-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
1/153
AD-A270 150@Q IEAEllI|IEEHIE(~) WL-TR-93-3068
, PROCEDURESAND DESIGN DATA FOR THEFORMULATIONOF AIRCRAFTCONFIGURATIONS
THOMAS R. SIERONDUDLEY FIELDSA. WAYNE BALDWINDAVID W. ADAMCZAK
AEROTHERMODYNAMICSAND FLIGHTMECHANICSRESFARCH BRANCH 'JC[,5 3, ,AEROMECHANICSDIVISION
August 1993
FINAL REPORT FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1992- JUNE 1993
APPROVEDFOR PUBLIC RELEASE;DISTRIBUTIONUNLMITID
FLIGHT DYNAMICSDIRECTORATEWRIGHT LABORATORYAIR FORCE MATERIEL COMMANDWRIGHT PATTERSON AFB, OHIO 453-7913
93-23106 14.iU IOlNll 0 0 0 0
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
2/153
NOTICEWHEN GOVERNMENTDRAWINGS,SPECIFICATIONS,OR OTHERDATA ARE
USED FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN IN CONNECTION WITH A DEFINITELYGOVERNMENT-RELATEDPROCUREMENT,THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENTINCURS NO RESPONSIBILITYOR ANY OBLIGATION WHATSOEVER, THE FACTTHAT THE GOVERNMENTMAY HAVE FORMULATED OR IN ANY WAY SUPPLIEDTHE SAID DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, OR OTHER DATA, IS NOT TO BEREGARDEDBY IMPLICATION,OR OTHERWISEIN ANY MANNER CONSTRUED,ASLICENSINGTHE HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PERSON OR CORPORATION;OR ASCONVEYING ANY RIGHTS ORPERMISSION TO MANUFA'3,TURE, USE, SELL ANYPATENTED INVENTION THAT MAY IN ANY WAY BE RELATED THERETO.
THIS TECHNICALREPORT HAS BEEN REVIEWEDAND IS APPROVED FORPUBLICATION.
THOMAS R. SIER DUDLEY'FIELDSTechnical Manager Senior Aerospace3pecialistFlight Mechanics Research Group AerodynamicsGroup
A. WAYNE BALDWIN DV0ID W. ADAMCZAKSenior Aerospace Engineer Aerospace EngineerAerodynamics Group Flight Mechanics Research Group
VALENTINE DAHLEMChief, Aerothermo& Flight Mechanics BranchAercmechanics Division
IF YOUR ADDRESSHAS CHANGED,IF YOU WISH TO BE REMOVED FROMOUR MAILING LIST, OR IF THE ADDRESSEEIS NO LONGEREMPLOYED BY YOURORGANIZATIONPLEASE NOTIFY WUFIMH,WRIGHT-PATTERSONAFB, OH 45433-1913 TO HELP MAINTAIN A CURRENT MAILING LIST.
COPIES OF THIS REPORT SHOULD NOT BE RETURNED UNLESS RETURNIS REQUIREDBYSECURITYCONSIDERATIONS,CONTRACTUALOBLIGATIONS,OR
NOTICE ONA SPECIFIC DOCUMENT.
0 0 S S 0 0
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
3/153
FomApprovedREPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No . 0?04-0188
fPiic ( frrn. hurdrn for this collectionl of information is estimated Io erqt p t r w O M e . fldtudiii the time' for rpviewinq instructions, weAriholc -- si~tng data sources.a1 therin. rmid tdnwimnqithe data n e e d e .n d Omtrq dd e.'oq h (o0ctot infrma io ndi-om entliria dinga hi butdc-n e.', tim ur iny othinr .spert of this* ollectionotr fnromation.ndkiding sugg3iZornr reduo.n," br den i)Wa ihinqton irtesdiquarteri,`arvi.m I,~feclor..te frt nfomtio nr Oper0ons and Hermfts IMh leferonOavis ltivjwa. Wt~e 1?04. A.-ington. A~11101430), and to thP Office of Maimjin~ement d Midget. P sperwork Fit-duilion Pru t (0?10-1019). Wahinqtin P( 10O'O
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE S. FUNDING NUMBERS4PROCEDURES AND DESIGN DATA FOR THE F~ORMlULATION OF AI&CRAFT PE : 62201F4
CONFIGURATIONS PR : 2404TA : 240416
6. UTHOR(S) WU : 67THOMAS R. SIERON, DUDLEY-FIELDS, A. WAYNE BALDWIN, DAVID W.ADAIICZAK
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S)AND ADDAESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONWRIGHT LABORATORY, AFMC REPORT NUMBERFLIGHT DYNAMICS DIRECTORATEAEROMIECHANICS DIVISION, WL/FIIIHWRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OH 45433-7936 WL-TR-93-3068
9. PONSORING/IMONITORING AGENCY is AI(S) AND ADDRIaS$IS) 10, SPONSORING/I MONITORING
WRIGHT LABORATORY, AFMC AGENCYREPORT NUMBER
FLIGHT DYNAMICS DIRECTORATE WL-TR-93-3068AEROMECHANICS DIVISION, WL/FIMHWRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OH 4 5 4 3 3 - 7 9 3 6 . - j
11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
O ~Ila- DISTRIBUTION /AVAILARU.ITYSTATEMINT 1lb OISTRA8UTiON CODEl
Approved fo r public release; distribution unlimited.
13 AISTRACT r u m 0 w t f )
This report contains design data and rapid analysis methods to assist in stabl ishing 1an initial aircraft configuration to begin the conceptual design process. It sbased on an array of data acquired over many years for fighter, bomber an d transport
aircraft. Th e data is ompiled to estimate the gross take-off weight aud physicalsize of a representat ive configuration fo r various range, payload and speed require-ments. Other data and procedures are Included to defiat the genrwal dimensions of thifuselage, ving, vertical and horizontal stabilizers. Aerodynamic methods and data ariprovided to rapidly estimate the drag an d lift characteristics at subsonic, transonicand supersonic speeds for the this class of aircraft. Performanc~e data has been as-sembled to show the impact of range, payload, speed, maneuverabi l i ty. take-off da dlanding requirements on the physical and geometric characteristics of t hese coinfigurations. A sample problem is presented to Illustrate the use of this design data informulating an aircraft c,.kfiguration.
AIRCRAPT CONFIGURATIONS, CONCEPTUAL DES$!CNif AEROI)TIWIC pREUlC'lIUNETHOUS, AIRCRAFT U)ESlGN tP%*
SU SCCuRITVCtASWeCATBON 19. SECURITYCLASWICATION 10 . SECURItYCtASW6CAtIONt 10 UMITTIONO ABS~tACTOF 0IPOiAt W TI4S PAGE OF ABSTRACr
1 IiiLa" IFI IIb mu[ k ! t ; I n llft!TWlILVI1IM?1ti 1-i
IV SQ0-W`% S1f0vi 09 0 0' 1
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
4/153
0 TABLE OF CONTENTS19)
PAGE4D
ID
1. INTRODUCTION 1-12. AIRCRAFT CONCEPTUALDESIGN 2-1
3. IMPACT OF PERFORMANCEREQUIRMENTS 3-1ON CONFIGURATIONSHAPE
4. DESIGN DATA FORINITIAL SIZING AND 4-1SHAPING OF CONFIGURATIONS
5. METHODSAND DATA TO ESTIMATE PRELIMINARY 5-1AERODYNAMICCHARACTERISTICS
* 6. INFLUENCEOF AERODYNAMICAND 6-1CONFIGURATIONPARAMETERS ON PERFORMANCE
7. PROCEDURESFOR THE FORMULATION 7-1AND ANALYSISOF AN AIRCRAFtCONFIGURATION
& CONCLUSIONS 8-1
9. REFERENCES 9-1
APPENDIXA REPRESENTATIVE OPERATIONALAND A-IADVANCEMDCONFIGURATIONS
APPENDIX B VOLUME ANDAREA RELATIONSHIPS B-I S.0...
APPENDIX C WINGS IN SUPERSONIC RLoW C-I
I m -. -.. ,afI
O 4~j O I
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
5/153
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
6/153
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
7/153
5-15 Parasite Drag Area Correlation at Mach 2 5-24
5-16 Variation of CD0 with Mach Number 5-25
5-17 Subsonic Lift Curve Slope 5-27
5-18 Supersonic Lift Curve Slope 5-28
5-19 Maximum Lift-to-DragRatio 5-30
5-20 Subsonic MaximumL/D Correlation 5-32
5-21 Subsonic Maximum L/D Variation with Aspect Ratio 5-33
5.-22 Variation of Maximum L/D with Mach Number 5-34
5-23 Maximum L/D at SubsonicCruise and MaximumSpeed 5-35
6-1 FLAPSDown CL MA X 6-2
6-2 Stall Velocity Versus Wing Loading 6-3
6-3 Take-Off Velocity 6-4
6-4 Take-Off Distance 6-5
6-5 Cruise Altitude 6-7
6-6 Impact of Cruise Fuel on Transport Range 6-9
6-7 Impact of Cruise Fuel on Fighter Range 6-10
6-8 Impact of Supersonic Speed on Fight-es 6-11
6-9 Specific Excess Power, G = 1.0 6-16
6-10 Specific Excess Power. G = 5.0 6-17
6-11 Maximun Sustaineo "G" CntuurM 1 = 0.6 6-19
6-12 Ntaxuimu Sustained "G" Contours, M = 0.9 6-20
6-13 MaxuinumSustained *G-"CAontos M = 15 6-2)
vi
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
8/153
6-14 Thrust Variation for a Modem Fighter 6-22
A) 6-15 Aircraft Turn Rate, V = 200 - 800 Knots 6-25
6-16 Aircraft Turn Rate, V = 700 - 1400 Knots 6-26
6-17 Luding Ground Distance 6-28
6-18 Descent Distance Over 50 feet 6-29
A-1 A-7D FighterConfiguration A-2
A-2 F-106 Fighter Configuration A-3A-3 F.-15 Fighter Configuration A-4
A-4 F-16 Fighter Configuration A-5
A-5 Advanced Supersonic FighterConfiguration A-6
A-6 C-141 Transport Configuration A-7
A-7 C-5 Transport Configuration A-8
A-8 AdvancedTransport Configuration A-9
A-9 B-52 Bomber Configuration A-10
C-I Arrowhead Wings with DoubleWedge at ZeroIncidence C-5
vii
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
9/153
Alf
Nomenclature
a Acceleration, ft/sec2
Angle of attack, deg
Ax Frontal projected area, ft2
AR Aspect ratio b2 ISf
AWET Wetted area, ft2
b Wing span, ft
I for M>l
= -- 2 for M
"... ...
a ~~ ~. .1 .J .. .. . . . ....
*~ 00,106o
S/I I III
I I I II I I : k I ~I5-I I4
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
89/153
1 T...............
*.......................... ................. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
*. . . .. . . . . . . . . . ... . . ~. . . . . .
*.............. [ ... ....
... .. .....-- -- .. ... ... ... .. ..- - _ - _
00
......................................
............... ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... ........... ...... ........ . .. .......
.... .. .. . . . . - - .. . . . .
- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0
0..... ......t
.. ........ ....................
5-35
S S S
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
90/153
6. INFLUENCE OF AERODYNAMICAND CONFIGURATION PARAMETERSONPERFORMANCE
The initial designof a configurationis strongly dependenton the performancerequirements.
These requirementsdictate the generalappearance of a configuration,wing loading, thrust-to-
weight, wing sweepback, fuselage fineness ratio and almost every other major feature of an
aircraft. Thus it is important to have an awareness of how eachmission performancesegment
influencesthe selection of key vehicleparameters. A typical fightermission consistsof take-off,
accelerationto speed and altitude,cruise, combat, cruise, and land.
TAKE-OFF
Take-off performanceis dependent primarilyon the weight of the aircraft, the lift generated
by the aircraft wing and the takeoff power available from the engine. The maximum lift
coefficient(Reference 28) is a functionof wing planform (AR,A, X), wing thickness andcamber,
as well as the type of high lift devicesemployed(slot or droopedleading edge flaps, plain hinge
or fowler trailing edge flaps)and the percentageof the wing area that these devices encompass.
In the early preliminarydesign phase, mostof these detailsare not known. However, CL , x can
be estimated based on data from existing aircraft of a similarconfiguration. Figure 6-1 shows
the CL NU, that is availablefor several fighter and transportaircraft. With the estimate of
CL NMx,the stall velocity (ignoring thrust effects) can be detenrined as a function of the wing
loading (WIS) as shown in Figure 6-2. If the stall velocity is a requirement, this curve can be
used to detennine the W/S and thus the wingarea (S) required to meet the stallspeed. The
takeoffvelocity is normallybased onusing only 75% ofCL NW and is shown in Figure 6-3. The
take-offdistance is shown in Figure 6-4 as afunction of thrust loading, wing loading,and CLTO '
This curve is based on data from many aircraft andis presented in tenus of the most importaut
6-1
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
91/153
u-. . . . . . ....
LIM . . . .
L . . . . . . ........ ... . ............... ............ ............
~~~4. .. .." ..., ,
. . . .
................................... ......
......................................
*. . . .. .... . . .. . .
lii-----------9.,' * . ,. .9..nwixv.
6-2
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
92/153
.. . . ... . . .. ... .
P *-. --- i..i---i ; I... . .. . .- .. .....- -.... .......
- .. t.t.t.f.t-t........................ ................. 1
* ............................. .- .
..... .... ... .... I... .... ..... . . . .. .. . . . . . . 4 . - 1
..... .. ................. ..................... -......
.. . . .. j-c a..... . .. ... ...
.. ....
.. .. .
.. .... ... .. .
(yqr) S/- Swpwq &SU&6-3
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
93/153
.. . . . ....4 .. .. I. .. L -
44 4 -4 -4 .. j
.. .. ... . .. .I..
. ........... .. .. . . . . $ I .
*. . . ...........
00.. .... .. . .. ,tZ
Ui I-
........... 9........ ~~~~~~~ .........
..........
7 .. ... ...
(SIX)O-A
6-4
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
94/153
. . ..... . . . .. . . . . . . . .
.. .. . . . . ..... ... ......
... . .. .. . .. .. ..... ... . ... ... ... .. .
........... . .. T ~
& .......... . ... .. 4.....4 . 4 . . ..
S . . S . S... ........ .... 4.
000
(k"oi a A!UO4avl
6-5
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
95/153
airplane and engine parameters.
RANGE AND SPECIFIC RANGE
4,) The range of an aircraft is a critical performanceparameter andit stronglyinfluences the
wing design. The primary aerodynamicparameterwhich drives the configuration ismaximum
lift-to-drag ratio, (L/D)Ma. The lift coefficient for (L/D)Max is called theoptimum CL and is
given by: CL O (6-1)
and the requiredCL for one g level cruise flightis:
CL Je = .W162q Sj~ (6-2
then for CLRe=CL Opt - Cq (6-3)
0 Therefore, at maximum LiD, airplanes fly at an altitude andvelocity to satisfy equation (6-2).
Hence for a fixed velocityand wing loading, the cruise altitudeis defined formaximum L)D.
Historical data is pmsentedin Figure 6-5 toevaluate cruise altitude basedon take-"ff wing
loading. The data indicatescruise altitu.c dmcrAscs as wing loadi-g increases, butbegins to
level off at wing loadingsabove M6Wpsf.The crtise raang of an aircraft can be estimated4 uitc
accumatelyby the imguit range equation gin beltw:
R Vv~,.[Jg ,i64
with R in tautic-al milesV in k"sSRK' in lbs of fuel p-r bwor per poundof thrust11) lift to drag ratioWIAFVpinitial cruiuc weightlfinalcmiu.i weight
6-6
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
96/153
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
97/153
Assumptions used in developing this equation includecruising at constant (LID) (go constant
altitude), constant velocity and constant SFC. Thus an increase in I/D, a reduction in SFC, and
an increase in fuel fraction willlead to increased range.
The impact of lift-to-drag ratio on cruise rangefor transportsis shown in Figure 6-6. Since
fuel fraction for transports (Figure4-7) varies between 35 and 45 percent of the gross take-off-
weight, and typical cruise fuel loads account for 45 to 55 percent of the total fuel load, a
representative range of values for cruise fuel weight to gross take-off weight is 0.15 to 0.25.
Hence, a transportwith an L/D = 16, an initial cruise weightto final cruise weight ratio of 1.25
would have a nominal range of 3800 nautical miles. A similar chart forfighters is presented in
Figure 6-7. Since thenominal fuel fraction for fighters is 27 percent of gross take-offweight
and typic.al internal cruisefuel loads are about 30 to 40 percentof the total fuel load, a nominal
range of values for initial cruise fuel weight to gross take-off weight is 0.075 to 0. C25.
Therefore, a fighter with an LID = 10, an initial cruiseweight to final ciuiaz weight ratio of 1.10,
would have a nowinal range of 500 nautical miles.
The impact of supersonicspeed to fighter range is mradiiy appawvnt in Figore 6-8. Assuming
an UD = 4, at an altitudeof 40.000ft, SFC=2.0 and an initial to finalcruise weight ratio of 1.10.
the fighter range is only 225 naiutical miles. This is over a 55 percent reductionin range
capability. "Tis s optimistic since large quantitiesoil fuel will be coLsumed duringickleratio
from Maclh 0.9 to 2.0. 11T acceleratioi fuel will d& x sc' the fuel avaiiablu for cruise tligjht.
Thus there is a significant penalty for superonic speeds. hiWslarge Xmealtymay be reduced
thmugh theuse of very highfuseae fiteviss ratios, i m a " wing swcepback anzlgi aswd situal
wing thiclatessratios.
6-8
m = = m w =
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
98/153
- - - - - - - - -. . .. . . . . . . .. .. . .. . . . . . .
.... ... .. . ... ..... .. ... ..
-- -- -- --- - 4 . . ...... ... .... ..
.. ..... .. . . .. . ......
* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -. ------
-0-............. ......--
tft
0 .'Sl-d: ' 4 - -MOW&RS-loVUI AAI6-93
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
99/153
.... .- A- .A- .... ...- L- - - - - - -.
. . . . . . . . -- - - -- --- --- -
.. .. .. ... .. . . . . -- -- ---. . .
- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --.. . . . .
*rZ
..........-------------------.* It
.1 HlaA~i.......-LOM H- l .MA0
~6-1
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
100/153
------------. . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . .
---- ---. . . . . .-- . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
......... .......... ... ..S. . ...................................... r...
....................................................................................
. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. .. . ..
.. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . .
. . . .. . . . . .
..........
t~q.4
jL~oamaintiv~AX_
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
101/153
Much attention in the 1970's and 80's was given to investigating the technologies which
3maximizethe range parameter M(LID) (References 29-32). A class of vehicles calledSFC
"Osupercruisers"were envisioned where LID at higher Mach numbers was maximized while
keeping engine throttle setting below afterburnerfor low SFC. This was a severe challengeto
the aerodynamicist in trying to maximize supersonic LIDand maintain acceptable transonic
maneuvering characteristics. The design options for increasing high speed LID impact the
available fuel fraction, whilethe thrustrequiredat non-afterburnerengine powersettingsdefines
engine size, which in turn impacts vehiclesize, shape,weight, fuel fraction and LID. These are
the conflicts whichmust be resolved early in the design cycle.
In order to permit rapid estimates involving aircraftrange the following approach can be
used. If a cruise range segment is divided by the fuel consumed for the distance traveled a
parametercalled specific rangeis formed, with units of nautical miles per pound of fuel. This
is an average value of how far a particularaircraft can travel on one pound of fuel. The
instantaneousspecific rangeis found by dividing the flight velocity by the fuel flow
SR V (6-5)FF
where: V - nautical titles pet hourFF - lbs of fuel per hourSR - nautical miles pcr lb of fuel
Equation (6-5) may be expessed as
SR V VR ~3- s''FY~ SF C X 7'
Wand for T=D; L=W; and D -
6-12
O I ... O t
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
102/153
SF C x W
For a modem aircraft at Mach 0.9 and 30,000 feet:
LID= 10,SF.C = 1.0 lbsihrllbV = 516 knotsWI = 25,000 lbs
SR-- (516)(10)
t el 1.0(25,000) m= 0.206 nm.
1b
Anotheroften used parameteris the range parameterwhich is composedof parametersfromS
the Breguet rangeequation.
R F PSFC *
It is often usedto compareaircraft capabilit-ybasedon aerodynamicsand propulsionefficiencies.
A rapid approximation for the fuel required for a cruise mission segment can be made by
dividing the range required by the specific range. S
SPECIFICEXCESS POWERIMUNEUVERING
Sptifit cxcess power isdefined asS
Ps -I" r- D(6-8)
and is expimseA inthe unitsof fw- per setond. Simpleaircraft forc equilibriumshows thlt Ps
is the rate of climb an aicratq can achieveunder the approximationsof shallowclimb anglesand
,m,acwxrcmted flight (Retcraces 33 io 35). However as cureutly us- Ps is betea
6-13
0S 0 0
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
103/153
characterizedas the excess power availableto an aircraft for maneuvering or climbing. This
interpretation is based on the fact that PS is calculatedat flight conditionsother than I "g". ForI
example,at a specific altitude, velocity,and weight all terms in thePS equationare fixed except
drag.
Ps
3.5g
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0"g's" \
SKETCH A
Sketch A indicates the maximum valueof PS at I *g", the PS 0 point of about 3.5 "g's" and
negative PS beyond 3.5 "g's"
Aircraft perfonrance specificationsare often expressedpartially in terms of Ps. A matrix
of values are used with different levels of PS required at various combinationsof altitude,
velocity, thrust level, maneuver level,and weight. A sample matrix is shown below.
MACH ALTITUDE "g's" THRUST PS (ft/sec)
1.8 0K Ig Max A/B 1000
0.8 10K 7 Max AIB 100
0.9 30K I Max A/B 400
0.9 30K Ig LMil Power 106
0.9 INK 5g _Max A/8
Aeraft designerswillvary iksagn pamimetei such as T1W. WIS.AR and finemws ratio in
6[ 6-14
0 6 0 S~~ S 000
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
104/153
an attempt to meet these perfornance requirements (aswell as others). Often meeting one
particular requirementsuch as the 5g, M=0.9, h=30,O00ft. point in the example abovewill ensure
that the other requirementsare also met.
Contour plotsof Ps againstaltitude and Mach numberare often generatedto show the global
perfonnancecapability of an aircraft. A typical exampleis shown in Figure 6-9. The Ps = 0
lines indicate on a "lg" chart the flight envelope capability of the vehicle. On charts for
conditions above I "g" (Figure 6-10) the PS = 0 line indicates for each Mach number the
maximum altitude atwhich the aircraft can sustain the "g" evel of the figure.
Anothervaluable use of the PS performanceparameter is in comparing one aircraft against
another. This is typically done in evaluatingvarious aircraftdesign solutions andin evaluatingthe performance advantagesand disadvantagesof threat aircraft. An advantage of 100 feet per
second is generally accepted as significantwhen comparing aircraftperformance, *
SUSTAINED MANEUVERING
Another classic performanceparameterutilized ismaximum sustained "g" capability. As
indicated in the previous discussionPS and maximum *g" capabilityare closely related. When
P. is equal to zero an aircraft is at its maximum sustained"g" level with thrust equal to drag at
the tueuver level. This "g" evel can be detenminedas follow:
When PS= 0;WheuP- P -)
w ~iV
qS
6-15
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
105/153
0o
Vtr
0- CDfa
r-. G)
C4
(4) pnq.-1
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
106/153
A C 4
CM J
I
0 I
0 5 0
(4) spnv/
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
107/153
solving for n results inthe followingrelationship
n = q7t'AR T_ qC-9)WI iV W4
Figures6-11 to 6-13 have plottedthis equationin paiametricform for valuesof AR. "W, nd
CD0 typical of modem aircraft. on e interesting interpretationof Figure 6-12 isto note the
variation of required T/Was WIS varies while keeping the maneuvercapability constant. This
type of chart ,aa identify designchoices for meeting maneuver specificationswith either fixed
or "rubber" engines. Note in Figure 6-12 that the effect of CDOon the required T/W at a
constant WIS is relatively small for this condition. The effectsof wing planfonn (AR) and
design technology("e') can also be estimatedwith equation(6-9). Figure 6-13 indicatessimilardata for supersonic flight conditionsand typical tighteraircraft parameters.
In using equation(6-9) it is important to note that the thrust-to-weight. T/W, parameteris v
specified at the particular flight conditions under consideration. Thrust-to-weightand wing
loading, WIS. are often used to characterize the performance levelsand designemphasis ofI
aircraft, high TIWand low WiS representinghigh performance. Sincethmst varies with altitude
and Mach number andwing loading varieswith payloadand fuel consumption; thrustto weight
values are usually quoted at some refrnce condition suchas sea level statiic maximum thrust
and take-offgross weight. Figure 6-14 pa.sentsthe varia-Jonof T(%Vfor a typical modenifighter
with both M1ch numberand altitude, Cwunt high pefrtfon1ainue ilghtcs have TAV valus around
1.0 or greater at sea level rfkemwo conditionsaid decrcaue to I1 these valutmat mid altitude
and transonic speo.
In awssing the tlatrionshipsbctween pctfrnwmau, veuitenwnts, iypitally 11SAund.susaintdlp
.6-1g
S 5 0 0 0 0 0
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
108/153
0 I
II
c8 (DIv0 lo ( t C46'
0 -9
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
109/153
* .7... . ........
\ .. .. ..- - --- - .. ..... . . .. .. .
-..........
.... . .* .. 0--
......... ........ c. .... ..*. .. .. ...
. . . . . . . . .
V4 -
6-20
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
110/153
0
*99
........... .. ..........\ . . . . . . . . . ............ .. ....
A .... ...kc~... .... I I.t ... ... ....
........ .. .. . . .. . .
\\. .... .
iv~
0~~~~~ 43 V( Ot C
6it21
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
111/153
.. .... ... .. . ..... .. ..... . .. . .. ....... ... . . .
* ...............
S.......... 4 .. . ...
S. . . . . . . . . .... 4........ . .....- - - - - - - 0.....
.................................. .............-----... ..............
.. .... ........ .
S.... ............ ............. ... . . . .
ell
"a. 0 0- 0 6 o 6a~dH
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
112/153
0 0 0 0 .0,' 0
g's, on aircraft design driverssuch as T/W, thefollowing observationsprovide some guidance.
Using the PS equation (6-8) results in
T [ D]
T - If D=O
T Psor For D > 0W V
Givena PS specificationat some altitudeand Mach numberwe can immediatelyestablisha lower
bound on T/W at those conditions. To obtain a betterestimate consider
D I If L= W
if we return to the Ps relationshipwe have
T Ps 1
L L
The minimum value of 1 resultswhen LD (isl -DDD
T Ps Io - +.
At mnueuver lift coefficients where L- nW, (L/D)t.tNa, is less than (I/D)Mr so the final
estimate is
6-23
a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
113/153
T>
)Mau
A typical value for L/D at high speed, subsonic maneuverconditions for current fighters is 3 to
4.
The T/W's estimated by the above procedure can be scaled back to reference conditions
using propulsion data from a candidate engine (see Figure 6-14 for trends) or the following
approximationwhen data is not available.
TATFPJDE =TSpA LEVl - I
TURN RATE
Another performanceparameteroften used is turn rate expressed in degrees per secondand
indicateshow fast the pilot can "point the nose". Turn rate for sustained maneuveringis simply
related to the g capability of the aircraft through the following well-knownexpression
V
Figures6-15 and 6-16 presentparametricdata forquickly convertingbetween sustainedmaneuver
and turn rate.
All of the expressions used or developed in this section relate to sustained maneuvering
which is an idealized steady state condition. Instantaneous maneuvering is also used as a
performance requirementand represents a more dynamiccondition. Instantaneous turn rate or
maneuverlevel is typically characterizedby maneuversat CL &tAXor a structural limit for limited
durationsand drag levels aboveavailablethrust. These maneuvers result in negative Ps and large
6-24
I
* u 0 S Si i0 0w 00
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
114/153
it)~
SI-.- .b . ...........--- ------
00 00
.. . . .. .
~. , .......
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.. .. . ... .. . .. . . . . .
...................................................
.......--.., k sSe ) a . jj
6-25S
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
115/153
I - -- -
- , , ,--
*- . . . . . ~ .. ........ .. .... .I.....
---- ---- -I.t-- -- - -
. . . . . .5 .......................... . . . . . . . . . .---
.............. ) S.......---- 4........I. S .
............. ~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~ ..... . .. ... ......................................
.S .......... ...... . . . .. . . . . .. . L . . . . . . S......... A S.
~~~~~~.......... .. I.....~.. .
......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v ~
0 ... ...... ............ ....................... ............. . . . . . . . . L....... . . . . . . .....
.........................
6-26
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
116/153
changes invelocity and/oraltitude,hence the name instantaneousas opposed to sustained.
LANDING
Landing performance is primarily dependent on tile approach speed and thedeceleration
generated from braking (ignoringreverse thrust). The approach speed is normally definedas
20% above thestall velocity for CL MAX,which can be determinedfrom Figure 6-1. A good
breaking systemcan providea mean decelerationrate (-a) of -6 ft/sec2. Figure6-17 providesthe
landing ground distance as a function of approach speed anddecelerationand is based on the
relationship:2
Distance = App-2a
Landing distancecalculationsnormallyincludethe horizontaldistance traveledduring the descent
from a standard 50 foot obstacle. Figure 6-18 presentsthis air distanceas a function of descent
angle or glide slope y, which is defined as the angle whose tangent is the ratio of vertical
distance tohorizontaldistance and is also representedby the reciprocal of the lift to drag ratio,
including power,in the approach configuration(L(D Power Approach), flapsand landing gear
down, and also approximlates the resulting thrust to weight ratio [ - D -
6-27
0 0.. . . .. . 0,0
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
117/153
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
118/153
4---- -4-I T - r-*
11 -- - 1....i
........ 00
......... . ......
N~ 00
gap - Aajaiy OdOISaP!ID6&29
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
119/153
7. PROCEDURESFOR THE FORMULATION AND ANALYSIS OF ANAIRCRAFT CONFIGURATION
This section illustrates the procedures to use for sizing and shaping an initialconfiguration,and to determine if it can meet the specified performance requirements.It uses many of the design charts in this report. The problem presented is only forfighters, but the procedure canalso be used for transports andbombers. It is good toremember this is a starting point to defining a configuration. It is assumed the outputfrom this procedurewill be used as inputs to a more elaborateaircraft synthesisprogram(References3 and 4).
Sample Problem
Performance Requirements
Max Speed: Mach= 2Cruise Speed:Mach= 0.9Radius: 325n.m.Payload: 1,8001bsMax Load Factor. 7.33g
Maneuverability:4g's at M= 0.9/h= 30,00Oft5g's at M= 0.6/h= l0,O00ft
, 4g's at M= 1.51h= 40,000ft *Take-Off Distance: 3,000ftLanding Distance: 6,000ft
Step I - Determine the gross take-offweight of this fighter fromFigure 4-2.
Ton -Miles = RangexPayload
2,000650x 1,8002,000
= 585then GTOW 36,000lbs
Step 2 - Detemine length from Figure 4-4a for a 36,0001b fighter.
Lengh = 55 ft
7-1
* S 0
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
120/153
Step 3 - Determine emptyweight frction from Figure 4-6 fora 36,O0Olbfighter.
WEMPTY 0.68
GTOW
V and WEMrl,- 24,480/bs
Step 4 - Determine fuel fraction and payload fiactionfrom Figure 4-8 for a 36,0001bfighter.
WFUEL .0.7
GTOW
WFUEL + WPL = 0.32 and WpL f 0.05GTOW GTOW
Thus: Fuel Weight = 0.27x36,000= 9,720lbs
Payload = 0.05x36,000
= 1,800lbs
Step 5 - Determinethe wettedarea from Figure 4-10 for a 36,0001b fighter.
Since WEMp,- = 24,480lbs
then SW - 1.920ft2
Step 6 - Estimate the internal volumefrom Figure4-11 for a 36,0001bfighter,or use therelationship:
V 0.0226(SWE"43
Since SWT. = 1,920fi 2
then Vol - 1,332fl3
7-2
0 SSSS
w
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
121/153
Step 7 - Check estimated volume from Figure 4-12 for a 36,0001bfighter.
Since WMp, = 24,480
then PEMPT" = 5.8
where ULF =-1.5xMax Load Factor
= 1.5x7.33311
then pEn~q 5.8(k11hn1%un ,3.75) 5=17.01.lbs
ft3For V 0 = W E M P T Y
PEMPrY
24,48017.01
=1,439ft 3
Step 8- Average the volumefrm steps6 and 7 at thispoint of the design.
Hence V = 1,332 - 1,4392
= 1,385ft3
Step 9 - Re-compute thewetted area from Figure 4-11.
Swu = 1,972fJ
7-3
A .
* 0 00 0 S 00 0O
tiiim
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
122/153
Step 10 - Determine fuselage diameter from following relationships:
d-=2 V7IKvL
where Kv - 0.80 (Bombers)= 0.70 (Fighters)S0.75 (Transpons)
Kv is an empirical constantdetermined from many aircraft and is based on thederivation that volume can be representedby the relationship:
V = Kv7,R2 L
This is the volume relationshipfor certain bodiesof revolution and ellipsoids.
For V = l,385ft3
L = 55ftKv = 0.70
I
then d = 2 1 1,385S(3.14)(0.70)(55)
= 6.77ft
Step 11 - Compute the fuselagefineness ratio.
L - 55.f
d -67-7fl
L 55d 6.77
I
7-4
AI
* S SS *
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
123/153
Step 12 - Check the fuselage fineness ratio from Step 11 with the data contained inFigure 3-3. The computedvalue should be within the bucket of the drag rise
curve at Mach= 1.0. This bucket is located between the values of 8 to 10.5.Hence, the computedvalueof 8.12 is a reasonableestimate. If the computed valuedid not fall within the drag bucket, then an average Lid value shouldbe selectedand the process reversed to estimatevolume and wetted area. The fuselage mayinitially be represented by a sphere, right circular cone nose, a right circularcylinder forthe center-body section,and acone frustrum for theafterbody. Typicallengths of these componentsare:
Fighter TransportNose Section 25%L 10%LCenterBody Section 50%L 70%LAfterbodySection 25%L 20%L
Step 13 - Estimate wing areafrom Figure 4-13 for a 36,0001b fighter. Assume a ratio ofSWET
4.93 for _ . Which is representativeof the F-16.SwSWING
Since SwET = 1,972ft2
SWING - 400ft2
Step 14 - Determinethe wingsweepback angle from Figure 4-16 for a cruise Mach numberof 0.9.
ALE - 490
Step 15 - Determine the wing aspect ratio from Figure 4-15.
AR = 3.0
Step 16 - Estimate the maximum L/D from Figure 5-23 at a cruise speed of Mach= 0.9.Values for fighter. typically vary from 10 to 11. Select L/D= 11 mpresentative
of the F-15 and F- 16. The aspect ratio may then be chocked using figure5-21 fora conventionally shaped fighter.
AR - 3.0
The values foraspect ratio from step 15 and 16 compare favorablyand (oVecanproceed withthe evaluation.
7-5
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
124/153
0 S S S S 0 O. .
Step 17 - Determinethe wing thickness ratiofrom Figure 4-17 for an AR= 3 wing.
"t 0.055 or 5.5%C
Step 18 - Computethe wing loading at take-off.
GTOW = 36,000lbsSjvjv -=400ft 2
W 9 0 b s
Step 19 - Determine the span loading ftomr Figure 4-14.
AR 3.0
w
W=o30psf
S
b 2
The span loading may also be computed from the relationship:
AR WI
7-6
0 00 00 0
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
125/153
Step 20 - Determine wingplanform from Figure 4-18 fora 36,0001b fighter.
b GTOW = 36,000 (from span loading equation)4'. W 30b 2
-34.6
CTAssume a wing taper ratio, = 0.2, which is representative for a fighter.
CR = (2S By rearanging equation from Figure 4-18
Ce= 19.30ft
then C7= 3.86ft
A wing planform cannow be generated to reflect awing,A/'= 49, Ci= 19.30ff,C7= 3.86ft, and b= 34.6f.
Step 21 - Determine the size of the horizontal tailusing Figure4-19 and a preliminary3view drawingto estimateIHT for a fighter.
Since C = ( + CT CRCT
=13.3ft
an l Sw = 13.3x400
-= 5,320fl 3
then tosfJ = 1,450ft3
and s/if -1,450
If a value for Ittr can not be 6etermined,assume the horizontal tail area is 20%
of the wing area. This is a non*al value and satisfactoryfor this stage of thedesign cycle.
7-7
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
126/153
Step 22 - Determine the size of the vertical tail using Figure 4-20 anda preliminary 3-viewdrawing to estimate IVT for a fighter.
bSw = 34.6x400
,1 = 13,840ft3
then IVTSVT = 1,070ft 3
an d 8VT=- 1,070
If a value for Iv can not be determined,assume the vertical is 20% of the wingarea. This is a nominal valueand satisfactory for this stageof the design cyclk.
Step 23 - Determine the subsoniczero lift drag, CD0, from figure 5-10. Based on otherfighter aircraft assume an equivalent skin friction coefficient of 0.004.
For SwT = 1,972.ft2
f = CfeSwET = CDOSREFf = O.004x1,972
= 7.89
then Cw f
7.89400
- 0.0197
Step 24 - Determine wing efficiency factorfrom Figure 5-8.
For AR= 3.0, e- 0.85
7-8
* 0 0 0 S 0 0 0
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
127/153
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
128/153
* 0 0 S 0 O0 .'
Step 28 - Determinethe subsonic lift curve slope from Figure 5-17
0 For ALjE 490, Cie= 19.30ft, C7= 3.86fl,and b= 34.6ftthen Ay,-= 420 and AR= 3.0 and rom Fig 5-17
CLa t = .2 r
= 0.056deg
Step 29 - Determinethe optimum lift coefficientfor cruise flight from the relationshipsonpage 5-29:
CDOCL OPT ~ F where K= 0.125 from step 25
=i0.0197
\0.125
- 0.397
Step 30-Determine the 2T ratio for this postulated fighter from figure 3-4, T
W Wrequired at take-off for a highly agile fighterfor the maneuverabilityspecified will
Wapproach current inventory aircraft. For a -S . 90, assume a minimumST
requirementof T = 1.0. This value may have to be iterated if ou r aircraft doesW
not meet the specifiod maneuverabilitygoals.
Step 31 - Determinethe inaximumlift coefficient from figure 6-1.
For A,,.E 494 ; CLm\,c 1.5
7-10
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
129/153
O O0 0 V 0' '0
Step 32- Determinethe take-off distance fromFigures 6-4.
wFor A =49 0 , CLan1.5 , d 90psfL LMAX =S.5
"VTO= 155knots from figure 6-3
then -=80(T=
T)
w,ere we assume T = 1.0w
and Ca.o = 1.1.5 (CLTO= 75 % CLMAX)
Take -Off Distance = 1,2001f
Step 33 - Determinethe approximatecruise range at Mach 0.9 and 30,000fi from Figure6-7
or the relationship:
R 2.3_V L..-05SF C WFMAL
132oMA)R =LogWINM
SFWF L
Where L GTOW - 3 0%(WFUE1)
whr ZTOW - 7O%(WFUU)
36,000 - (0.3)(9,730)36,000 - (0.7)(9,730)
= 1.133
and SFC = 1.0 at M 0.9; L/D 10.1; IVF, =9,730lbs
then R 651ni.
7-11
m
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
130/153
* 0 0 O O O 0 O,
Step 34 - Determinethe sustained "g" capabilityfrom Figure6-12 at Mach 0.9 and 30,000ftor the relationship.
n reAR T qCD,
T
Assume: T = 0.52 (from Figure 6-14)WS--77psf (50% Fuel load)
Sq = 360psf
CDO = 0.0197e = 0.85AR = 3.0
then n = 4.0g's
Step 35 - Determinethe sustained"g" capabilityat Mach 0.6 and 10,000ftfrom Figure6-I1.
Assume: T = 0.84; CDo,= 0.0197 w- = 77psfS
q=
367psfthen n = 5.34g's
Step 36 - Determinethe sustained*g"capabilityat Mach 1.5 and 40,00ft from Figure6-13.
A,vume: w . 0.65, CtX=-0.041W-- u77psfSq - 616psf
then n = 4.54g's
7-12
! ml m w .. m m m u l mm , u r ll w m m m m u =w
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
131/153
S0 0
@Step 7 - Determine the turn rate capability at M= 0.6 and 10,OO0ftfrom Figure 6-15.V = Ma
= 0.6(1,073)
= 644 fA = 383knotssec
0= 15.0deSgi for n = 5.34g'ssec
Step 38 - Determinethe turn rate capabilityat M= 1.5 and 40,000ft from Figure 6-16.
V = 1.5(971)
= 1,4571 = 863knotssec
= 5.6.dg for n = 4.54g'ssee
Step 39 - Determinethe landingdistance from figure 6-2,6-17and 6-18. Assumea landingfuel fractionof 10% (for reserves).
* WLjVD = 36,000 - 0.90(9,720) = 27,252/bs
then W 27,252 = 68 wa CL 1.5 from step 31= 400 L
VsrAU"= 116ksnos from Figure 6-2
VApe = 139 nowts ftom Figure 6-17
Landing Ground Distance = 4500feet
assume a typical glide angle of 30 then
Laiuling descent ovwr 50ft = 950feet
Total Landing Distance - 5450ftet
This completes the preliminary aerodynamic and perfontance characteristics. Thepreliminary perfomance indicates the conceptual aircraft can meet the initial specified goals.The next step is to input the configuration into an aircraft synthesis program and conductparametric trade-off analysis and sensitivity evaluations to arrive at a more optimumconfigumtion.
7-13
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
132/153
* 0 0 0 0 , "
O4,
*. CONCLUSIONS
This reportprovidesdesign data and procedures toinitiallyformulateand analyze an aircraft
configuration. It is based on an array of data from past militaryaircraft. Many convenientcharts
are includedto rapidlydefine pertinentfeatures of a configuration,and to evaluate their impact
on the lift and dragcharacteristics.
The design data and procedurescan be used to perform the followingtasks:
Size and shape initial fighter and transportconfigurations.
Estimate gross-take-offweight, empty weight and fuel weight.
Define fuselage fineness ratio andwing geometry.
* Size horizontal and vertical tails
Estimateaircraft wetted area and volume
Determine pertinent aircraft configurationparameters such as wing loading,
span loadingand thrust loading.
* Predict the drag characteristicsat subsonic, transonic and supersonic speeds
Predict lift curve slopeacross Mach range
Estimate naximum lift-to-drag ratio
* Assess performtncecapabilityof conceptual aircraft
8-1
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
133/153
9. REFERENCES
1. Nicolai,LelandM., "Fundamentalsof AircraftDesign",METS,Inc, SanDiego,CA, 1984.
2. Raymer, Daniel P., "AircraftDesign-A ConceptualApproach" AIAA, Washington D.C.,1989.
3. Rinn, S. "CASPPreliminarySizing ProgramWrightLaboratory, Wright-PattersonAFB,Ohio, 1989.
4. Hollowell, S. et al, "InteractiveDesign and Analysis System", N.A.82-467, RockwellInternational,Los Angeles CA, 1982.
5. Schemensky,R.T., "Developmentof an EmpiricallyBased ComputerProgram to Predict
The Aerodynamic Characteristicsof Aircraft," AFFDL-TR-73-144,Wright- PattersonAFB, Ohio 1973.
6. Ellison, D.E., "USAF Stability and Control Handbook,(DATCOM)", Air Force FlightDynamics Laboratory,Wright-PattersonAFB, Ohio, Revised 1976.
7. Perkins,CourtlandD. and Hage, RobertE., Airplane"Performance,Stabilityand Control,"John Wiley & Sons Inc, September 1954.
8. Wood, K.D., "AircraftDesign", Johnson Publishing Co.,Boulder, Colorado,1966.
9. Roskam, j., "AirplaneDesign", Parts I to VIII, Roskam Aviation & EngineeringCorp.,Ottawa, Kansas, 1989.
10 . Genston,W., "TheEncyclopediaof World Air Power,"Crescent Book, CrownPublishers,Inc., 1986.
II, Taylor, U.W.R., "Janes All The World Aircraft,"Janes PublishingCo, London, England,1984.
12. Aviation Week & SpaceTechnology," 1992 AerospaceForecast,"Vol. 136. No. 11, NewYork, N.Y. March 16, 1992.
13. Coming,Gerald. "AirplaneDesign", Edwards Brothers,Inc, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 1953.
14. Caddell,WKE.,"On the Use of AircraftDensityIn PrelitninaryDesign",SAWE PaperNo.813, 5 May 1969.
15. Abbot, 1.11.,"Theory of Wing Sections,"Dover Publications,hic., 1959.
9-1
LS
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
134/153
* 16. Abbot, I.W., "Characteristicsof Wing Sections," NACA TR 824, 1945.
17. Jones, R.T., "Propertiesof Low AspectRatio Wings", NACA TR-835, 1946.
18. Johnson, M.E., "Design and Analysisof ManeuverWing Flaps at Supersonic Speeds,"NASA CR-3939,1985.
19. Hoemer, S.F., Fluid DynamicDrag," Midland Park, NewJersey, 1965.
20. Ely, W.E. et el, "Prediction of Aircraft Drag Due to Lift," Air Force Flight DynamicsLaboratory, AFFDL-TR-71-84,Wright-PattersonAFB, Ohio, June 1971.
21. Gollos, W.W., "Transonicand SupersonicPressure Drag fora Family of ParabolicTypeFuselages at Zero Angle of Attack," Rand RM 982, 1952.
22. Morris, D.N., "A Summaryof the SupersonicPressure Drag of Bodies of Revolution",
Journal of AeronauticalSciences, Vol, 28, July 1961.
23. Nelson & Welsh, "Applicationof the Transonic& SupersonicArea Rule to the Predictionof Wave Drag," NASA TN D-446, September 1960.
24. Mirels, H., "Aerodynamicsof SlenderWingsand Wing BodyCombinationsHaving SweptTrailing Edges", NACA TN-3105, 1954.
0 25. Hall, C.F., "Lift, Drag and PitchingMoment of Low Aspect Ratio Wings,"NACA RMA53A30, 1958.
26. Carlson,H.W. and Mann,MJ.. "Survey andAnalysis of Research on SupersonicDrag-
Due-ToLift Minimizationwith Recommendationsfor Wing Design," NASA Tech Paper3202. 1992.
27. Harris, R., "An Analysis and Correlation of Aircraft Wave Drag," NASA TM X-947.1964.
28. May, F. and Widdison,C.A., "STOL High Lift Design Study" AFFDL TR-71-26,WrightPatterson AFB. Ohio, April, 1971.
29. Bonner, E. and Gingrich, P., "Supersonic Cruise.lransonic Maneuver Wing SectionDevelopmentStudy," AFWAL-TR-80-3047,Wright Pa-wum AM, Aiu, Ir.9.
30. Carlson, 11. and Miller, D., "Numerical Methods for the Design and Analysis of Wingsat Supersonic Speeds," NASA "IN D)-7713, 1947.
9-2
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
135/153
* S S 0 0 S "
31. Miller, D., "SupersonicWing Design ConceptsEmployingNon-LinearFlows,' 14th ICASProceedings, 1984. - lt
32. Miller, D. and Schemensky, R., "Design Study Results of a Supersonic CruiseFighterWing", AIAA Paper 79-0062 1979.
33 . Etkins, Bernard, "Dynamicsof AtmosphericFlight," JohnWiley & Sons, 1972.
34. Rutowski,E.S., "EnergyApproachto the GeneralAircraft PerformanceProblem,"Journalof Aeronautical Sciences, March 1954.
35 . Bryson,A.E. and Desai, M.N. "Energy State Approximationin PerformanceOptimizationof Supersonic Aircraft", Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 6, November 1969.
9-3
S
SS .... 00
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
136/153
APPENDIX A!P
Representative Operational an d AdvancedConfigurations
This appendixis composed of 3-view drawings of several current and advanced military
aircraft. Each drawingcontains the wing aria, span, length gross take-offweight andmaximum
speed. It is to illustrate the size and shape of aircraft configurations based on specific
performancerequirements.
A-I
* 0 0 0n w0 0 0 J 0 0
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
137/153
ImI
Si
I' A
rr &Ee
A-2-
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
138/153
S S S 5 0 O O, "O6
c]
-)v
L.-
4
:: EL 305
A-3C '0
A-C)
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
139/153
V 0
00
(U) -
00p
A-4A
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
140/153
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
141/153
rjr(AinIKcr cm
CA
coi LL
A-6
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
142/153
II
*4"
00
00
* S
OO
I Sc
CL EC.)
C3 >
A-7
L
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
143/153
*
!I
0
Ii
C
0
0CQ CL
0
LLC A ~
Il~CD E 4>i
A-81
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
144/153
O
toN
),-Is
C I C .-
A-9
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
145/153
0 0 0 O0 '0" . '
0'0
CDM
in4.2
I (U
:1I.
w))
A-IO
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
146/153
APPENDIXB_ VOLUME AND AREA RELATIONSHIPS
This appendixprovides a numberof mathematicalequationsto compute the volume and wettedarea of several simple shapes. They canbe quickly used tocheckthe volumeand area ofdefinedconfigurations.
1. Sears-Haack Body
V=I X2 R2L
16
SwE= 1.867L"V"=1.27dL
2. Ellipsoid
V=2..J 2L3
3. Von Karman Ogive
0 V-- R2L2
4. Prolate Spheroid
V=1=ab0 where: a- major axis3
b= minor axis
5. Sphere
v i&3Sw4tR 2
S~B-I
,O, e
* .... 0 0mmWm~~wwmme.mwm mS S S~em Semmmmm 0
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
147/153
6. Right Cone
V=I!R 2L
3
SwEgrT% R'O+L' (Curved Surface)
7. Right Cylinder
V=id?2L
SwET=27xRL (Curved Surface)
8. Cone Frustrum
V=IE R +R R +R 2)
SWET ='[2(RI R4 2 +2(1 -R2)2 (Curved Surface)
Where: RI= Radius of BaseR2= Radius of TopL= Length
9. Formulas for Sears.Haackbody of revolutionshapes, volume and drag
The factor d/L is the fineness ratio, diameter/length.
Case I: Given length, givenvolume
(i~~)
valumme n2LP
T6
CD O 1 d
B-2
o
*ie l mlili lm i m m 4l I i ll l l , .iii m
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
148/153
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
149/153
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
150/153
equationis the profilewave drag due to camberand thickness.The minimumprofile dragoccurs
for a symmetrical wedgeshape, and results in K2= 0 and Kr= (t/c)2 so that
CDWAV" 4l (C-3)
The first term is the wave drag due to lift and is somewhat similarto subsonic induced drag.
The second term is the wave drag due to thicknessand indicates the extreme importance of
keeping wings thin on supersonic aircraft. Th e dependence on Mach number is also indicated
in the equations.
The wave drag due to lift term from equationC-3 can be expressed as
CDw =KC2 where K= 1 . for M>ILAVCL
The above expression is often usedas an asymptoticlimit for wingsat higher Mach numbers.M
Integrationof the pressure in equation C-1 in the lift directionyields4ct
CL= 4 (C4)
or
dC L 4 4
If we ignore friction drag%vecan combine the equation for CL and CD, form CL/CO.
differentiate andestablish the maximunm(LAD)ratio for a 2.D wedge
LMAX 4 j
Whichoaeagain indicates the importanc of thin shapes at supersonic speeds.
C-2
0. . . "0 S" i - - 0-I...'l ii 0.i ' I0[i 1*"i ....
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
151/153
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
152/153
The wave dragof uncambered anduntwisted trapezoidal wings can be estimated by
CW) t FOR PcotAS > 1
=Ktane FOR IcontA, < 1
withK= 16/3 for biconvex airfoils
K= 4 for double wedge airfoils
Note that the upperexpression is identical to the 2-D wedgeshape in equation C-3.
The above expressions are for ballparkestimates onlyand do not capture manyof the
finerdetails that determinewing wave drag. Leading edgebluntness,aspect ratio, camber and
location of maximumthicknessare all importantparameterswhich can significantly effectwing
wave drag.
Referring to Figure C-1 the followingobservationsare made. Above PcotALE> 1 where
the wing leadingedge is supersonicthe drag is shown to be a strong function of the chordwise
locationof maximum thickness,"b" n Figure C-1, and approachesthe (2-D) symmetric wedge
value given by equation C3 (CL= 0) at higher Mach numbers. The curve is alteredbetween
PcotAtE > I and an abscissavalue that representsthe sweep of line of the maximum thickness.
For example, for b=0.3 this value PcotAL= 0.7 which represents where the sweep angleAO ;
becocues subsonic in an analogous marner to the leading edge. At lower Mach numbers the
location of optimum chordwise thickness reversesand minimum drag is represented by nmre
formwid thickness distributionscharacteristicof subsonic flows.
C-4
0 O O 0-
-
8/6/2019 Sanity Check - Data for Aircraf Design Balaji
153/153
4.... .. ......... .. ................. . ... .. .........
...... ..... . . . . . . .
... . . ... . . . -- -- -
.. ..... ~.... .. . . .. .00... .. .. . .
... .. ... .. I....... I .......
.. ........ .... . ....
I IN