-drag ratio
Wing loading
Power loading
Takeoff gross weight
Fuel weight
Fuel tank capacity
Wing area
High-lift device, single-slotted trailing-edge flaps
Zero-lift drag coefficient
Drag-due-to-lift coefficient
Aspect ratio
Propeller efficiency 0.8
Engine power, supercharged to 20,000 ft P 363 hp
CL,MAX 2.34
L / D MAX
14
W / S 29.3 ftlb2
lb
W / P 14.2 hp
W0 5158 lb
W f 820 lb
145.4 gal
S 176 ft 2
CD,0 0.017
K 0.075
AR 7.07
18
Configuration Layout (1/4)

Overall Configuration
The
weight of 5158 lb is on the borderline of single- and twinengine general aviation airplanes. We need 363 hp. Examining
the available piston engines, we find the Textron Lycoming
TIO/LTIO-540-Vis rated at 360 hp supercharged to 18,000
ft.

19

Tractor Configuration
(+)
The heavy engine is at the front, which helps to move the

center of gravity forward and therefore allows a smaller tail for
stability considerations.
(+) The propeller is working in an undisturbed free stream.
(+) There is a more effective flow of cooling air for the engine.
(-) The propeller slipstream disturbs the quality of the airflow
over the fuselage and wing root.
(-) The increased velocity and flow turbulence over the fuselage
due to the propeller slipstream increase the local skin friction on
the fuselage.

20

Pusher Configuration
(+)
Higher-quality (clean) airflow prevails over the wing and

fuselage.
(+) The inflow to the rear propeller induces a favorable pressure
gradient at the rear of the fuselage, allowing the fuselage to close
at a steeper angle without flow separation. This in turn allows a
shorter fuselage, hence smaller wetted surface area.
(+) Engine noise in the cabin area is reduced.
(+) The pilots front field of view is improved.
(-) The heavy engine is at the back, which shifts the center of
gravity rearward, hence reducing longitudinal stability.
(-) Propeller is more likely to be damaged by flying debris at
landing.
(-) Engine cooling problems are more severe.
21
Because
we need a rather large, powerful reciprocating engine

for our airplane, we wish to minimize any engine cooling
problems. Therefore, we will be traditional and choose the
tractor configuration.

22
Wing Layout (1/2)

ratio b S AR 176 ft 2 7.07 35.27 ft
Wing sweep, subsonic therefore no need for swept wings
Taper ratio ct / cr ,0 1
(+) Smaller taper ratio implies a lighter wing structure (based on
centroid of the lift distribution)
(-) Smaller taper ratio exhibits undesirable flow characteristics
Compromise with 0.5 which determines the geometry of the
trapezoidal wing
Variation of airfoil shape and thickness along the span, root
NACA 23018, tip NACA 23012
Geometric twist, unnecessary since aileron control is maintained
Anhedral wings bent up
Dihedral wings bent down
Aspect
23
Wing Layout (1/2)
High-wing:
good for loading/unloading cargo; more stable re:

lateral/rolling motion; dihedral also enhances lateral stability;
possibly too much stability inhibiting rolling motion; anhedral
Mid-wing: lowest drag because wing-body interference is
minimized; structural disadvantages with support running
through the fuselage; okay with passengers above and cargo
below
Low-wing: landing gear disadvantages; ground clearance needed
for propeller
We choose a low-wing configuration due to structural and
landing gear considerations.
24
Fuselage Configuration
Store
the fuel in the wings

Volume is given for the Lycoming engine, seating is referenced,
baggage
Note: Tapering should be less than 15 degrees to avoid flow
separation.

25
CG Location First Estimate
Used
to locate the wing relative to the fuselage such that the

mean aerodynamic center of the wing is behind the c.g. of the
airplane for static longitudinal stability.
Estimate the weight of the wing.
Wwing 2.5 ftlb2 S 2.5 ftlb2 176 ft 2 440 lb

26
Horizontal and Vertical Tail Size (1/)
Horizontal
tail: longitudinal stability

Elevator: provides longitudinal control and trim
Vertical tail: directional stability
Rudder: provides directional control
Size may be based on stability and control analysis or historical
approach.
Horizontal tail volume sizing: (historically, VHT 0.7 )
Vertical tail volume sizing: (historically, VVT 0.04 )

27
Horizontal and Vertical Tail Size (2/)
Tail
types: Conventional, T-tail, Cruciform

We choose the conventional tail for its light-weight structure
and reasonable stability and control then calculate SHT 37.2 ft 2
and SVT 15.5 ft 2. It makes no sense to use a cambered airfoil for
the tail, therefore, use symmetric airfoils, e.g. NACA 0012.
Wings of lower AR, although aerodynamically less efficient,
stall at higher angles of attack than wings with higher AR.
Hence, if the horizontal tail has a lower AR then the wing, when
the wing stalls, the tail still has some control authority.
Select AR 4 with the same taper ratio as the wings, 0.5 .
Then calculate wingspan, root chord and tip chord length, and
mean aerodynamic chord for the horizontal tail.
28
Horizontal and Vertical Tail Size (3/3)

the vertical tail, 1.3 ARVT 2.0 is typical. Choose ARVT 1.5 .
Then, calculate the height of the vertical tail, and with 0.5 ,
calculate the root chord and tip chord lengths as well as the mean
aerodynamic chord for the horizontal tail.
For

29
Propeller Size (1/2)
Propeller
efficiency is improved as the diameter of the propeller

gets larger.
1. Propeller tips must clear the ground when the airplane is on
the ground.
2. Propeller tips speed should be less than the speed of sound to
avoid compressibility effects.
1/4
Two-blade D 22 hp
(diameter in inches)
1/4
Three-blade D 18 hp
(diameter in inches)

30
Propeller Size (2/2)

a two-blade: D 22 360 95.8 in 8 ft , the wing tip velocity is
1,089 ft/s
Add this vector to the forward velocity vector (250 mph = 367
fps) to attain 1,149 ft/s
The speed of sound at sea level is 1,117 ft/s which is undesirable.
1/4
D
18
360
78.4 in 6.5 ft , the wing tip
With a three-blade:
velocity is 889 ft/s
Add this vector to the forward velocity vector (250 mph = 367
fps) to attain 962 ft/s
Therefore, we choose the three-blade propeller with D 6.5 ft
(adjust to what is available off the shelf)
With
1/4

31
Landing Gear/Wing Placement (1/3)
Landing
gear configurations: tricycle, tail dragger, and bicycle

Tricycle: cabin is level when on the ground, forward visibility is
improved, requires the c.g. to be ahead of the main wheels,
enhanced stability during ground roll
Tail dragger: allows for a larger propeller, greater lift at takeoff,
main wheels must be ahead of the c.g., unstable during a groundroll turn
Bicycle: useful for high wing airplanes, light-weight outrigger
wheels are required near each wing tip
We choose the tricycle configuration. (Complete texts are
written on landing gear design.)
32
The
landing gear should be long enough to give the propeller tip

at least 9 inches of clearance above the ground. (We choose 12
inches or 1 ft.) The diameter of the propeller was determined to
be 6.5 ft, so that the radius is 3.25 ft. The landing gear length
should be at least 4.25 ft.
Note: since the landing gear folds up into the wing, the wing
location may have to be adjusted to distribute the loading on the
wheels keeping the aerodynamic center behind the c.g. to
maintain longitudinal stability.

33
Tire
sizing
Wheel diameter (inches)

Wheel width (inches)
A
1.51
0.715
B
0.349
0.312
From
a load analysis, the load on the main gear is 4,301 lb and

the nose gear is 857 lb. Therefore, the main wheels are 22.0
inches in diameter and 7.8 inches wide; while the nose wheel is
15.9 inches in diameter and 5.9 inches wide. (adjust according to
what is available off the shelf)
Note: Keep in mind the c.g. shifts as fuel is consumed.
Therefore, a detailed analysis should be conducted to account for
the range of the c.g.
34
Better Weight Estimate (1/3)

Reference:
Aircraft Design: A conceptual Approach by Daniel

Raymer, AIAA
Wing weight = 2.5(Sexposed wing planform)
Horizontal tail weight = 2.0(Sexposed horizontal tail planform)
Vertical tail weight = 2.0(Sexposed vertical tail planform)
Fuselage weight = 1.4(Swetted area)
Landing gear weight = 0.057(W0)
Installed engine weight = 1.4(Engine weight)
All else empty = 0.1(W0)

35

Sexp osed wing planform 148 ft 2
Sexp osed horizontal tail planform 35.3 ft 2

Sexp osed vertical tail planform 14.4 ft 2
Swetted area 306.3 ft 2
W0 5158 lb
Engine weight 547 lb

Wing
weight = 370 lb
Horizontal tail weight = 70.6 lb
Vertical tail weight = 28.8 lb
Fuselage weight = 428.8 lb
Landing gear weight = 294 lb
Installed engine weight = 765.8 lb

36
All
else empty = 515.8 lb
We 2474 lb
W0 Wcrew Wpayload W fuel Wempty

Wcrew 170 lb
Wpayload 970 lb
W fuel 820 lb
W0 170 lb 970 lb 820 lb 2474 lb 4434 lb
With
this new we recalculate landing gear weight 0.057(W0)

and all else empty 0.1(W0) and recalculate . Repeat until
convergence occurs. Finally
We 2308 lb
W f 652 lb
W0 4100 lb
37
Performance Analysis (1/8)

Updated
performance parameters
Wing loading
W 4100 lb
23.3 ftlb2
2
S 176 ft
Power
loading
W 4100 lb
lb
11.4 hp
P 360 hp
Still
assume
CD,0 0.017
K 0.075
CL,MAX 2.34
L / D MAX 14

38
Power
required and power available curves

ft
Plotted curves show VMAX 437 s 298 mph
Requirement #1: Maximum level speed at midcourse weight: 250
mph

39
Rate
of climb and ceiling

ft
Plots show R / C MAX 1572 min with a ceiling of 33,300 ft
Requirement #4: Rate of climb at sea level: 1,000 ft/min
Requirement #3: Ceiling: 25,000 ft

40
Range
Calculations
show range meets the range requirement.

Requirement #2: Range: 1,200 mi

41
Stalling
Vstall
speed
2 W 1
2
1
ft
lb
23.3
91.5
2
s 62.4mph
slug
ft
S CL, MAX
0.0023769 ft3
2.34
Requirement
#5: Stalling speed: 70 mph

42
Landing
distance
Calculations show slanding 1751 ft
Requirement #6: Landing distance (to clear a 50-ft obstacle):
2,200 ft

43
Takeoff
distance
Calculations show stakeoff 761 ft
Requirement #7: Takeoff distance (to clear a 50-ft obstacle):
2,500 ft

44
Clearly
we meet all the performance requirements (in some

cases considerably). This is due to the change from the initial
weight estimate of 5,158 lb to a new weight estimate of 4,100
lb.

45
Iterate
iterate
steps 3 to 6
There really is no reason to iterate on the design. But if you did,
its best to have this information in MATLAB or an Excel
spreadsheet for iterative purposes.

46
Optimize
Is it the Best Design?
With the new, lighter weight, we could choose a less powerful,
more light-weight engine. Hence the airplane will be less
expensive.
Optimization

47
References
Aircraft
Performance and Design, by John D. Anderson

Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, by Daniel P. Raymer

48

Airplane Performance and Design

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Airplane Performance and Design

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

AIRPLANE PERFORMANCE and DESIGN

Dr. Randal Allen

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Phases of Airplane Design

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

structural and control system analysis and design take

airplane is now simply a machine to be fabricated.

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

7 Pivot Points for Conceptual Design

weight estimate of the airplane

Requirement Aspects (1/4)

thrust required and power required are associated

g SCL , MAX T D r W L 0.7V

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Requirement Aspects (2/4)

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Requirement Aspects (3/4)

CL, MAX nMAX

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Requirement Aspects (4/4)

Design of a Propeller-Driven Airplane

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Maximum level speed at midcourse weight: 250 mph

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Initial (gross) Weight Estimate (1/2)

(empty: historical data for 19 propeller-driven airplanes)

(fuel: see Anderson, section 8.3.2, pp. 400-405)

5 passengers (5 x 170 lb) and luggage (6 x 20 lb)

Initial (gross) Weight Estimate (2/2)

(1140 lb)(4.525) 5158 lb

For each 1 lb increase in passenger weight, there is 4.525

W0 (0.159)(5158 lb) 820 lb

needed fuel capacity

Critical Performance Parameters

cl ,MAX 1.7 0.9 2.6 CL,MAX 0.9 cl ,MAX (0.9)(2.6) 2.34

Critical Performance Parameters

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Critical Performance Parameters

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Maximum lift coefficient

Configuration Layout (1/4)

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Configuration Layout (2/4)

The heavy engine is at the front, which helps to move the

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Configuration Layout (3/4)

Higher-quality (clean) airflow prevails over the wing and

Configuration Layout (4/4)

we need a rather large, powerful reciprocating engine

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Wing Layout (1/2)

Wing Layout (1/2)

good for loading/unloading cargo; more stable re:

the fuel in the wings

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

CG Location First Estimate

to locate the wing relative to the fuselage such that the

Wwing 2.5 ftlb2 S 2.5 ftlb2 176 ft 2 440 lb

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Horizontal and Vertical Tail Size (1/)

tail: longitudinal stability

2012 Randal Allen, PhD

Horizontal and Vertical Tail Size (2/)