DESIGN OF 300 SEATED LONG

RANGE AIRCRAFT
AN AIRCRAFT DESIGN PROJECT

Submitted by

ASWATH J (19101006)
HARIHARAN L (19101015)
NAVINKUMAR V (19101025)

in partial fulfillment for the award of the degree of

BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING

IN

AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING

PAAVAI ENGINEERING COLLEGE, NAMAKKAL

(AUTONOMOUS)

DECEMBER 2022
 PAAVAI ENGINEERING COLLEGE, NAMAKKAL
(AUTONOMOUS)
BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

Certified that this project report “DESIGN OF 300 SEATED LONG RANGE
AIRCRAFT” is the bonafide work of ASWATH J (19101006), HARIHARAN L
(19101015), NAVINKUMAR V (19101025) who have carried out the project work under
my supervision.

SIGNATURE SIGNATURE

Dr.R.Arravind,M.E,Ph.D, Dr.R.Arravind,M.E,Ph.D,

HEAD OF THE SUPERVISER

DEPARTMENT,
Department of Aeronautical
Department of Aeronautical
Engineering,
Engineering,
Paavai Engineering College
Paavai Engineering College,
Namakkal - 637018
Namakkal - 637018

Submitted for Pre-End Semester Examination held on ………………

INTERNAL EXAMINER EXTERNAL EXAMINER

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
A great deal of arduous work and effort has been spent in implementing this project work. Several
special people have guided us and have contributed significantly to this work and so this becomes
obligatory to record out thanks to them.

We express my profound gratitude to our honorable Chairman, Sri. CA. N. V. NATRAJAN,

B.com., and to our correspondents, Smt. MANGAI NATRAJAN, M.Sc., for providing all
necessary facilities for the successful completion of our project.

We wish to express my sincere thanks to our respected Director Administration,

Dr.K.K.RAMASAMY, M.E Ph.D., for all the blessing and help providing during the period of
project work.

We would like to thank our respected Principal Dr.M.PREMKUMAR, M.E.., Ph.D., for allowing
us to do this project and providing require time to complete the same.

We wish to express the since of gratitude to Dr.R.ARRAVIND,M.E., Ph.D.., Head of the

Department, for the able guidance and useful suggestions, which helped us for completing project
work in time.

We would like to extend our sincere thanks to Dr.R.ARRAVIND,M.E., Ph.D.., supervisor for
his invaluable guidance, generous help and support.

We would like to extend our sincere thanks to all our department staff members and our
parents for their advice and encouragement to do the project work with full interest and
enthusiasm.
 ABSTRACT
The design 300 seated long range aircraft has proven to be one of the most effective approaches
as far as the endeavor to response long-range travelling of payload is concerned.

Especially for heavy business aircraft, “long range” or “sustain heavy” has become all new
aircraft types are designed taking into account low observable principles and techniques, while
existing jet fighters are considered for modification in order to reduce their radar signature. Low
radar signature for a target means that it is detected and tracked at a shorter distance from a
radar. However, low observable does not mean no observable, That is complete disappearance
from the radar screens. Having realized the capabilities of long range aircraft, many countries
have been developing anti-stealth technologies.

The following systems have been reported to be enhanced heavy payloads: passive/ multistatic
radars, very low frequency radars, over-the horizon radars and sensitive IR sensor systems. It
will continue by exploring the basic concepts of low observable principles, mainly reduction of
RCS – Radar Cross Section. Focusing on the Fighter stealth aircraft, there will be an attempt to
calculate the expected detection ranges for a number of representative radar systems, taking into
account an open-source estimation of the Fighter fuselage RCS.

Finally, there will be a brief presentation of systems which are reported to have anti-stealth
capabilities. Considering all such anti-stealth proposals, it will become evident that no system
alone seems to be capable of providing adequate protection: a suitable combination of radar,
sensors, weapon systems, tactical data links, as well as tactics, should be employed to effectively
counter stealth threats.

i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

NO. NO.

ABSTRACT i
LIST OF TABLES v

LIST OF FIGURES vi

LIST OF SYMBOLS viii

1. INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Conceptual design 1

1.2 Preliminary design 1

1.3 Detail design 2

1.4 The seven intellectual pivot points for conceptual design 2

1.5 Classification of airplanes 7

2. LITERATURE SURVEY 9

2.1 Geometric specifications 9

2.2. Weight specifications 10

2.3 Powerplant specifications 10

2.4 Performance specifications 11

3. COMPARATIVE PLOTS 12

3.1 Speed Vs aspect ratio 12

3.2 Speed Vs rate of climb 12

3.3 Speed Vs range 13

3.4 Speed Vs altitude 13

3.5 Speed Vs wing loading 14

3.6 Speed Vs b/l 14

4. PRELIMINARY WEIGHT ESTIMATION 15

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

ii
 NO. NO.
5. WING & TAIL DESIGN WITH CONTROL SURFACES 19
(AERODYNAMICS)

5.1. Airfoil Selection 19

5.2. Dimensional parameters 22

5.3. Wetted area determination 25

5.4. Design of control surfaces 28

6. DRAG ESTIMATION 31

7. CALCULATION FOR THRUST REQUIRED & ENGINE 40

SELECTION

8. RATE OF CLIMB CALCULATION 43

9. V-N DIAGRAM 45

10. LANDING GEAR SELECTION AND DESIGN 47

10.1. Landing Gear Configuration 48

10.2. Landing gear arrangements 50

10.3. Landing Gear Design 50

10.4. Gear retraction geometry 53

11. WING STRUCTURAL DESIGN 55

11.1. Schrenk’s approximation method 55

11.2. Wing structural weight distribution 56

11.3. Structural design study – theory approach for wing 57

12. FUSELAGE DESIGN AND LAYOUT 61

12.1. Longerons 61

12.2. Former 62

12.3. Bulkhead 63

12.4. Fuselage layout drawing 65

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

NO.
iii
 NO.
13. DETAILED DESIGN WITH CAD DRAWINGS 66

13.1 Top view of an aircraft 66

13.2 Side view of an aircraft 66

13.3 Front view of an aircraft 67

14. CONCLUSION 68

LIST OF TABLES
iv
TABLE NAME OF THE TABLE PAGE
NO.
NO.

2.1 Geometric specifications 9

2.2 Weight specifications 10

2.3 Powerplant specifications 10

2.4 Performance specifications 11

5.1 Airfoil selection 21

6.1 Calculation of cdO 34

6.2 Drag polar 36

LIST OF FIGURES

v
 TABLE NAME OF THE FIGURES PAGE
NO.
NO.

1.1 Seven intellectual pivot points for design 3

1.2 Aircraft conceptual design process 4

1.3 The Design Wheel 6

3.1 Speed Vs aspect ratio 12

3.2 Speed Vs rate of climb 12

3.3 Speed Vs range 13

3.4 Speed Vs altitude 13

3.5 Speed Vs wing loading 14

3.6 Speed Vs b/l 14

4.1 Mission Profile 16

5.1 Airfoil Geometric Parameters 20

6.1 Cl& Cd for different altitudes 38

8.1 Velocity Vs Rate Of Climb 44

9.1 V-n Diagram 46

10.1 A typical Landing Gear System 48

10.2 Landing Gear Configuration 50

10.3 Fixed and retractable landing gear comparison 54

11.1 Wing Lift Distribution 55

11.2 A Typical Ribs Structure 58

11.3 Arrangement Ribs Structure 59

12.1 Longerons 61

12.2 Former 62

12.3 Bulkhead 63

TABLE NAME OF THE FIGURES PAGE

vi
NO. NO.
12.4 Longerons & frame locations and spacing 64

12.5 Fuselage layout drawing 65

13.1 Top view of an aircraft 66

13.2 Side view of an aircraft 66

13.3 Front view of an aircraft 67

vii
 LIST OF SYMBOLS

SYMBOLS NAME OF SYMBOLS

R Range

V Velocity

T Thrust

W Weight

C Specific fuel consumption

E Loitering time

L/D Lift to drag ratio

V alt Velocity at altitude

ρalt Density at altitude

S Wing surface area

B Wingspan

µalt Coefficient of viscosity at altitude

C HT Horizontal tail volume coefficient

L HT Horizontal tail arm length

S HT Horizontal tail area

SW Wing area

CW Wing mean chord

LVT Vertical tail arm length

SVT Vertical tail area

C VT Vertical tail volume coefficient

bW Wingspan

SW Wing area

VTO Vertical take-off distance

STO Take-off distance

FTO Take-off thrust

viii
SYMBOLS NAME OF SYMBOLS

VA Approach Velocity

Sπ Wetted area

Λ Sweep angle

Λ Taper ratio

ix
 CHAPTER 1`

INTRODUCTION
WHEN YOU DESIGN AN AIRPLANE ……… THINK ABOUT HOW YOU WOULD
FEEL IF YOU HAD TO FLY IT! SAFETY FIRST. Sign on the wall of the design office
at Douglas Aircraft Company, 1992.

Aircraft design is an evolutionary process rather than a revolutionary process. Thanks

to Sir George Cayley who is a milestone in the evolutionary process. If anyone wants to
design an aircraft without taking any help from previous designs, it will be a one of two
extremes, one a success with the hectic and long process or a failure even after long duration.

Airplane design is an art and a science. In that respect it is difficult to learn by reading
a book. Airplane design the intellectual engineering process of creating on paper a flying
machine to meet certain specification and requirements established by potential users or to
pioneer innovative, new ideas and technology, like the aircraft to be designed here.

An example of the former is the designer of most commercial transports, starting at

least with the Douglas DC-1 in 1932, which was designed to meet or exceed various
specifications by an airplane company.

An example of the later is the design of Rocket- powered Bell X-1, the first airplane
to exceed the speed of sound in level of climbing or level flight on October 14, 1947. The
design process is indeed an intellectual activity, but a rather a special one that is tempered by
good intuition developed via experience, by attention paid to successful airplane designs that
have been used in past, and by design procedures and databases that are a part of every
airplane manufacturer.

So there is a need to conduct a literature survey related to what sort of aircraft is going
to be designed.

The project is centered towards a design of safe jet transport. The objective of this
project is to provide a better design by manipulating the previous designs.
 An airplane design is both an art and a science. Airplane design is an intellectual
engineering process of creating on paper a flying machine to

 Meet specifications established by users

 Pioneer innovative, new ideas and technology.

The design process is an intellectual activity developed via experience, by attention paid
to successful airplane designs that have been used in the past and by design procedures and
databases that are a part of every airplane manufacturer.

From the time when an airplane materializes as a new thought to the time the finished
product is ready, the complete design undergoes three distinct phases in perfect sequences
which are

 Conceptual design
 Preliminary design
 Detail design

1.1. CONCEPTUAL DESIGN:-

The design process starts with a set of specifications or much less frequently to desire
to implement pioneering. There is a concrete goal where we designers are aiming at. The first
step towards it is conceptual design. Within a fuzzy latitude, overall shape, size, weight are
determined for the potential user.

The product of the conceptual design phase is layout of airplane configuration on

paper. This drawing has flexible lines, which can be slightly changed. However we get a
detailed account of the layout configuration at the end of this phase. The major drivers during
the conceptual design process are aerodynamics, propulsion and flight performance.

Structural and control system considerations are not dealt in detail but however they
are not dealt in detail but however they are not totally absent. The designer is influenced by
qualitative aspects. No part of the design process is carried out in total vacuum unrelated to
other parts.

1.2. PRELIMINARY DESIGN:-

This phase includes only minor changes to be made in the configuration layout. There
is serious control and structural system analysis and design takes place. During this phase
substantial wind tunnel testing will be carried out and major computational fluid dynamics
(CFD) calculations. At the end of the phase, the airplane configuration is frozen and defined.
The drawing process is called lofting. This process makes precise shape of outside skin of
airplane making certain all sections fit together.

The end of the phase is the decision if the airplane is to be manufactured or not. It is
no longer a critical condition where “you – bet your company” on full scale development of a
new airplane.

2
1.3. DETAIL DESIGN:-

This phase is literally the ‘nuts and bolts’ phase of airplane design. The aerodynamic,
propulsion, structures, performance, flight control analysis are over in the preliminary phase.
The airplane is to be fabricated and machined. The size, number and location of rivets,
fasteners are determined now. Flight simulators are developed. At the end of this phase, the
aircraft is ready to be fabricated.

1.4. THE SEVEN INTELLECTUAL PIVOT POINTS FOR CONCEPTUAL

DESIGN:-

The overall conceptual design is anchored b seven intellectual “pivot points” – seven factors
that anchor the conceptual design thought process. They allow different, detailed thinking to
reach out in all directions from each point.

The requirements are given by the people who are going to buy – the customers. For other
aircrafts, these requirements are usually set by the manufacturer in full appreciation of needs
of owner. Requirements of one airplane are different from the other. There can be no
stipulated specific standard. There must be established requirements that serve as impinge off
point for design process. The requirements that are frequently stipulated are:

 Range
 Takeoff distance
 Stalling velocity
 Endurance
 Maximum velocity
 Rate of climb

For dog fighting combat, maximum turn rate and minimum turn radius

 Maximum load factor

 Service ceiling
 Cost
 Reliability and maintainability
 Maximum size.

3
 SEVEN INTELLECTUAL PIVOT POINTS FOR DESIGN

REQUIREMENTS

WEIGHT OF AIRPLANE –FIRST ESTIMATE

CRITICAL PERFORMANCE PARAMETER

 LIFT COEFFICENT (CLMAX)

 LIFT-TO-DRAG RATIO (L/DMAX)
 WING LOADING (W/S)
 THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO(T/W)

CONFIGURATION LAYOUT – SHAPE

ANDSIZE OF AIRPLANE ON DRAWING

BETTER WEIGHT ESTIMATE

NO
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS-DOES DESIGN
MEET REQUIREMENTS

YES
OPTIMIZATION

FIG.1.1

4
AIRCRAFT CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PROCESS

BETTER NEW CONCEPT

REQUIREMENTS IDEAS

REVISED LAYOUT

TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE
AERO

WEIGHT
INITIAL LAYOUT S
CONCEPT SKETCH
PROPULSION

AERO COST

STRUCTURE
WEIGHTS

FIRST GUESS SIZING LANDING GEAR

PROPULSION

OTHERS

REFORMED SIZE
PERFORMANCE
SIZING AND OPTIMIZATION
PERFORMANCES
OPTIMIZATION
PRELIMINARY DESIGN

5
 FIG.1.2

CRITICAL PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS:-

Requirements stipulate the performance of the new aircraft. The critical parameters are:

 Maximum lift coefficient

 Lift to drag ratio (L/D)
 Thrust to weight ratio (T/W)

Therefore the next step is to make first estimates of W/S and T/W to achieve the performance
as stipulated by requirements.

CONFIGURATION LAYOUT:-

The configuration layout is a drawing of the shape and size of the airplane as evolved till
stage. The critical performance parameters along with first weight estimate helps to draw the
configuration and approximate the size of the aircraft.

6
BETTER WEIGHT ESTIMATE:-

The overall size and shape of the airplane are better known now. There is now an improved
estimate of weight based on performance parameters. A more detailed estimate of fuel is
required now.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS:-

This is the point where the configuration is judged if it can meet all original specifications.
An interactive process is initiated where the configuration is modified. The critical
performance parameters are adjusted for improving performance. In this stage, some mature
decisions should be made as the specifications or cost or unavailable technology.

Hence some specifications might be relaxed so that others might get higher priority.

OPTIMIZATION:-

When iterative process is over, it has produced a viable airplane. This leads to
optimization. The optimization analysis is carried out may be carried out by a systematic
variation of different parameters T/W, W/S and plotting the performance o graphs which can
be found using a sizing matrix or a carpet plot from which optimum design can be found.

WEIGHT OF AIRPLANE – FIRST ESTIMATE:-

No airplane can take off the ground unless it produces a lift greater than its weight. There
should be a first estimate of gross takeoff weight. The weight estimate is the next pivot point
after the requirements. Lilienthal, Langley and Wright brothers knew more weight means
more drag. This needed an engine with greater power and hence more weight

CONSTRAINT DIAGRAM:-

A constraint diagram is constructed which identifies allowable solution space for airplane
design. A constraint diagram consists of plots o the sea – level thrust to take off weight ratio
versus wing loading at takeoff weight ratioT O /WO versus wing loading at takeoff WO /S
determined by intellectual pivot point.

7
THE DESIGN WHEEL

SIZING
AND
TRADE
STUDIES

DESIGN
REQUIREMENTS
ANALYSIS

DESIGN
CONCEPT

FIG.1.3

1.5. CLASSIFICATION OF AIRPLANES

1. FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS
a. Civil Airplanes
b. Military Airplanes

Civil Airplanes Military Airplanes

1. Cargo transport 1. Strategic fighters
2. Passenger travel 2. Interceptors
3. Mail distribution 3. Escort fighters
4. Agricultural 4. Tactical bombers
5. Ambulance 5. Strategic bombers
6. Executive transport 6. Ground attack airplanes
7. Training 7. Photo-reconnaissance airplanes
8. Sports 8. Multipurpose airplanes
9. Air taxi & charter
10. Forestry
11. Fish and wildlife sanctuary

8
 12. Construction
13. Aerial photography
14. Off- shore drilling

2. CLASSIFICATION BY POWER PLANT

a. Types of engine
i. Piston Engines
ii. Turbo-Prop Engines
iii. Turbo-jet Engines
iv. Ram-jet Engines
v. Rockets
b. Number of engines
i. Single Engine
ii. Twin Engine
iii. Multi-Engine
c. Location of power plant
i. Engine (with propeller) located in fuselage nose
ii. Pusher Engine located in the rear fuselage
iii. Engines (jet) submerged in the wing
1. At the root
2. Along the span
iv. Engines (jet) in nacelles suspended under the wing(pod mountings)
v. Engines (jet) located on the rear fuselage
vi. Engines (jet) located within the rear fuselage

3. CLASSIFICATION BY CONFIGURATION
a. Shape and position of wing
b. Type of fuselage
c. Location of horizontal tail surfaces
d. Types of Landing gear

9
FIG.1.4

10
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE SURVEY

It is very easy to design an aircraft if we have data’s about already existing aircrafts of
similar type. It provides more satisfaction and avoids confusion while choosing some design
parameters for our aircraft. In this detailed survey some many important design drivers like
aspect ratio, wing loading, overall dimensions and engine specifications are determined for
our reference. It assists in proposing a new design and modification in our design which will
improve the performance of the proposed aircraft. This assures the performance of the aircraft
as per the design calculations and easy way of designing an aircraft within particular period
of time. So in this literature survey we have collected some ten already existing heavy
business jet aircraft for our reference of design parameters. Mostly these aircrafts have
similar characteristics in many designs aspects which are shown in the table.

2.1. GEOMETRIC SPECIFICATIONS

Wing Wing Wing

Sl. Name of the Aspect Length
Span Area Loading
No. Aircraft Ratio (m)
(m) (m2) (Kg/m2)
Airbus A340 760.5
1 10.1 60.3 63.68 361.6
Prestige
Boeing B777 699.8
2 8.7 60.9 73.86 427
VIP
Embraer Lineage 594.6
3 8.9 28.72 36.24 92.5
1000
Lancair IV 9.3 9.93
4 7.62 9.1 996.7

5 Boeing 777 8.7 60.93 63.7 427.8 315.1

Antonov 8.2 44.06
6 40.7 394 168.1
An-70
Gulfstream 7.7 28.50
7 29.39 105.63 56.7
G550
8 CRAIC CR929 8.2 15.5 10.09 18 63.4
9 Airbus A220 10.8 11.21 9.22 17.3 46.9
10 Airbus A320neo 11.1 11 9.5 17.22 47.1

TABLE.2.1

Sl. Name of the Empty Gross Maximum Take-off

11
 Weight Weight Weight
No. Aircraft
(Kg) (Kg) (Kg)
Airbus A340 130900
1 165515 275000
Prestige
Boeing B777 167800
2 195267 299370
VIP
Embraer Lineage 28080
3 34271 55000
1000
4 Lancair IV 907 703 1610
5 Boeing 777 134800 94210 247200
Antonov
6 66230 38000 145000
An-70
Gulfstream
7 17917 18819 41277
G550
8 CRAIC CR929 1656 2721 4134
9 Airbus A220 1142 1656 3670
10 Airbus A320neo 811 1542 2341
2.2. WEIGHT SPECIFICATIONS

TABLE.2.2

2.3. POWERPLANT SPECIFICATIONS

Power or Rate of Altitude

Sl. Name of the Type of Number of Thrust per climb (ft)
No. Aircraft Engine Engines Engine (ft/min)
(KN)
Airbus A340 CFM56-5C3 5700 13500
1 4 145
Prestige
Boeing B777 GE90-115B 5240 15840
2 2 514
VIP
Embraer GE CF34- 2467 18334
3 Lineage 2 82.3
10E
1000
4 Lancair IV TSIO-50 2 250 2511 14212
5 Boeing 777 GE90-115B 4 520 3000 18777
6 Antonov IVCHENK 4 300 8000 15906
An-70 O
PROGRESS

12
 D-27
Gulfstream BR710C4- 3740 51000
7 2 360
G550 11
8 CRAIC CR929 PT6A-42A 1 347 3245 12000
9 Airbus A220 IO-550-B 1 300 6000
io-540- 4000 24000
10 Airbus A320neo 1 300
K1A5
TABLE.2.3
2.4. PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS

Maximum Service
Sl. Name of the Cruising Range
speed ceiling
No. Aircraft speed (km/h) (Km)
(km/h) (Km)
Airbus A340 14300
1 914 880 12500
Prestige
Boeing B777 18700
2 927 895 13140
VIP
Embraer Lineage 8334
3 890 847 12496
1000
4 Lancair IV 595 431 8840 2494
5 Boeing 777 950 536 13140 9700
Antonov An-70
6 780 498 12000 6600
Gulfstream
7 1086 390 15545 12501
G550
8 CRAIC CR929 645 507 9144 2668
9 Airbus A220 560 326 5600 1326
10 Airbus A320neo 723 270 4950 1352
SUMMARY
The specification details such as Geometric, Power plant, Weight and Performance

TABLE.2.4

SUMMARY

From the above comparative tables and calculation are plotted and verified.

CHAPTER 3

13
 COMPARATIVE PLOTS

Comparative graphs
 Speed Vs aspect ratio
 Speed Vs rate of climb
 Speed Vs range
 Speed Vs altitude
 Speed Vs wing loading
 Speed Vs Wing area

ATTACH GRAPHS

Speed Vs aspect ratio

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Maximum speed Wing Area

Fig.3.1. Speed VS Aspect ratio

14
 Speed Vs Rate of climb

60000

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Maximum speed Altitude

Fig.3.2. Speed VS Rate of climb

Speed Vs Range

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Maximum speed (km/h) Wing Area (m­2)

Fig.3.3. Speed VS Range

15
 Speed Vs Altitude

60000

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Maximum speed (km/h) Altitude (ft)

Fig.3.4. Speed VS Altitude

Speed Vs Wing loading

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Maximum speed (km/h) Wing Area (m­2)

Fig.3.5. Speed VS Wing loading

16
 Speed Vs Wing area

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Maximum speed (km/h) Wing Area (m­2)

Fig.3.6. Speed VS Wing area

SUMMARY

From the above comparative graphs and calculation are plotted and verified.

17
 CHAPTER 4

PRELIMINARY WEIGHT ESTIMATION

The purpose of this section is to introduce a technique to obtain the first estimate of
the maximum take-off weight for an aircraft before it is designed and built. The word
estimation is intentionally selected to indicate the degree of the accuracy and reliability of the
output. Hence, the value for the maximum take-off weight is not final and must be revised in
the later design phases. The result of this step may have up to about 20% inaccuracies, since
it is not based on its own aircraft data. But the calculation relies on the other aircraft data with
similar configuration and mission. Thus, we are adopting the past history as the major source
of the information for the calculation in this step. At the end of the preliminary design phase,
the take-off weight estimation is repeated by using another more accurate technique.

An aircraft has a range of weights from minimum to maximum depending upon the number
of pilots and crew, fuel, and payloads (passengers, loads, luggage, and cargo). As the aircraft
flies, the fuel is burning and the aircraft weight is decreasing. The most important weight in
the design of an aircraft is the maximum allowable weight of the aircraft during take-off
operation. It is also referred to as all up weight. The design maximum take-off weight
(MTOW or WTO) is the total weight of an aircraft when it begins the mission for which it is
designed. The maximum design take-off weight is not necessarily the same as the maximum
nominal take-off weight, since some aircraft can be overloaded beyond design weight in an
emergency situation, but will suffer a reduced performance and reduced stability. Unless
specifically stated, maximum take-off weight is the design weight. It means every aircraft
component (e.g. wing, tail) is designed to support this weight.

The major factor that determines the whole design of aircraft especially the selection of
overall weight, airfoil and power plant of the aircraft.

Total weight of an airplane is given by,

WTO =WC+WPL+WF+WE …4.1

Where,

WTO = Design takeoff weight of the aircraft

WC = crew weight
WPL = weight of the payload
WF = weight of the fuel
WE = empty weight
To simplify the calculation, both fuel and empty weights can be expressed as fractions
of the total takeoff weight, i.e., WF/WO. Equation

WO = WC+WPL+ ( )WTO+( )WTO …4.2

18
This can be solved for WTO as follows:

WTO ─ ( ) WTO ─ ( ) WTO = WC+WPL …4.3

WTO = ( ) …4.4

Now WTO can be determined if (WF/WTO) and (WE/WTO) can be estimated.

These are described below.

According to our design, aircraft’s capacity is 320 to 370 passengers. So,

WPL=WPASSENGERS+WBAGGAGE …4.5

Assuming that each passenger weight is 80 kg with 15 kg baggage, then the payload weight
is,

W Pay Load = 95×370= 35150 kg.

Assuming that each crew weight is 80 kg with 15 kg baggage, then,
W Crew = (370 ×80) + (370 ×15)
= 35150 kg
So,

W TO = 380
…4.6
1-(W f/WTO) – (WE / WTO )

MISSION PROFILE:-

FIG.4.1

19
From the figure the various stages of aircraft during mission is as follows,
1. Start & warm up
2. Taxiing in the runway
3. Takeoff
4. Climb
5. Cruising
6. Loiter
7. Descent and
8. Landing.
For subsonic jet transport aircraft weight fuel fraction is,
(W8/W0) = (W1/W0)×(W2/W1)×(W3/W2)×(W4/W3)×(W5/W4)×(W6/W5)×(W7/W6)x(W8/W7)

APPROXIMATE WEIGHT ESTIMATION:

Weight fraction for each profile in mission segment,
For Warm up,
(W1/W0) = 0.982
For Taxy,
(W2/W1) =0.98
For Takeoff,
(W3/W2) =0.982
For Climb,
(W4/W3) =0.978
For Cruising,

(W5/W4) =exp ( ) …4.7

Where,
SYMBOLS DESIGN PARAMETERS DESIGN VALUES
R Range 4079.04km(2000nm)
V Velocity 0.69mach(426knots)
L/D lift to drag ratio 12
C Specific 0.683
fuel consumption
TABLE.4.1
So, (W5/W4) =exp [ -348 ×0.8 ]
90.17×8
= 0.8767

20
For loiter,

Assume 10 minutes for loitering,

(W6/W5) =exp ( )
Where,

SYMBOLS DESIGN PARAMETERS DESIGN VALUES

E Loitering time 0.166 hr

L/D lift to drag ratio 23
C specific fuel consumption 0.7

TABLE.4.2
So, (W6/W5) =exp [- 0.5 x 0.41 ]
18.56
=0.989
For descent,
(W7/W6) =0.989
For landing,
(W8/W7) =0.989
Then,
(WF/WTO) = (1.06× (1-W8/W0))
=0.663
Assume Empty Weight fraction,
(WE/WTO) = 0.72

So, overall weight,

W TO = 380 = 380 / (1-(0.663) - (0.72)) = 9921.671

1-(W f/WTO) – (WE / WTO )

Approximate Overall weight = 9921.67 kg

SUMMARY

21
 Thus the final Takeoff weight of the proposed aircraft was estimated using fuel fraction
method were as follows.

CHAPTER 5

WING & TAIL DESIGN WITH CONTROL SURFACES (AERODYNAMICS)

This experiment focuses on the detail design of the wing. The wing may be
considered as the most important component of an aircraft, since a fixed-wing aircraft is not
able to fly without it. Since the wing geometry and its features are influencing all other
aircraft components, we begin the detail design process by wing design. The primary function
of the wing is to generate sufficient lift force or simply lift (L). However, the wing has two
other productions, namely drag force or drag (D) and nose-down pitching moment (M).
While a wing designer is looking to maximize the lift, the other two (drag and pitching
moment) must be minimized. In fact, wing is assumed ad a lifting surface that lift is produced
due to the pressure difference between lower and upper surfaces.

During the wing design process, eighteen parameters must be determined. They are as
follows:
1. Wing reference (or planform) area (SW or Sref or S)
2. Number of the wings
3. Vertical position relative to the fuselage (high, mid, or low wing)
4. Horizontal position relative to the fuselage
5. Cross section (or airfoil)
6. Aspect ratio (AR)
7. Taper ratio
8. Tip chord (Ct)
9. Root chord (Cr)
10. Mean Aerodynamic Chord (MAC or C)
11. Span (b)
12. Twist angle
13. Sweep angle
14. Dihedral angle
15. Incidence (iw)
16. High lifting devices such as flap
17. Aileron
18. Other wing accessories

5.1. Airfoil Selection

The airfoil, in many respects, is the heart of the airplane. The airfoil affects the cruise
speed, take-off and landing distances, stall speed, handling qualities, and overall aerodynamic
efficiency during all phases of flight. The design of the airfoil is a complex and time
consuming process.

22
 Much of the Wright brothers success can be traced to their development of airfoils
using a wind tunnel of their own design, and the in-flight validation of those airfoils in their
glider experiments if 1901-1902. More recently, the low speed airfoils develop by peter
Lissaman contributed much to the success of the man-powered Gosssmer Condor, and the
airfoils designed by John Rontz were instrumental to the success of Burt Rutan’s radical
designs.

FIG.5.1

Cruising Reynolds number (Re) as follows,

23
 V alt × ρalt ×C
Re = …5.1
µ alt

V alt =Velocity at altitude

ρalt = Density at altitude
C =(s/b)
S = wing surface area
b = wing span
µalt = coefficient of viscosity at altitude

And, from standard air table at altitude 24000 m,

T alt =542.3 k.

ρalt =0.926 kg/m2

V alt =M×√ (ΥR T alt )

=0.136×√ ¿)

=79.581 m/s

Aspect ratio of our aircraft=11.2

From the literature survey for that aspect ratio,

Area=427 m2

Span=60.93 m

And, c =s/b =7.08 m-1

T alt 0.75
And µalt = µ0 ×( ) …5.2
T0

−5 342.30 0.75
= 20.32 ×10 ×( )
296.33

=1.7326×10−4

342.30× 0.819 ×2.26

So, Re = −4
1.7326 × 10

=36.56×10 6

For the Reynolds’s number approximately 3 ×106 , from the THEORY OF WING SECTION
by ABBOT following data can be obtained.

24
 Airfoil type Maximum lift coefficient Minimum drag coefficient
NACA 0010-34 0.95 0.004
NACA 0012-4 1.5 0.006
NACA 0012-64 1.4 0.005
NACA 1408 1.5 0.0045
NACA 1410 1.5 0.0055
NACA 2408 1.5 0.005
NACA 4412 1.5 0.0070

TABLE.5.3

5.2. DIMENSIONAL PARAMETERS

Fuselage:

Once the takeoff gross weight has been estimated, the fuselage, the wing. And tail can be
sized. Many methods exist to initially estimate the required fuselage size. For certain types of
aircraft, the fuselage size is determined strictly by “real world constraints”. For example, a
large passenger aircraft devotes most of its length to the passenger compartment. Once the
number of passengers is known and the number of seats across is selected, the fuselage length
and diameter are essentially determined.

Wing:

Actual wing size can now be determined simply as the takeoff weight divided by takeoff
wing loading. Remember that this reference area of the theoretical, trapezoidal wing, and
includes the area extending into the aircraft center line.

Tail Volume Co-efficient:

For the initial layout, the historical approach is used for the estimation of the tail size. The
effectiveness of a tail in generating a moment about the centre of gravity is proportional to
the force produced by the tail and to the tail moment arm. The primary purpose of the tail is
to counter the moments produced by the wing.

1. Length of fuselage:

25
LFU = a woc …5.3

= 2.3× 45500.23

= 15.961 m.

2. Surface area:

Aspect ratio of our aircraft=11.2

From the literature survey for that aspect ratio,

Area=427 m2

Span=60.93 m.

3. Taper ratio

FIG.5.2

Taper ratio is defined as the ratio between the tip chord (Ct) to the root chord (Cr). This
definition is applied to the wing, as well as the horizontal tail, and the vertical tail. General,
the taper ratio varies between zero and one. 0 ≤ λ ≤ 1

The taper ratio can be defined as,

26
…5.4

tip chord
λ=
root chord

And the value for the taper ratio in general from design book is 0.4
2s
So, C root chord =
b(1+ λ)
…5.5

2× 4.42
= =0.423 m.
14.92(1+0.4)
And, C tip chord = λ× C root chord

…5.6

=0.257 m.

4. Aerodynamic mean chord:

2
2 1+ λ+ λ
C W= × C root ×(
chord )
3 (1+ λ)
…5.7

2
2 1+0.4 +0.4
= ×0.423×
3 (1+0.4 )

C W =0.31422 m.

Location of mean chord is, x =

b (1+2 λ)
And, y =
6 (1+ λ)
…5.8

14.92 (1+0.8)
=
6 (1+0.4)
=3.1971m.

27
5. Vertical and horizontal volume coefficient:
LHT × S HT
C HT = …
C W × SW
5.9

Where,
C HT -Horizontal tail volume coefficient
L HT - Horizontal tail arm length
S HT - Horizontal tail area
SW -Wing area
C W -Wing mean chord

Since, L HT is 25% of the fuselage length,

L HT = 0.25× LFU …5.10

= 0.25×36.7
= 9.175 m.
For our design,
SW =29.3 m2
C W =0.2377 m.

From “Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach” by Daniel.P.Raymer 3rd Ed,

C HT =0.70So,

CW × S W × C HT
S HT = …
LHT
5.11

0.2377 ×29.3 × 0.70

SHT = = 2.097 m2
2.3175

LVT × S VT
And, C VT =
bW × SW

Where,

LVT -Vertical tail arm length

SVT –Vertical tail area

28
C VT -Vertical tail volume coefficient
b W -Wing span
SW -Wing area
Since, LVT is 50% of the fuselage length,
LVT = 0.5× LFU
= 0.5×36.7
=18.35 m.
For our design,
SW = 427.8 m2.
b W = 60.93 m.

From “Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach” by Daniel.P.Raymer 3rd Ed,

C VT =0.8 m.

bW × SW × CVT
So, SVT =
LVT

60.93× 427.8 × 0.8

=
18.35

= 11.36 m2

5.3. WETTED AREA DETERMINATION

Aircraft wetted area (Swet), the total exposed surface area, can be visualized as the area of the
external parts of the aircraft that would get wet if it were dipped into water. The wetted area
must be calculated for drag estimation, as it the major contributor to friction drag.

The wing and tail wetted areas can be approximated from their platforms. The wetted area is
estimated by multiplying the true view exposed plan form area is estimated by multiplying
the true view exposed planform area (S exposed) times a factor based upon the wing or tail
thickness ratio.

If a wing or tail were paper –thin, the wetted area would be exactly twice the true plan form
area. The effect of finite thickness is to increase the wetted area, as approximated by the
following equations.

Note that the true exposed plan form area is the projected area divided by the cosine of the
dihedral angle.

29
If t/c ˂ 0.05,

S wet =2.003 S exposed

If t/c ˃0.05,

S wet= S exposed [1.977 + 0.52(t/c)] …5.12

The exposed area can be measured from the drawing in several ways. A professional designer
will have access to a “planimeter” a mechanical device for measuring areas. Use of the
planimeter is a dying art as the computer replaces the drafting board. Alternatively the area
can be measured by tracing onto graph paper and “counting squares”.

The wetted area of the fuselage can be initially estimated using just the side and top views of
the aircraft. The side and top view projected areas of the fuselage are measured from the
drawing, and the values are averaged.

For a long, thin body circular in cross section, this average projected area times Π will yield
the surface wetted area. If the body is rectangular in cross section, the wetted area will be
four times the average projected area. For typical aircraft the following equation provides a
reasonable approximation.

S wet=3.4 [(A top + A side) / 2)]

A more accurate estimation of wetted area can be obtained by graphical integration using a
number of fuselage cross sections. If the perimeters of the cross sections are measured and
plotted vs longitudinal locations, using the same units on the graph, then the integrated area
under the resulting curve gives the wetted area.

Perimeters can be measured using a professional’s “map-measure,” or approximated using a

piece of scrap paper. Simply follow around the perimeter measurements should not include
the portions where components join, such as at the wing –fuselage intersection. These areas
are not “wetted”.

WETTED AREA CALCULATION

1) For fuselage
2
π df
s πf =
4

Π denotes its wetted calculation

30
 lf
From Airplane Design Part II by Dr.John roskam, for Single Engine Aircraft is 4.58,
df
From wing design calculation Lf =11.18 m,
11.18
Now, d f = =2.44 m,
4.58
2
π d f π × 2.442
s πf = = =4.677 m2
4 4

2) For wing
s πw= t w × bw
tw
A known relation, = 0.3(from aerofoil t/c max)
c root
From wing design calculation,c root is 5.22 m,
t w=0.3×5.22 = 0.566 m.
s πw = 0.566×60.93 =34.486 m2

3) For horizontal tail

s πht = t ht ×b ht =7.64×0.0324 =0.2479 m2
t ht = t vt = 10 percent t w =0.1×0.324 =0.0324
From “Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach” by Daniel P.Raymer,
2
bht
(AR) ht = =4
s❑ht
NoWQw,
2
b ht = 4×14.63 = 7.64 m
4) For vertical tail
2
bvt
(AR) vt = ❑ =
s vt
s πvt=b vt ×t vt = 3.82×0.0324 =0.123 m2.
5) Engine area
2
π de
s πengine =
4
π × 0.813
2
df
= Since d e = = 1.49/2 =0.745 m
4 2
=0.519 m2.

31
6) 1/4 flap deflection
θ=¿15˚
For Single Engine range, (0.05 to 0.1)
The below is average of above range,
s π = 0.075 m2
7) 3/4 flap deflection
θ=¿45˚
For Single Engine range, (0.15 to 0.2)
The below is average of above range,
s π = 0.175 m2
8) Undercarriage
s πu =1.1× s πengine
=1.1×0.436
=0.479 m2

S.No Component s π (m2)

1 Fuselage 4.677
2 Wing 34.486
3 Horizontal tail 0.342
4 Vertical tail 0.123
5 Engine 0.519
6 1/4 flap 0.075
7 3/4 flap 0.175
8 Undercarriage 0.479
TABLE.5.4
5.4. Design of control surfaces

Aircraft flight control systems are classified as primary and secondary. The primary control
systems consist of those that are required to safely control an airplane during flight. These
include the ailerons, elevator (or stabilator), and rudder. Secondary control systems improve
the performance characteristics of the airplane, or relieve the pilot of excessive control forces.
Examples of secondary control systems are wing flaps and trim systems.

PRIMARY
AIRPLANE AXES OF TYPE OF
CONTROL
MOVEMENT ROTATION STABILITY
SURFACE
Aileron Roll Longitudinal Lateral

32
 Elevator/ Stabilator Pitch Lateral Longitudinal
Rudder Yaw Vertical Directional

TABLE.5.5

Vertical and horizontal volume coefficient:

LHT × S HT
CHT =
C W × SW
Where,
C HT -Horizontal tail volume coefficient
L HT - Horizontal tail arm length
S HT - Horizontal tail area
SW -Wing area
C W -Wing mean chord

Since, L HT is 25% of the fuselage length,

L HT = 0.25× LFU
= 0.25×11.18
= 2.795 m.
For our design,
SW =16.2 m2
C W =0.562 m.

From “Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach” by Daniel.P.Raymer 3rd Ed,

C HT =0.70So,

CW × S W × C HT
SHT =
LHT

0.562× 16.2× 0.70

SHT = = 2.7499 m2
2.3175

And,

LVT × S VT
C VT =
bW × SW

33
Where,

LVT -Vertical tail arm length

SVT –Vertical tail area

C VT -Vertical tail volume coefficient

b W -Wing span

SW -Wing area

Since, LVT is 50% of the fuselage length,

LVT = 0.5× LFU
= 0.5×11.18
=5.59 m.
For our design,
SW = 36.7 m2.
b W = 12.92m.

From “Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach” by Daniel.P.Raymer 3rd Ed,

C VT =0.04 m.

So,

bW × SW × CVT
SVT =
LVT

12.92× 36.7 ×0.04

= = 32.039 m2
5.59

34
SUMMARY

1. Selected Airfoil: NACA 641-212

2. The dimensional parameters of wing are included.

3. The wetted area details are plotted.

4. The dimensional parameters of control surfaces are detected and calculated.

CHAPTER 6

DRAG ESTIMATION

Aerodynamic forces that split into two forces: Lift force or lift, and Drag force or
drag. A pre-requisite to aircraft performance analysis is the ability to calculate the aircraft
drag at various flight conditions. Drag force is the summation of all forces that resist against
aircraft motion.

35
 …6.1

The drag coefficient is non-dimensional parameter, but it takes into account every
aerodynamic configuration of the aircraft including, wing, tail, fuselage and landing gear.
This coefficient has two main parts. The first part is referred to as lift-related drag coefficient
or induced drag coefficient (CDi) and the second part is called zero-lift drag coefficient
(CDo).

//

6.1. Calculation of CDo

The CDo of an aircraft is simply the summation of CDo of all contributing components.

CDof, CDow, CDoht, CDovt, CDoLG, CDoN, CDoS, CDoHLD, are respectively representing
fuselage, wing, horizontal tail, vertical tail, landing gear, nacelle, strut, high lift device (such
as flap).
CDo OTHERS is components such as antenna, pitot tube, wire, and wiper

Fuselage
The zero-lift drag coefficient of fuselage is given by the following equation:

…6.2

36
where, Cf is skin friction coefficient and is non-dimensional number. It is determined based
on the Prandtl relationship as follows:
…6.3

(for turbulent and laminar flow)

6.4

Where ρ is the air density, V is aircraft true airspeed, µ is air viscosity, and L is the length of
the component in the direction of flight. For the fuselage, L it the fuselage length. The second
parameter (fLD) is a function of length to diameter ratio

6.5

The third parameter (fM) is a function of Mach number (M).

…6.6

The last two parameters Swetf and S, where are respectively the wetted area of the fuselage
and the wing reference area.

37
Wing, Horizontal Tail, and Vertical Tail

In these equations, Cfw, Cfht, Cfvt are similar to what we defined for fuselage. The only
difference is that the equivalent value of L in Reynolds number) for wing, horizontal tail, and
vertical tail are their mean aerodynamic chord (MAC).

…6.7

High lift devices

…6.8

The δf is the flap deflection in degrees (usually less than 50 degrees).

Landing gear

38
39
Engine (cooling drag)

…6.9

where P is the engine power (hp), T is the air temperature (K), σ is the relative density of the
air, V is the aircraft velocity (m/sec), and S is the wing reference area (m 2). Th parameter Ke
is a coefficient that depends on the type of engine. It varies between 1 and 3.

Overall CDo

where Kc is a correction factor and depends on several factors such as the type, year of
fabrication and configuration of the aircraft.

Sl.No. Aircraft type Kc

1 Passenger 1.1
2 Agriculture 1.5
3 Cargo 1.2
4 Single engine piston 1.3
5 General Aviation 1.2
6 Fighter 1.1
TABLE.6.1

No. Component CDo of component Percent from total

CDo (%)
1 Wing 0.0053 23.4
2 Fuselage 0.0063 27.8
3 Wing tip tank 0.0021 9.3
4 Nacelle 0.0012 5.3
5 Engine strut 0.0003 1.3
6 Horizontal tail 0.0016 7.1
7 Vertical tail 0.0011 4.8
8 Other components 0.0046 20.4
9 Total CDo 0.0226 100

40
 TABLE.6.2

No. Aircraft type CDo E

1 Subsonic jet 0.014-0.02 0.75-0.85

2 Large turboprop 0.018-0.024 0.8-0.85

3 Twin-engine piton prop 0.022-0.028 0.75-0.8

4 Small GA with retractable landing gear 0.02-0.03 0.75-0.8

5 Small GA with fixed landing gear 0.025-0.04 0.65-0.8

6 Agricultural aircraft without crop duster 0.06-0.065 0.65-0.75

7 glider 0.01-0.015 0.8-0.9

8 Supersonic jet 0.02-0.04 0.6-0.8

TABLE.6.3

6.2. DRAG POLAR

C Dt =C DO+ K (C ¿¿ L)¿2
…6.10

Where,
1
K=
Π∗e∗AR
…6.11

Typical values of CDo and e for several aircraft

1
For our wing, k= =0.104
ΠeAR
…6.12

1. At SEA LEVEL, (h=0)

Where,

41
 T=288.16 K,

ρ =1.225 kg/m3

a = (γ×R×T) ^0.5 = (1.4×332×288.16) ^0.5 =365.973 m/s.

2× W 2 ×41270 × 9.81
CL = 2 = 2 = 29.127
ρ× S ×V 1.225× 29.3 ×27.83

2. At Altitude, (h=1.05 km)

Where,

T=281.66 K,

ρ =1.1117 kg/m3

a = (γ×R×T) ^0.5 = (1.4×332×281.66) ^0.5 =367.23 m/s

2× W 2 × 41270 ×9.8
CL = 2 = 2 = 7.28
ρ× S ×V 1.1117× 29.3 ×55.66

3. At Altitude, (h=2.1 km)

Where,

T=274.51 K,

ρ =0.9964 kg/m3

a = (γ×R×T) ^0.5 = (1.4×332×274.51) ^0.5 =357.21m/s.

2× W 2 × 41270× 9.81
CL = 2 = 2
ρ× S ×V 0.9964 ×29.3 × V
…6.13

4. At Altitude, (h=3.15 km)

Where,

T=268.02 K,

ρ =0.8999 kg/m3

a = (γ×R×T) ^0.5 = (1.4×332×268.02) ^0.5 =352.95 m/s.

2× W
CL = 2
ρ× S ×V

42
 2 ×41270 × 9.81
= 2 =3.236
1.225× 29.3 ×83.49

4. At Altitude, (h=4.2 km)

Where,

T=260.88 K,

ρ =0.8022 kg/m3

a = (γ×R×T) ^0.5 = (1.4*332*260.88) ^0.5 =348.21 m/s.

2× W
CL = 2
ρ× S ×V

2 × 41270× 9.81
= 2 = 1.821
1.225× 29.3 ×111.32

5. At Altitude, (h=5.8 km)

Where,

T=260.88 K,

ρ =0.8022 kg/m3

a = (γ×R×T) ^0.5 = (1.4*332*260.88) ^0.5 =348.21 m/s.

2× W
CL = 2
ρ× S ×V

2× 41270 × 9.81
= 2
1.225× 29.3 ×139.15

6. At Altitude, (h=6.24 km)

Where,

T=260.88 K,

43
 ρ =0.8022 kg/m3

a = (γ×R×T) ^0.5 = (1.4*332*260.88) ^0.5 =348.21 m/s.

2× W
CL = 2
ρ× S ×V

2 ×41270 × 9.81
= 2
1.225× 29.3 ×167

S.No V CL M=v/a CDo CDT =(C DO +¿ )2 D=(( CDT

(m/s) ×W)/ CL)
(N)
1. 27.83 3.2112 0.0817 0.00196 0.5975 8296.75
2. 55.66 0.8028 0.1635 0.00196 0.0392 2177.28
3. 83.49 0.3568 0.2453 0.00196 0.0137 1713.86
4. 111.32 0.2007 0.3271 0.00196 0.0085 1223.19
5. 139.15 0.1284 0.4089 0.00196 0.0071 2051.01
6. 167 0.0895 0.4907 0.00196 0.0087 4338.86
TABLE.6.4

GRAPH BETWEEN Cl& Cd for different altitudes

CL VS CD
3.5

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
1 2 3 4 5 6

CL CD

44
 FIG.6.1

SUMMARY

45
 1. The graph drawn b/w lift coefficient and drag coefficient for different stages of
aircraft. And the variation of trend was observed.
2. From the above tables and graphs, drag with respect to velocity at different altitudes is
obtained.

CHAPTER 7

CALCULATION FOR THRUST REQUIRED & ENGINE SELECTION

1. Thrust to weight ratio

2. Thrust matching
3. Engine rating
4. Rubber sizing of the engine
5. Number of the engines

Thrust to weight ratio:

T/W directly affects the performance of the aircraft. An aircraft with a higher T/W
will accelerate more quickly, climb more rapidly, reach a higher maximum speed, and sustain
higher turn rates. On the other hand, the larger engines will consume more fuel throughout
the mission, which will drive up the aircraft up the aircraft’s takeoff gross weight to perform
the design mission.

T/W is not a constant. The weight of the aircraft varies during the flight as fuel is
burned. Also, the engine’s thrust varies with altitude and velocity (as does the horsepower
and propeller efficiency, (ηp). When the designers speak of an aircraft’s thrust-to-weight ratio
they generally refer to the T/W during sea-level static (zero velocity), standard-day
conditions.

T/WTO Ratio for Heavy Business aircraft - four engine is 0.248

Overall weight of aircraft WTO =84907 kg.

Then,

T=0.248×84907

=21056.93 kg.

=20657 N

So, the thrust needed=206.57 KN

From the literature survey the nearest value of the thrust corresponding aircraft is CFM56-7B
The CFM56-7B has the following characteristics,

46
  Thrust per engine = 86.7
 Number of engine = 1
 Type of engine = CFM56-7B
 Total thrust =86.7 KN

THRUST CALCULATION

Thrust available, from the engine selection calculation,

F = 86.7 KN

Freq = F ×σ1.15

For sea level,

Freq = F [(20 – h) / (20+h)] 1.15

= 86.7 [(20-0) / (20+0)] 1.15

= 86.7 KN

For h1 = 1.05 km,

Freq = 86.7 [(20- 1.05) / (20+1.05)] 1.15

=76.829 KN

For h2=2.1km,

Freq = 86.7 [20-2.1) / (20+2.1)] 1.15

=68.037 KN

For h3=3.15km,

Freq = 86.7 [(20 – 3.15) / (20+3.15 )] 1.15

= 60.169 KN.

For h4=4.2km,

Freq = 86.7 [(20-4.2) / (20+ 4.2)] 1.15

= 53.099 KN.

For h5=5.8km,

Freq = 86.7 [(20-5.8) / (20+ 5.8)] 1.15

= 43.630 KN.

47
For h6=6.24km,

Freq = 86.7 [(20-6.34) / (20+ 6.34)] 1.15

= 40.74 KN

For h7=7.83km,

Freq = 86.7 [(20-7.83) / (20+ 7.83)] 1.15

= 33.49 KN.

For h8=8.59km,

Freq = 86.7 [(20-8.59) / (20+ 8.59)] 1.15

= 30.14 KN.

For h9=9.03km,

Freq = 86.7 [(20-9.03) / (20+ 9.03)] 1.15

= 28.31 KN.

For h10=10.42km,

Freq = 86.7 [(20-10.42) / (20+ 10.42)] 1.15

= 22.96 KN.

S.NO ALTITUDE(Km) THRUST (KN)

1. 1.05 76.829
2. 2.1 68.037
3. 3.15 60.169
4. 4.2 53.099
5. 5.8 43.630
6. 6.24 40.74
7. 7.83 33.49
8. 8.59 30.14
9. 9.03 28.31
10. 10.42 22.96

TABLE.7.1

48
Engine Details

 Thrust per engine = 86.7

 Number of engine = 1
 Type of engine = CFM56-7B
 Total thrust =86.7 KN

CHAPTER 8

RATE OF CLIMB CALCULATION

Rate of climb is defined as the aircraft speed in the vertical axis or the vertical component of
the aircraft airspeed. Hence rate of climb is about how fast an aircraft gains height.

Jet aircraft:
In general, the Rate of Climb (ROC) is defined as the ratio between excess power and the
aircraft weight

…8.1

Prop-driven Aircraft:
The available power is the engine power times the propulsive efficiency.

…8.2

1. At SEA LEVEL (h=0)

S.No V(m/s) T D RATE OF CLIMB (m/s)
(N) (N)

1 914 14500 41406 5700

2 927 51400 25737 5240
3 890 82300 69358 2467
4 595 25000 35453 2511
5 950 52000 43500 3000
6 780 32200 45464 8000
7 1086 36400 33565 3740
34700 36736

49
8 645 30600 36573 3245
9 560 30000 43630 6000
10 723 4000

TABLE.8.1

Velocity Vs Rate of climb h=0 km

10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Velocity m/s Rate of Climb m/s

FIG.8.1. VELOCITY VS RATE OF CLIMB

50
SUMMARY

1. The required amount of thrust for the aircraft at various altitudes are
2. From the above analysis, graph – rate of climb vs velocity was drawn and the trend in
rate of climb was observed.

CHAPTER 9

V-n DIAGRAM

The V-n diagram provides a treasure trove of information regarding flight

performance for pilots. Basically, it is a graph depicting the variation of load factor with the
speed of the vehicle. It defines the strength limitation of an aircraft. Every aircraft has their
own version. V-n diagrams are developed during the design process either in the conceptual
or very early preliminary design stages

Four factors affect a V-n Diagram

– MTOW

– Altitude

– Configuration of aircraft: clean, stores, cruise or landing, etc.

– Symmetry of loading

A V-n diagram shows the flight load factors that are used for the structural design as a
function of the air speed. These represent the maximum expected loads that the aircraft will
experience. These load factors are called as limit load factors. These diagrams are used
primarily in the determination of combinations of flight condition and load factors to which
the airplane structure must be designed.

For purposes of structural sizing, analysis is performed at four extreme loading

conditions on the V-n diagram. The Positive High Angle of Attack (PHAA) is the loading
condition represented by the intersection between the positive operational load limit line and
the positive maximum lift curve. The Positive Low Angle of Attack (PLAA) is at the
intersection between the positive operational load limit line and the dive speed. The Negative
High Angle of Attack (NHAA) and Negative Low Angle of Attack (NLAA) are defined
similarly except are for the negative loads. Should the gust envelope extend beyond the
manoeuvring envelope in any of these four locations, the load factor of the gust envelope is
instead used for the extreme loading condition. The high angle of attack conditions are
characterized by a high coefficient of lift and high drag. The low angle of attack conditions
are characterized by a high lift force. Designing to accommodate these four extreme loading

51
conditions will guarantee that the wing will not undergo structural damage so long as
operational load limits are not exceeded.

52
FIG. 9.1

53
SUMMARY
1. The required VN Diagram for the aircraft at various altitudes are
2. From the above analysis, graph -VN diagram MTOW, altitude configuration of aircraft:
clean, stores, cruise or landing, etc.
3. Symmetry of loading was drawn and the trend in VN Diagram was observed

CHAPTER 10

LANDING GEAR SELECTION AND DESIGN

LANDING GEAR DESIGN

Introduction
Another aircraft major component that is needed to be designed is landing gear
(undercarriage). The landing gear is the structure that supports an aircraft on the ground and

54
allows it to taxi, take-off, and land. In fact, landing gear design tends to have several
interferences with the aircraft structural design. In this lab, the structural design aspects of
landing gear are not addressed; but, those design parameters which strongly impact the
aircraft configuration design and aircraft aerodynamics will be discussed. In addition, some
aspects of landing gear such as shock absorber, retraction mechanism and brakes are assumed
as non-aeronautical issues and may be determined by a mechanical engineer. Thus, those
pure mechanical parameters will not be considered in this experiment either. In general, the
followings are the landing gear parameters which are to be determined in this experiment:
1. Type (e.g. nose gear (tricycle), tail gear, bicycle)
2. Fixed (faired, or un-faired), or retractable, partially retractable
3. Height
4. Wheel base
5. Wheel track
6. The distance between main gear and aircraft cg
7. Strut diameter
8. Tire sizing (diameter, width)
9. Landing gear compartment if retracted
10. Load on each strut

Landing gear usually includes wheels, but some aircraft are equipped with skis for snow or
float for water. In the case of a vertical take-off and landing aircraft such as a helicopter,
wheels may be replaced with skids. The descriptions of primary parameters are as follows.
Landing gear height is the distance between the lowest point of the landing gear (i.e. bottom
of the tire) and the attachment point to the aircraft. Since, landing gear may be attached to the
fuselage or to the wing; the term height has different meaning. Furthermore, the landing gear
height is a function of shock absorber and the landing gear deflection. The height is usually
measured when the aircraft is on the ground; it has maximum take-off weight; and landing
gear has the maximum deflection (i.e. lowest height).

The common options for landing-gear are shows in figure. The single main gear is used for
many sailplanes because of its simplicity. The wheel can be forward of the center of gravity
(c.g), as shown here, or can be aft of the c.g. with a skid under the cockpit is also of
significant importance and will be employed during calculations. Wheel base is the distance
between main gear and other gear (from side view). The landing gear is divided into two
sections: 1. Main gear or main wheel1, 2. Secondary gear or secondary wheel. Main gear is
the gear which is the closest to the aircraft center of gravity (cg). During the landing
operation, the main wheel touches first with the point of contact to the ground. Furthermore,
during the take-off operation, the main wheel leaves the ground last. On the other hand, main
gear is carrying great portion of the aircraft load on the ground.

55
 FIG.10.1

Landing gear primary parameters

10.1. Landing Gear Configuration

The first job of an aircraft designer in the landing gear design process is to select the landing
gear configuration. Landing gear functions may be performed through the application of
various landing gear types and configurations. Landing gear design requirements are parts of
the aircraft general design requirements including cost, aircraft performance, aircraft stability,
aircraft control, maintainability, producibility and operational considerations. In general,
there are ten configurations for a landing gear as follows:
1. Single main
2. Bicycle
3. Tail-gear
4. Tricycle or nose-gear
5. Quadricycle
6. Multi-bogey
7. Releasable rail
8. Skid
9. Seaplane landing device
10. Human leg

56
 FIG.10.2

“Bicycle” gear has two main wheels, fore and aft of the c.g., with small “outrigger” wheels
on the wings to prevent the aircraft from tipping sideways. The bicycle landing gear has the
aft wheel so far behind the c.g., that the aircraft must take-off and land in a flat altitude,
which limits this of gear to aircraft with high lift at low angles of attack (i.e.., high-aspect
ratio wings with large camber and/or flaps). Bicycle gear has been used mainly on aircraft
with narrow fuselage and wide wing span such as the B-47 .

The “tail dragger” landing gear has two main wheels forward of the c.g. and an auxiliary
wheel at the tail. Tail dragger gear is also called conventional landing gear, because it was the
most widely used arrangement during the first 40 years of aviation. Tail dragger gear
provides more propeller clearance,, has less drag and weight, and allows the wing to generate
more lift for rough-field operation than does tricycle gear.

However, tail dragger landing gear is inherently unstable. If the aircraft starts to turn, the
location of c.g. behind the main gear causes the turn to get tighter until a “ground loop” is
encountered, and the aircraft either drags wingtip, collapses the landing gear, or runs of the
side of the runway. To prevent this, the pilot of a tail dragger aircraft must align the aircraft
almost perfectly with the runway at touchdown, and “dance” on the rudder pedals until the
aircraft stops.

The most commonly used arrangement today is the “tricycle” gear, with two main wheels aft
of the c.g. and an auxiliary wheel forward of the c.f., with a tricycle landing gear, the c.g. is
ahead of the main wheels so the aircraft is stable on the ground and can be landed at a fairly
large “crab” angle (i.e., nose not aligned with the runway). Also, tricycle landing gear

57
improves forward visibility on the ground and permits a flat cabin floor for passenger and
cargo loading.

Quadricycle gear is much like bicycle gear but with wheels at the sides of the fuselage.
Quadricycle gear also requires a flat takeoff and landing attitude. It is used on the B-52 and
several cargo planes where it has the advantage of permitting a cargo floor very low to the
ground.

The gear arrangements described above are also seen with two, four, or more wheels in place
of the single wheels shown in figure. As the aircraft weights become larger, the requires
wheel size for a single wheel capable of holding the aircraft’s weight too large. Then multiple
wheels are used to share the load between reasonably sized tires.

Also, it is very common to use twin nose-wheels to retain some control in the event of a nose-
wheel flat tire. Similarly, multiple main wheels (i.e. total of four or more) are desirable for
safety. When multiple wheels are used in tandem, they are attached to a structural element
called a “bogey,” or “truck,” or “axle beam” that is attached to the end of shock-absorber
strut.

Typically an aircraft weighing under about 50,000 lb(22,680 kg) will use a single main wheel
per strut, although for safety in the event of a flat tire it is always better to use two wheels per
strut. Between 50,000 lb (22,680-68,040 kg), two wheels per strut are typical. Two wheels
per strut are sometimes used for the aircraft weighing up to about 250,000 lb(113,400 kg).

Between aircraft weights of about 200,000 and 400,000 lb(90,720-181,440 kg) the four-
wheel bogey is usually employed; for aircraft over 400,000 lb (181,440 kg) four bogeys, each
with four or six wheels, spread the total aircraft load across the runway pavement except for
light aircraft and a few fighters, most aircraft use twin nose-wheels to retain control in the

event of

FIG.10.3

58
a flat nose tire. Carrier-based aircraft must use twin nose-wheels at least 19in. (483 cm) in

diameter to straddle the catapult-launching mechanism. The massive C-5 employs four nose-
wheels to spread to spread the tire load, permitting operation off of relatively soft fields.

10.2. Landing gear arrangements

Guidelines for layout of a bicycle landing gear are shown in figure. The c.g. should be aft of
the midpoint between the two wheels. The requirements for tail dragger gear are shown in
figure. The tail-down angle should be about 10-15 deg with the gear in the static position
(i.e., tires and shock absorbers compressed the amount seen when the aircraft seen when the
aircraft is stationary on the ground at takeoff gross weight).The c.g. (most forward and most
aft) should fall between 16-25 deg back from vertical measured from the main wheel
location. If the c.g. is too far forward the aircraft will tend will tend to nose over, and if it is
too far back it will tend to ground loop.To prevent the aircraft from overturning the main
wheels should be laterally separated beyond a 25 deg angle off the c.g., as measured from the
rear in a tail-down attitude.

10.3. Landing Gear Design

1. Diameter or width of the wheel

D=AW W B …10.1

Where,

A&B is constant,

W w =load on single wheel.

For main wheel that value is 80% of the total aircraft weight and for auxiliary wheel it is 20%
of total aircraft weight. So,

W w for main wheel = 0.8 × W O

=0.8 × 19104 =15283.2 kg.

W w for auxilary wheel = 0.2 × W O

=0.2 × 19104 =3820.8 kg.

59
Diameter of main wheel

D=AW W B

The constants from RAYMER book becomes,

A=1.51

B=0.349

We are choosing a tricycle configuration .so, two main wheels and one auxiliary wheel. So,
for one main wheel W w is 19104.

D=1.51 × 19104 0.349

=47.107 cm.

Diameter of auxiliary wheel

D=1.51× 454 0.349

=68.6 cm.

2. Width of the wheels

For main wheel(w)=AW W B …10.2

Where,

A=0.7150

B=0.312

W=0.7150× 3214 0.312

=8.881 cm.

For auxiliary wheel (w) =AW W B

= 0.7150 × 2750.312

= 19.7 cm.

60
3. Pavement or contact area

B
WW = P AP

a) Main wheel,

d
Where A P = 2.3 × √ w . d ( −Rr ) …10.3
2

Rr = rolling radius

w =width

d =diameter

FIG.10.4

For major civil airfield P=140.6 psi =76416.3 kg/m2 =76.416 N/m2
1820× 9.81
AP =
76.416
=233.644cm2.
20.74
A P = 2.3 × √ 7.43 ×20.74 ( −Rr )
2
Rr =30 cm.
b) Auxiliary wheel,
910 ×9.81
AP =
76.416

61
 = 116.822 cm2.
16.28
A P = 2.3 × √ 5.99× 16.28 ( −Rr )
2
Rr =41.4 cm.
10.4. GEAR RETRACTION GEOMETRY

Another design aspect of the landing gear is to decide what to do with it after take-off
operation. In general, there are four alternatives as follows:
1. Landing gear is released after take-off.
2. Landing gear hangs underneath the aircraft.
3. Landing gear is fully retracted inside aircraft (e.g. wing, or fuselage).
4. Landing gear is partially retracted inside aircraft.

No Item Fixed (unretractable) Landing Retractable Landing Gear

Gear
1 Cost Cheaper Expensive
2 Weight Lighter Heavier
3 Design Easier to design Harder to design
4 Manufacturing Easier to manufacture Harder to manufacture
5 Maintenance Easier to maintain Harder to maintain
6 Drag More drag Less drag
7 Aircraft Lower aircraft performance (e.g. Higher aircraft performance
performance maximum speed) (e.g. maximum speed)
8 Longitudinal More stable (stabilizing) less stable (destabilizing)
stability
9 Storing bay Does not require a bay Bay must be provided
10 Retraction system Does not require a retraction system Requires a retraction system
11 Fuel volume More available internal fuel volume Less available internal fuel
volume
12 Aircraft structure Structure in un-interrupted Structural elements need
reinforcement due to cutout

TABLE.10.1

62
Fixed and retractable landing gear comparison

FIG.10.5

63
SUMMARY

Thus the final landing gear selection and gear calculation of the proposed
aircraft was observed

CHAPTER 11

WING STRUCTURAL DESIGN

According to classical wing theory, the spanwise lift or load distribution is

proportional to the circulation at each span station. A vortex lifting-line calculation will yield
the spanwise lift distribution. For an elliptical plan form wing, the ift and load distribution is
of elliptical shape.

11.1. Schrenk’s approximation method

For a non-elliptical wing, a good semi empirical method for spanwise load estimate is
known as Schrenk’s approximation method. this method assumes that the load distribution on
an untwisted wing or tail has a shape that is the average of the actual polar form shape and an
elliptic shape of the same span and area. The total area under the lift load curve must sum to
the required total lift.

64
 FIG.11.1

From design project-I for our aircraft,

Tip chord (Ct) =3.63 m

Root chord (Cr) =9.15 m

Span (b) =26.44 m

πab
Plan form area= =20.75 m2
4

Where,

Semi span (a) =b/2=13.22 m

b = √ Root chord 2−Tip chord 2 =8.399m. …11.1

s.no θ(deg) a cos Ө b cos Ө

1 0 13.22 8.399

2 10 13.01 8.27

3 30 11.44 7.27

4 35 10.829 6.88

65
 5 45 9.347 5.93

6 60 6.61 4.19

7 75 3.42 2.17

TABLE.11.1

GRAPH

a cos Ө VS b cos Ө
25

20

15

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

a cos Ө b cos Ө

FIG.11.1

11.2. WING STRUCTURAL WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION

Change the numerical values according to your calculations

STRUCTURAL WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION:

The structural weight is assumed to square of the chord,

WS α Cx2

WS =k × Cx2

K –constant

Cx –chord at any point at a distance x from the root.

66
Since the chord variation is linear along the span,

@ x= 0, Cx =a = Cr

@ x= semi span, Cx =Ct

Cx =a +bx ………………………….. (1)

Substitute all in eqn (1)

x=0 , Cx =a =Cr =0.32 m.

x =6.46, Cx = Ct =0.128 m.

Cx = a + bx

0.128 =0.32 +b (6.46)

b = -0.029

Cx =0.32 -0.029x
6.46

Ww =k ∫ Cx 2 dx
0

6.46

=k ∫ (0.32−0.029 x )2 dx
0

=k ( 0.3498 )

227.5 =k (0.3498 )

k = 650.37 N/m2.

Table-1:

Stations Mean Resultant

Section Cx (m) 2 Air load
(X) ordinates(Y) kCx (N) load

1 0.5 1 0.128 10.64 7 22.54

2 1.0 2 0.134 11.67 8 43.32

3 1.5 3 0.156 15.81 9 52.12

67
 TABLE.11.2

Load at mid point(in Bending moment

Stations (X) Shear force(N)
magnitude) (N-m)

2 0.677 1.44 43

2.5 0.872 1.18 32

3 1.211 1.87 56

3.5 1.623 1.91 39

TABLE.11.3

11.4. STRUCTURAL DESIGN STUDY – THEORY APPROACH FOR WING

AEROFOIL

An airfoil (in American English) or Aerofoil (in British English) is the shape of a
wing or blade (of a propeller, rotor or turbine) or sail as seen in cross-section.

An airfoil-shaped body moved through a fluid produces an aerodynamic force. The

component of this force perpendicular to the direction of motion is called lift. The component
parallel to the direction of motion is called drag. Subsonic flight airfoils have a characteristic
shape with a rounded leading edge, followed by a sharp trailing edge, often with asymmetric
camber. Foils of similar function designed with water as the working fluid are called
hydrofoils.

The lift on an airfoil is primarily the result of its angle of attack and shape. When
oriented at a suitable angle, the airfoil deflects the oncoming air, resulting in a force on the
airfoil in the direction opposite to the deflection. This force is known as aerodynamic force
and can be resolved into two components: Lift and drag. Most foil shapes require a positive
angle of attack to generate lift, but cambered airfoils can generate lift at zero angle of attack.
This "turning" of the air in the vicinity of the airfoil creates curved streamlines which results
in lower pressure on one side and higher pressure on the other. This pressure difference is
accompanied by a velocity difference, via Bernoulli's principle, so the resulting flow field
about the airfoil has a higher average velocity on the upper surface than on the lower surface.

68
The lift force can be related directly to the average top/bottom velocity difference without
computing the pressure by using the concept of circulation and the Kutta-Joukowski theorem

RIBS

In an aircraft, ribs are forming elements of the structure of a wing, especially in traditional
construction.

By analogy with the anatomical definition of "rib", the ribs attach to the main spar, and by
being repeated at frequent intervals, form a skeletal shape for the wing. Usually ribs
incorporate the airfoil shape of the wing, and the skin adopts this shape when stretched over
the ribs.

Wing construction is basically the same in all types of aircraft. Most modern aircraft have all
metal wings, but many older aircraft had wood and fabric wings. Ailerons and flaps will be
studied later in this experiment.

FIG.11.2

To maintain its all-important aerodynamic shape, a wing must be designed and built
to hold its shape even under extreme stress. Basically, the wing is a framework composed
chiefly of spars, ribs, and (possibly) stringers (see figure 1-5). Spars are the main members of
the wing. They extend lengthwise of the wing (crosswise of the fuselage). The entire load
carried by the wing is ultimately taken by the spars. In flight, the force of the air acts against
the skin. From the skin, this force is transmitted to the ribs and then to the spars.

Most wing structures have two spars, the front spar and the rear spar. The front spar is found
near the leading edge while the rear spar is about two-thirds the distance to the trailing edge.

69
Depending on the design of the flight loads, some of the all-metal wings have as many as five
spars. In addition to the main spars, there is a short structural member which is called an
aileron spar.

The ribs are the parts of a wing which support the covering and provide the airfoil shape.
These ribs are called forming ribs and their primary purpose is to provide shape. Some may
have an additional purpose of bearing flight stress, and these are called compression ribs.

FIG.11.3

TYPE OF RIBS

There are several types of ribs. Form-ribs, plate-type ribs, truss ribs, closed-ribs, forged ribs
and milled ribs, where form-ribs are used for light to medium loading and milled ribs are as
strong as it can get.

70
Form-ribs are made from a sheet of metal bent into shape, such as a U-profile. This profile is
placed on the skin, just like a stringer, but then in the other direction. Plate-type ribs consist
of sheet-metal, which has upturned edges and (often has) weight-saving holes cut into it.

FIG.11.4

Truss ribs are built up out of profiles that are joined together. These joints require
great attention during design and manufacture. The ribs may be light or heavy in design
which makes them suitable for a wide range of loads. Closed-ribs are constructed from
profiles and sheet metal and are suitable for closing off sections of the wing (e.g. fuel tank).
Here too, particular care must be taken with the joints and this type of rib is also suitable for
application in a variety of loading conditions.
Forged ribs are manufactured using heavy press-machinery. The result is fairly rough; for
more refined parts, high-pressure presses are required, which are very expensive. Forged
pieces (usually) have to undergo further treatment (for smoother edges and holes). Forged
ribs are used for sections where very high loads apply - near the undercarriage for example.
Milled ribs are solid structures. They are manufactured by milling away excess material from
a solid block of metal (usually using computer-controlled milling machines). The shape of
these ribs is always accurately defined. Such ribs are used under similar conditions as those
for forged ribs.

Ribs are made out of wood, metal, plastic, composites, foam. The wings of kites,
hang, Para gliders, powered kites, powered hang gliders, ultra lights, and windmills are
aircraft that have versions that use ribs to form the wing shape.

71
 FIG.11.5

For full size and flying model aircraft wing structures that are usually made of wood,
ribs can either be in one piece (forming the airfoil at that rib's "station" in the wing), or be in
a three-piece format, with the rib web being the part that the one-piece rib consisted of, with
cap strips for the upper and lower edging of the rib, running from the leading edge to the
trailing edge, being the other two component parts.

SPAR

In a fixed-wing aircraft, the spar is often the main structural member of the wing, running
span wise at right angles (or thereabouts depending on wing sweep) to the fuselage. The spar
carries flight loads and the weight of the wings whilst on the ground. Other structural and
forming members such as ribs may be attached to the spar or spars, with stressed skin
construction also sharing the loads where it is used. There may be more than one spar in a
wing or none at all. However, where a single spar carries the majority of the forces on it, it is
known as the main spar.

Spars are also used in other aircraft aerofoil surfaces such as the tailplane and fin and serve a
similar function, although the loads transmitted may be different to those of a wing spar.

72
RIBS AND SPAR LOCATIONS & SPACING

FIG.11.6

RIBS AND SPARS

FIG.11.7

73
SUMMARY
Thus the wing structural design and the numerical values of wing calculation and graph
has been observed

74
 CHAPTER 12
FUSELAGE DESIGN AND LAYOUT

12.1. LONGERONS

In aircraft construction, a longeron or stringer or stiffener is a thin strip of wood, metal or

carbon fiber, to which the skin of the aircraft is fastened. In the fuselage, longerons are
attached to formers (also called frames) and run the longitudinal direction of the aircraft. In
the wing or horizontal stabilizer, longerons run spanwise and attach to ribs.

Sometimes the terms “longeron” and “stringer” are used interchangeably. Historically,
though, there is a subtle difference between the two terms. If the longitudinal members in a
fuselage are few in number (usually 4 to 8) then they are called “longerons”. The longeron
system also requires that the fuselage frames be closely spaced (about every 4 to 6 in/10 to 15
cm). If the longitudinal members are numerous (usually 50 to 100) then they are called
“stringers”. In the stringer system the longitudinal members are smaller and the frames are
spaced farther apart (about 15 to 20 in/38 to 51 cm). Generally, longerons are of larger cross-
section when compared to stringers. On large modern aircraft the stringer system is more
common because it is more weight efficient despite being more complex to construct and
analyze. Some aircraft, however, use a combination of both stringers and longerons.

Longerons often carry larger loads than stringers and also help to transfer skin loads to
internal structure. As stated above longerons nearly always attach to frames or ribs. But
stringers often are not attached to anything but the skin, where they carry a portion of the
fuselage bending moment through axial loading. It is not uncommon to have a mixture of
longerons and stringers in the same major structural component.

FIG.12.1

75
12.2. FORMER:

FIG.12.2

A former is a structural member of an aircraft fuselage, of which a typical fuselage

has a series from the nose to the empennage, typically perpendicular to the longitudinal axis
of the aircraft. The primary purpose of formers is to establish the shape of the fuselage and
reduce the column length of stringers to prevent instability. Formers are typically attached to
longerons, which support the skin of the aircraft.

FIG.12.3

76
 The Former-and-Longerons technique was adopted from boat construction (also
called stations and stringers), and was typical of light aircraft built until the advent of
structural skins such as fiberglass and other composite materials. Many of today's light
aircraft and homebuilt aircraft in particular, are still designed in this way.

FIG.12.4

12.3. BULK HEAD

A bulkhead is a wall inside a craft such as a ship, airplane, or spacecraft. Bulkheads serve a
number of structural functions, and there are wide arrays of variations on the basic bulkhead
design which can be used in specific applications. The term “bulkhead” may also be used to
describe a retaining wall in a mine or along seashore used for control of flood and erosion.

77
 FIG.12.6

The Chinese appear to have been the first to use bulkheads in their ships. When
mariners from other regions encountered Chinese ships, they took note of the bulkhead
design and adopted it for themselves, causing it to spread rapidly across many shipbuilding
cultures. Prior to the use of bulkheads, the entire hull of a ship would be open, creating a
cavernous space.

FIG.12.7

One of the most obvious reasons to install bulkheads is to divide a space into usable
compartments. Using bulkheads inside a ship, for example, breaks the space up, which makes
it easier to store cargo and to establish accommodations for people on board the boat.

78
Historically, the use of bulkheads radically changed shipping, because it allowed companies
to sequester various products and to organize their loads without needing to worry about
shifting weight, since the bulkheads held materials in place.

LONGERONS & FRAME LOCATIONS AND SPACING

FIG.12.8

Fuselage Layout

FIG.12.9

79
 FIG.12.10

SUMMARY

The fuselage design layout and diagram of the fuselage has been attached and verified

80
 CHAPTER 13

DETAILED DESIGN WITH CAD DRAWINGS

TOP VIEW

FIG.13.1

FRONT VIEW

FIG.13.2

81
SIDE VIEW

FIG.13.3

55 m

FIG.13.4

SUMMARY

The detailed design of top view, front view, side view of 300 seated long range aircraft’s
layout and diagram has been attached and verified

82
 CHAPTER 14

CONCLUSION

Design of 300 seated long range aircraft is fine blend of science, presence of mind and the
application of each one of them at the appropriate time.

Design of anything needs experience and an optimistic progress toward the ideal system,
the scientific society always looks for the best product design.

This involves a strong fundamental and their skill full application which is a tough job
endowed upon the designer. We had put enough hard work to best of our knowledge for
this design.

A design never gets completed in a flutter sense but it is one further step towards the ideal
system. But during the design of this Heavy business aircraft, we learnt a lot about
AERONAUTICS and its implication when applied to an aircraft design.

83
REFERENCES

1. Anderson, John D. Jr., (1999) Aircraft Performance and Design,

McGraw-Hill, New York
2. Anderson, John D. Jr., (2001) Introduction to Flight, McGraw-
Hill, New York
3. Perkins, C. and Hage, R. (1949) Airplane Performance, Stability
and Control, Wiley, New York
4. Raymer, Daniel P. (1992) Aircraft Design: A Conceptual
Approach, AIAA Education series, Washington, DC
5. Roskam, J. (1985) Airplane Design, Roskam Aviation and
Engineering Corp., Ottawa, Kansas

6. Taylor, J. (2004) Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft, Jane’s, London,

UK

WEBSITES

1. Boeing technical characteristics, viewed 2 March 2014

http://www.boeing.com/boeing/commercial/737family/specs.page
2. Engine selection and technical Information, viewed 25 March 2014
www.purepowerengine.com http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_
%26_Whitney_PW1000G
3. JavaFoil – Analysis of airfoil, viewed 29 March 2014
http://www.mhaerotools.de/aerofoils/javafoil.htm

84