Ijcrt 185926

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF AIRCRAFT HAVING AWD TECHNOLOGY
CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCTION
The creation of aircraft was always considered as the biggest challenge for
the mankind. And now the aircraft is considered as the best man made marvel. The
number of commercial aircraft redefines the industrial and economic growth of any
country. At present in this modern days, the technology plays the vital role in both
commercial and combat aircraft. But still inspite of all this technologies and
developments, the safety factors remains as the biggest concern.
Even if an single engine fails in the two/multi engine aircraft, the pilot can
manage with the other engine and safely land the aircraft. But in case when both
engine fail, it is highly impossible to land the aircraft safely. In order to encounter
this safety concern, the concept of Auxiliary Wing Deployment (AWD) was
introduced.
Our mission is to ensure maximum safety even when both engines fails.
By using this AWD concept the stability will be improved and glide ratio will also
be increased to an large extend in such a way that it enables to land the aircraft
safely.
1.1 PROJECT REQUIREMENTS

• Design an aircraft that will transport 6 business class passengers and their
associated baggage with maximum takeoff weight of 9000Kg.
• To provide safety when both engines failed by adopting to the new
technology, i.e (Auxiliary Wing Deployment)to increase the glide ratio.
• To produce result of flow analysis of the aircraft design in such conditions.
INTRODUCTION
1
CHAPTER 2- LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 PROJECT ANALYSIS
With only six seats, the aircraft is considered as light aircraft in commercial
transport operations. Table 01 – shows the existing relationship between aircraft
size ( no. of passengers(PAX) ) and maximum design weight.
By considering the maximum weight requirement of 9000Kg, the new

aircraft falls into the mid size aircraft category but the passengers capacity of only
6 defines it as a light aircraft. This contradiction defines the unique design of the
new aircraft.
TABLE 2.1
TYPE PAX(Number of Max. Take Off Mass(kg)

passengers)
LIGHTJET
Embraer phenom 300 6 7951
Beech jet 400A 8 7303
Cessna S500 Citation 8 6849
Cessna Citation Ultra 7 7394
MID JET AIRCRAFT
Citation XLS + 10 9163
Lear Jet 40 7 9545
Lear Jet 60 XR 10 10660
LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONFIGURATION SELECTION
2
2.2 INFORMATION RETRIEVAL

This aircraft specification lies between light jet and mid size jet aircraft.
The new aircraft specified weight is nearer to the “Citation XLS+” But this jet
aircraft carries 10 passengers. The new aircraft’s passenger capacity is similar to
“Embraer Phenom 300” but it only weights 7951Kgs.To access the design
parameters table 02 has been compiled, which shows some of the details of these
two different types of aircraft.
TABLE 2.2
TYPE T/W W/S ME / MTO
LIGHT JET
Embraer 0.364 - -
phenom 300
Beech Jet 400A 0.360 325 0.624
Cessna S550 0.331 215 0.533

Citation
Cessna Citation 0.3736 247 0.576

Ultra
MID JET
Cessna Citation 0.407 266 0.555

X LS7
Lear Jet 40 0.332 329 0.662
Lear jet 60 XR 0.391 433 0.662

3
2.2.1 SELECTED VALUES

• MF / MTO is selected as 0.35 based on the reference book did for the same
weighing aircraft
• T/W is selected as 0.360
• W/S is selected as 320kg/m2 and
• ME/MTO is selected as 0.53
Since the above selected values are lower for Mid jet and higher for Light jet.
2.3 CONFIGURATION SELECTION

Due to technical risk of choosing other than conventional layout, here we
have chosen the conventional layout.
The reason for not choosing this form of conventional layout for our
aircraft is that it has less clearance between ground and the engine.
FIGURE 2.1
Considering the above reason another form of conventional layout has been
chosen as shown below, ie., Fuselage engine with T-Tail configuration. This
eliminates the problem of ground clearance.
FIGURE 2.2
4
CHAPTER 3 - INITIAL SIZING AND LAYOUT

3.1 MASS ESTIMATION(Suggested mass parameter)
Empty mass fraction = 0.53
Fuel mass fraction = 0.35
Payload = 6 Business class passengers including baggage
[We will allow 120Kg per passenger]
Pilot = 2 [100Kg each]
Cabin attendants = 3[80Kg each]
Payload is estimated to be
M pay = ( 6 x 120 ) + ( 2 x 100 ) + ( 3 x 80 )
= 1160 Kg
To cover incidental flight services allow 5Kg per passenger. This adds
30Kg to the payload.
Therefore total Mass = 1190 Kg.
3.1.1 CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM TAKE OFF MASS

MTO= MUL / 1-(ME/MTO)-(MF/MTO)
ME/MTO = Empty Mass Ratio
MF/MTO = Fuel Mass Ratio
Max. Take off Mass = 1190 / ( 1 – 0.53 – 0.35 )
= 9154 Kg [Nearer to the requirement Mass]

INTIAL SIZING AND LAYOUT
5
TABLE 3.1-The Initial mass estimation
Mass Kg %MTOM
Operational Empty 4760 52
Fuel 3204 35
Extra Service 30
Crew(2+3) 440 13
Passengers 720
MTOM 9154 100
3.2 ENGINE SIZE AND SELECTION:

The literature survey indicated a T/W of 0.36 was appropriate.
Engine Total Take Of Thrust = 0.36 x 9154 x 9.81 = 32 KN
With Two Engine this equates to 16 kN per Engine. There is only one
available engine for our requirement which is
Pratt &Whitney PW545A
3.2.1 SPECIFICATION
Thrust = 16.9 kN
Diameter = 0.813 m
Length = 1.727 m
INTIAL SIZING AND LAYOUT

6
CHAPTER 4 - WING GEOMETRY AND

AIRFOIL SELECTION
4.1 WING AREA, SPAN AND CHORD
The recommended wing loading is 320 kg/m2.
9154
Wing Gross Area (s) = = 28.6 m2
320
Selecting high Aspect Ratio will lower induced drag in cruise and save fuel.
A value of 10 is to be used.
Using wing area and Aspect Ratio we can determine,
Wing Span (b) = (AR x S) 0.5 = 16.91 m
Mean Chord (C m) = (b/AR) = 1.69 m
Selecting Taper ratio(ᵧ) of 0.3 gives (approximately)
Root chord C rt is given by

2𝑠
Crt =
𝑏(1+ᵧ)
Centre line chord C cen = 2.6 m
Tip chord C tip = ᵧ.C cen = 0.78 m
4.2 AIRFOIL SELECTION

The choice of the airfoil involves the selection of camber, thickness
ratio and shape of the airfoil. The camber decides the C lopt of the airfoil and
the thickness ratio decides the characteristics like C lmax, Cdmin , critical Mach
number (M cr), weight of the wing and stall pattern. For a good design the C lopt
of the airfoil
WING GEOMETRY AND AIRFOIL SELECTION
7
should be close to the lift coefficient of the aircraft (C L) in the flight

corresponding to the principal segment mission of the airplane. This lift
coefficient is called design lift coefficient (C Ldesign ). In most of the cases this
would correspond to the cruise flight condition.
In steady level flight ,

1
L=W= (𝜌𝑉 2 𝑆𝐶𝐿 )
2
Hence,
𝑊
𝐶𝐿𝑑𝑒𝑠 =
1
(𝜌𝑉 2 𝑆)
2
𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝜌 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑉 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
The camber of the airfoil will be chosen such that C lopt approximately
equals C Ldesign .
The thickness ratio can be chosen based on the trends given in Fig 4.1 as
suggested from Reference [1] . For design Mach number of 0.8 from similar
aircrafts, the thickness-to-chord ratio is chosen as 0.12.
Reynolds number calculation

𝜌𝑉𝐶
𝑅𝑒. 𝑁𝑜 =
𝜇
From the analysis of similar aircraft the cruise altitude is 15600 m.
Hence, Temperature, Density and Coefficient of Viscosity at 15600 m are
T=216.66 k, 𝜌 =0.1789 kg m-3 and 𝜇 = 1.41×10-5 kg m-1s-1 from Standard

Atmosphere table in Reference [5]
Then
0.1789 × 236.11 × 1.69
𝑅𝑒 = = 5.06 × 105
1.41 × 10−5
8
FIGURE 4.1
2×320×9.81
CLdes =
0.1789×(236.11)2
CLdes = 0.63
9
From Reference [6] ,Airfoil characteristic table is derived for selection of

airfoil.
TABLE 4.1 Aircraft Selection Characteristic
Reynolds Number > 5×10 6 and t/c= 0.12
Airfoil Shape Drag Co- Max.Cm.ac L/D at Max.Section

efficient for CL
Cl = 0.6
Cl=0.6
1412 .0068 -.025 88.23 1.57
2412 .0071 -.04 84.50 1.69
4412 .0062 -.09 96.77 1.64
23012 .0065 -.013 92.31 1.76
63-212 .0063 -.035 95.24 1.58
63-412 .0052 -.075 115.38 1.73
Considering low drag coefficient, low moment coefficient, high L/D

ratio and Max. section C L. Naca 23012 airfoil has been selected for our
mission.
10
CHAPTER 5 - FUSELAGE GEOMETRY

5.1 FUSELAGE CROSS SECTION AND LENGTH
For executive class with 2 seats abreast, a typical maximum first class seat
is 0.7 m wide. Providing a 0.6 m aisle would make cabin width of 2 m.
Adding 0.2 m for the pressure cabin structure makes.

Total fuselage diameter equal to 2.2 m
A circular cross section is preferred for an efficient structural pressure
shell.
The length of the fuselage is determined by the seat pitch. This varies as the
class. For executive class seat pitch is 1m-1.1m. Using the longest executive seat
pitch with two abreast seating requires cabin length of 3.3m, adding 2 m for aft
space and 2m for front space, the cabin length becomes 7.3 m.
lf = a.MToc
= 0.366*9154(0.42)
=16.87m
The value ‘a’ and ‘c’ from the (table 6.1 from Reference[1]) for General
aviation aircraft with twin engines
From the analysis of similar aircraft the nose fineness ratio is 2.5 and the
tail fineness ratio is 3. And the ratio of nose length and fuselage length from the
analysis of similar aircraft obtained as
Nose length/Fuselage length = 0.289

The ratio of tail length and fuselage length is
Tail length/ Fuselage length = 0.346
Nose length = 4.875m and Tail length = 5.837m
Revised fuselage length = (4.875+5.837+7.3) = 18 m
FUSELAGE GEOMETRY
11
5.2 CENTER OF GRAVITY

The major weight components for which we have some idea of their
location are the baggage, the people and pilot. Using this information, we can
make a estimation of the location of the center of gravity, hereafter denoted by c.g.
5.2.1 TYPE OF LOADS AND ITS MOMENT ARM ON

FUSELAGE
FIGURE 5.1
Pilot =2x100 =200kg
People = (80x6)+(3x80) = 720 kg
Baggage = 40x6 = 240 kg

(2.4375 × 200) + (8.525 × 720) + (15.093 × 240)
𝑥=
200 + 720 + 240
10247.82
Centre of gravity, 𝑥 = = 𝟖. 𝟖𝟑𝟒 𝒎 ( 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠 )
1160
Center of gravity due to location of Engine as follows,
Total Weight of One Engine = 1.4 of Engine dry weight (as suggested by
Reference [1]).
Weight of both engines = 2 x 1.4 x 347 = 971.6 kg.

FUSELAGE GEOMETRY
12
By considering the engine at rear of cabin, approximately 12 m from the

nose. The center of gravity location becomes,
10247.82 + (12 × 971.6)
𝑥=
1160 + 971.6
x = 10.277 m
Height of the engine on the fuselage is about 75% of the fuselage height
obtained from the analysis of similar aircraft.
5.2.2 WING LOCATION

Usual design procedure calls for locating the wing relative to the fuselage
such the mean aerodynamic center of the wing is close to the c.g of the
airplane.(Indeed, for static longitudinal stability, the aerodynamic center of the
airplane, also called the neutral point, should be located behind the c.g. of the
airplane). To account for the weight of the wing at this stage of our calculation, we
assume that the mean aerodynamic center of the wing is placed at x = 10.277 m.
(Later in the design process, the wing will be relocated to ensure that the
aerodynamic center of the airplane is behind the center of gravity).
The geometry of the mean aerodynamic chord, the mean aerodynamic

center, and the wing c.g location are shown in fig below. Raymer (Reference[1])
suggests that we estimate the weight of the wing by multiplying the planform area
by 2.5; hence Wwing = 2.5(28.6) = 71.5 kg. We also assume that the wing
aerodynamic center is 25% of the mean aerodynamic chord from the leading edge,
and that the wing center of gravity is at 40% of the mean aerodynamic chord( as
suggested by Reference[2]). These points are located in fig below, using the above
assumptions. With this, a new-center of gravity location for the airplane, including
the weight of the wing, can be estimated by adding to our earlier calculation the
weight of the wing, 71.5 kg, acting through the moment arm (10.277+0.2535).
The result is
21907.02 + (10.5305 × 71.5)

𝑪𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒐𝒇 𝒈𝒓𝒂𝒗𝒊𝒕𝒚, 𝒙 = = 𝟏𝟎. 𝟐𝟖𝟓 𝐦
2131.6 + 71.5
FUSELAGE GEOMETRY
13
FIGURE 5.2
Under these assumptions, note that the addition of the wing has shifted the
c.g. only a small amount rearward, from x = 10.277 m to x = 10.285 m.
5.3 DIHEDRAL ANGLE

For low wings the dihedral angle may be higher to provide ground
clearance. The wing geometry is given dihedral to increase lateral stability in Yaw.
For conventional unswept trapezoidal wing, the dihedral angle would typically be
3-6 deg for low wings as referred by Reference[4]. From the analysis of similar
aircraft, 3 deg would be selected for our aircraft.
FUSELAGE GEOMETRY
14
5.4 HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL TAIL SIZE
FIGURE 5.3
To calculate tail area,

𝐶𝑉𝑇 𝑏𝑤 𝑆𝑤
𝑆𝑉𝑇 =
𝐿𝑉𝑇
𝐶𝐻𝑇 ĉ𝑤 𝑆𝑤
𝑆𝐻𝑇 =
𝐿𝐻𝑇
To calculated tail size, the moment arm must be approximated at this

stage of design by percentage of fuselage length. For aft mounted engine the
tail arm is about 45-50% of fuselage length.
From Table 6.4 in Reference[1] for General Aviation- Twin Engine,
Horizontal tail volume coefficient = 0.8
Vertical tail volume coefficient = 0.07
We chose to use T-tail configuration, the length of the fuselage is 18 m.
Our design logic will be to somewhat arbitrarily locate the aerodynamic

center of the horizontal tail at a distance of 17.5m from nose as shown is fig above
and calculate horizontal tail are SHT.
FUSELAGE GEOMETRY
15
Since the location of c.g is x=10.285 m, then the moment arm from the
center of gravity to the aerodynamic center of the horizontal tail is
LHT = 17.5 – 10.285 = 7.215 m

0.8×1.69×28.6
SHT =
7.215
SHT = 5.359 m2
Similarly for vertical tail, again somewhat arbitrarily let us place the mean
aerodynamic center of the vertical 0.5 m forward of that of the horizontal tail as
suggested by Reference[2] for similar aircraft, we assume
LVT = 6.715 m
0.04×16.91×28.6
SVT =
6.715
SVT = 2.88 m2
FIGURE 5.4
The horizontal tail and vertical tail on almost all airplanes use a symmetric
airfoil section. A popular choice is the NACA 0012 airfoil. We will use the same
for our design on both the horizontal and vertical tails.
First, let us layout the horizontal tail. Wings of lower aspect ratio, although
aerodynamically less efficient, stall at higher angle of attack than wings with
higher aspect ratio. Hence, if the horizontal tail has a lower aspect ratio that the
wing, when the wings stalls, the tail still has some control authority.
FUSELAGE GEOMETRY
16
To achieve this advantage, we choose an aspect ratio for the horizontal tail less
than for the wing, we choose a value AR = 6 as suggested by Reference for similar
aircraft. Also, we choose a taper ratio as the same as that of wing, ᵧ = 0.3. Thus, the
span of the horizontal tail bt is
bt = √𝑆𝐻𝑇 . 𝐴𝑅
= √(5.359) × 6
Span of horizontal tail , bt = 5.67 m
The tail root chord Crt.t is

2 𝑆𝐻𝑇
𝐶𝑟𝑡.𝑡 =
(𝛾 + 1)𝑏𝑡
2×5.359
= (0.3+1)5.67
Tail root chord, Crt.t = 1.454 m
Tail tip chord, Ctt = ᵧ.Crt = 0.3×1.454
Ctt = 0.4362 m
The span wise location of the mean aerodynamic chord for the horizontal tail is
𝑏𝑡 (1+2𝛾) 5.67×(1+0.6)
yHT = =
6(1+𝛾) 6×(1+0.3)
yHT = 1.16 m
And the mean aerodynamic chord for the horizontal tail is

2 1+𝛾+𝛾 2 2 1+0.3+0.9
ĈHT = Crt = ×1.454×
3 1+𝛾 3 1.3
ĈHT = 1.036 m
FUSELAGE GEOMETRY
17
Leading edge sweep of the horizontal is usually set to about 5 deg more
than the wing sweep. This tends to make the tail stall after the wing and also
provides the tail with a higher critical Mach number than the wing, which avoids
loss of elevator effectiveness due to shock formation.
We now layout the vertical tail. Typical aspect ratios for vertical tail ARVT
range from 0.7-1.2 as suggested by Reference[1] for T-tail, where the aspect ratio is
based on the root-to-tip height hVT. We choose aspect ratio of 0.9 as analyzed from
the same aircraft types.
ℎ𝑉𝑇 2
𝐴𝑅𝑉𝑇 =
𝑆𝑉𝑇
hVT = √0.9 × 2.88
hVT = 1.61 m
Consistent with our choice for the wing and horizontal tail, we choose a
taper ratio of 0.3 for Vertical tail. Hence, the root chord is
2𝑆
𝑉𝑇
Crt VT = (𝛾+1)(ℎ
𝑉𝑇 )
CrtVT = 2.752 m
The tip chord is
CtVT = ᵧ.CrtVT
CtVT = 0.826 m
The vertical location of the mean aerodynamic chord of the vertical tail,
referenced to the root chord is
2ℎ𝑉𝑇 1+2𝛾
ZVT =
6 1+𝛾
ZVT = 0.66 m
FUSELAGE GEOMETRY
18
The mean aerodynamic chord for the vertical tail is

2 1+𝛾+𝛾2 2 1+0.3+0.9
ĉVT = Crt VT = ×2.752×
3 1+𝛾 3 1.3
ĉVT = 1.962 m
Vertical tail sweep varies between about 35-55 deg. For a high speed
aircraft, vertical tail sweep is used. Primarily to insure that the tail’s critical Mach
number is higher than the wing’s. After analyzing the similar aircraft, we choose
49 deg as the vertical tail sweep.
FUSELAGE GEOMETRY
19
CHAPTER 6 - MODELLING OF AIRCRAFT

IN CATIA v5
6.1 INTRODUCTION
Catia V5 is the software used to design the complete aircraft. With the help of
the tutorial guide (Reference[7]) our aircraft has been designed for calculated
values. Note that this design of aircraft is before deployment of Auxiliary wing.
The following steps refer to the modeling of Aircraft in Catia – Wireframe design .
Step 1: Design of Fuselage
Step 2: Design of Wing
Step 3: Design of Tail Surfaces
6.2 DESIGN OF FUSELAGE

6.2.1 DESIGN PARAMETERS OF FUSELAGE
Cross section of Fuselage = 2.2 m
Length of the Fuselage = 18 m
Cabin length = 7.3 m
Nose Length = 4.875 m
Tail length = 5.837 m
Nose length/Fuselage length = 0.289
Tail length/ Fuselage length = 0.346
Nose down sweep = 20 deg
Tail up sweep angle = 20 deg

Modeling of Aircraft in Catia V5
20
For Fuselage design, Draw two circles at the offset distance equal to cabin
length. Now at nose tip and tail tip draw two circles appropriate to the Nose
fineness ratio and Tail fineness ratio respectively. Then using Multi-section tool,
select and join all the circles together to get Fuselage. Fill the Nose tip and tail tip
using Fill option available in Wireframe design. The completed Fuselage is shown
in the Figure 6.1.
Figure 6.1

21
6.3 DESIGN OF WING

6.3.1 WING DESIGN PARAMETERS
Center line chord = 2.6 m
Tip chord = 0.78 m
Wing Span = 16.91 m
Taper ratio = 0.3
Dihedral angle = 3 deg
To design the wing, first the airfoil coordinates must be define for Naca
23012 airfoil from Reference [6] .After creating airfoil section at the Center
line chord and tip chord , they must be joined using Multi-section tool.
Symmetry tool is used to create the other wing with ease. Aircraft with
Wings is shown in Figure 6.2.
Figure 6.2
22
6.4. DESIGN OF TAIL SURFACES

6.4.1 DESIGN PARAMETERS OF TAIL SURFACES
Span of horizontal tail = 5.67 m
Tail root chord = 1.454 m
Tail tip chord = 0.4362 m
Tail sweep = 5 deg
Taper ratio = 0.3
Height of Vertical tail = 1.61 m
Vertical tail root chord = 2.752 m
Vertical tail tip chord = 0.826 m
Vertical tail sweep = 49 deg
Design of Tail surfaces is made using same method used to design the wing.
The Completed aircraft is shown as below.
Figure 6.3
23
CHAPTER 7- DRAG ESTIMATION AND AWD

TECHNOLOGY
7.1 DRAG ESTIMATION
Each main component of the aircraft (wing, fuselage, tail surfaces, nacelles;
and in the low speed flight phases the flaps and undercarriage) must be separately
assessed for its contribution to the overall drag of the aircraft.2 It is not sufficient
to consider only the wing effects in the estimation of drag.
For subsonic civil aircraft the overall drag of the aircraft can be considered
under three categories:
1. profile drag resulting from the pressure field around the shape and from the
surface skin friction effects of the boundary layer;
2. lift induced drag resulting from the changes in pressure due to attitude
variations resulting from the generation of lift
These effects result in the following formations for aircraft drag coefficient:
CD = CD0 + CDi
where:
CD0 = estimated total profile drag coefficient (i.e. the summation of the
drag from all the aircraft components appropriate to the flight
conditions under investigation)
CDi = total effect of all the lift dependent components (principally this
is a function of CDi ; as the design becomes more established this
term may be extended to include a direct CL term as well as the
square term)
DRAG ESTIMATION AND AWD TECHNOLOGY
24
7.2 PROFILE DRAG

The profile drag can be estimated using the formula below:
CD0 = Cf FQ [Swet/Sref]
where:
Cf = skin friction coefficient which is a function of Reynolds number
F = component form (shape) factor
Q — interference factor
Swer = component wetted area
Sref = reference area used for the calculation of CD
(normally the wing gross area)
We start by calculating the Reynolds number Re for each component:

Re = (V𝜌𝑙)/𝜇 (equation 7.1)
where:
V = aircraft forward speed in the flight case under investigation
𝜌
u = kinematic viscosity at the speed and height of operation
𝜇
l = component characteristic length, i.e. fuselage overall length, wing mean
chord, tail mean chord, nacelle overall length
The skin friction coefficient for turbulent boundary layer conditions can now
be calculated for each component using the Prandtl-Schlichting formula:
Cf = [0.455]/[(logRec)2.58 (1 + 0.144M2)0.65] (equation 7.2)
where:
M = Mach number at operational conditions under investigation.
Rec = Reynolds number of component
For any component or area with laminar flow the following equation should
be used:
Cf = 1.328/(Rec)0.5
For components with both laminar and turbulent flows the value for C f
should be a weighted (by area) average of the two results. The form factors for
each component are calculated from the input geometry using a specific formula
for each component.
25
(i) For the fuselage
F = 1 + 2.2/(λ)1.5 - 0.9/( λ)3
where:
I = lf /[(4𝜋)Ax] 0.5
lf = fuselage overall length
Ax = fuselage cross-sectional area
Q= 1.0
(ii) For the wing
F = (F* - l)cos2Λ0.5c + 1
F* = 1 + 3.3(t/c) - 0.008(t/c)2 + 27.0(t/c)3
where:
Λ 0 5c = sweepback angle at 50% chord
Q = 1.0 for well filleted low/mid wings, 1.1-1.4 for small or no fillet
(a value of 1.0 to 1.2 seems to work for conventional designs)
(iii) For the tail surfaces. F as for wings with
F* = 1 + 3.52 (t/c)
Q =1.2
7.3 LIFT INDUCED DRAG

Lift dependent drag arises from three principal effects:
1. a component from the wing planform geometry
2. a contribution from non-optimum wing twist
3. a component due to viscous flow forces
All of these effects are associated with the distribution of lift along the wing
span (sometimes called span loading). The best (lowest induced drag) loading
consists of a smooth elliptical distribution from wing tip to tip with no
discontinuities due to fuselage, nacelles, flaps, etc. Obviously, except for high
performance sailplanes, it is not feasible to arrange the aircraft layout to get such a
spanwise load distribution. The comments below will help you to estimate the lift
dependent drag coefficient for civil aircraft.
26
Figure 7.1- Uncorrected planform factor C1.
Figure 7.2 Empirical correction C2 to planform factor.
27
The component arising from the planform geometry is derived from classical
lifting line theory details of which can be found in good aerodynamic textbooks. In
this theory the wing is represented by a series of horseshoe vortices which generate
the aerodynamic circulation around and along the wing shape. Figure 8.20 shows
the theoretical distribution of the induced drag factor relative to the wing aspect
ratio and taper ratio. These values are corrected by the application of an
empirically derived factor (C2) derived from previous aircraft designs (Fig.
8.21).As might be expected, aircraft with older wing sections are inferior at high
aspect ratios. Modern aircraft tend to adopt higher aspect ratios partly because the
wings are designed using advanced technology three-dimensional aerodynamic
analysis methods.
Induced drag coefficient is estimated by the equation below:
CDi=[C1/C2)/(𝜋A)]Cl2
i.e. dCDi/dCl2 = C1/C2/(𝜋𝐴)
where:
C1 is found from Fig. 7.1
C2 is found from Fig. 7.2
A is the wing aspect ratio
CL is the lift coefficient of the aircraft in the flight condition under
investigation (i.e. aircraft mass, speed and altitude)
The contribution from the effect of non-optimum wing twist requires a

knowledge of the distribution of aerofoil section twist and changes of the sectional
lift curve shape, along the span. In the early stages of the project design such
intricacies in wing geometry will not have been decided; however, a contribution is
appropriate as the final wing shape will include such distributions. The addition of
CD. for such effects will be between 0.0003 to 0.0005 with a value of 0.0004 being
suitable for conventional civil turbofan layouts.
The viscous flow effects are significant. These forces manifest themselves
mainly in the boundary layer growth arising from changes in wing incidence.
Without the assistance of powerful computer fluid flow analysis it is difficult to
predict these effects accurately. An empirical analysis of conventional civil aircraft
geometry and operating conditions shows that the contribution to dCD/dCL is
proportional to aircraft profile drag.
28
The following relationship is appropriate for current wing geometry.

dCD/dCL = O.15CD0
Hence the total lift dependent drag coefficient for the aircraft is the sum
of the three effects:
dCD/dCL2 = C1C2/𝜋A + 0.0004 + O.15CD0
7.4 DRAG CALCULATION (POWERED FLIGHT AND

BEFORE DEPLOYMENT)
Drag of the aircraft before the deployment of auxiliary wing system in
powered flight condition at its cruising altitude of 15600 m (obtained from similar
aircrafts) has been calculated.
7.4.1 REYNOLDS No AND SKIN FRICTION DRAG

Reynolds no for components at mach 0.8 and corresponding Skin friction
drag calculated as below
(i)Fuselage:
Reynolds no for fuselage

ρvl
Re =
µ
0.1789 X 236.11 X 18
Re Fuselage =
1.14 𝑋 10−5
Re Fuselage = 6.66 X 107
Skin friction coefficient for fuselage

0.455
Cf = 2.58
[(log Refuselage ) X (1+0.144 M2 )0.65)]
0.455
C ffuselage =
[(log 6.66 𝑋 107 )2.58 𝑋 (1 + 0.144 (0.8)2 )0.65 ]
Cffuselage = 0.002
29
(ii) WING
Reynolds no for wing

ρv𝑙
Re Wing =
µ
Where l is theMean Aerodynamic chord
Re Wing = 5.06 X 106
Skin Friction For Wing

0.455
Cf =
[(log 5.06 𝑋 106 )2.58 𝑋 1.058]
0.455
Cf =
143.368
Cf wing = 0.0031
Where Cf wing is the Skin friction drag of Wing
(iii) Horizontal Tail
Reynolds no for Horizontal tail

ρ v𝑙
ReHT =
µ
Where l = Mean aerodynamic chord of Horizontal Tail

0.1789 X 236.11 X 1.036
Re HT =
1.14 𝑋 10−5
Re HT = 3.8 X 107
Skin Friction For horizontal tail

0.455
Cf HT =
[(log 3.8 𝑋 106 )2.58 𝑋 1.058]
30
0.455
Cf HT =
136.6
Cf HT = 0.0033
Where C f HT is the Skin friction drag of horizontal tail
(iv) VERTICAL TAIL
Reynolds no for Vertical tail

ρv𝑙
Re VT =
µ
Where l = Mean aerodynamic chord of Vertical Tail = 1.962 m
Re VT = 7.26 X 106
Skin Friction of Vertical tail

0.455
C f VT =
[(log 7.26 𝑋 106 )2.58 𝑋 1.058]
0.455
C f VT =
152.17
C f VT = 0.0029
Where C f VT is the Skin friction drag of Vertical tail
7.4.2 FORM FACTOR FOR EACH COMPOMENT

(i) For Fuselage
2.2 0.9
F = 1+ –
𝜆1.5 𝜆3
Where
Lf
𝜆= = 8.18
𝐷𝑓
31
Lf = Length of fuselage
Df = Diameter of fuselage
Q =1 (as referred by Reference[8] for fuselage with circular cross section)

2.2 0.9
F =1 + –
8.181.5 8.183
F fuselage = 1.0956
(ii) For wing
F = (F* - 1) Cos2 Λ 0.5c + 1
F* = 1+ 3.3 (t/c) – 0.008 (t/c) 2 + 27 (t/c) 3
Where t/c = 0.12 and Λ = 0 𝑑𝑒𝑔
F* =1.4425
F Wing = 1.4425
Q = 1.4 ( Referred by Reference[8])
(iii)For Horizontal tail
F= (F* - 1) Cos2 Λ 0.5c + 1
F*= 1+3.52(t/c)
Where t/c = 0.12 and Λ = 5 𝑑𝑒𝑔
F* =1.4224
F = (1.4224 - 1) Cos25 +1
F HT = 1.419
32
(iv) For Vertical Tail
F = (F* - 1) Cos2 Λ 0.5c + 1
F* = 1+ 3.52 (t/c)
Where t/c = 0.12
F* = 1.4224
F = (1.4224 - 1) Cos249 + 1
F VT = 1.1818
7.4.3 PROFILE DRAG OF EACH COMPONENT

(i)FUSELAGE
Profile drag of the Fuselage is given by the following equation.

𝑊𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑔𝑒
( CDO )fuse = (C f)fuse (F)fuse (Q)fuse [ ]
𝑅𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑔𝑒
(S wet) fuse = (S wet) nose + (S wet) cabin + (S wet) tail
(S wet) nose = 0.75 π D fuse L nose
= 0.75 x π x 2.22 x 4.875
(S wet) nose = 25.27m2
(S wet) cabin = π D cabin L cabin
= π x 2.2 x 7.3
(S wet) nose = 50.45 m2
33
(S wet) tail = 0.72 π D tail L tail
= 0.72 x π x 2.2 x 5.837
(S wet) tail = 29.046 m2
(S wet) fuse = 104.766 m2

104.766
(CDO) fuse = 0.0021 x 1.0956 x 1 x
28.6
(CDO) fuse = 0.0084
Where
(S wet) nose is the wetted area of nose cone.
(S wet) cabin is the wetted area of cabin.
(Swet) fuse is the wetted area of fuselage.
(S wet) tail is the wetted area of tail cone.
(CDO)fuse is the profile drag of fuselage.
(ii) WING
The profile drag of wing is

𝑊𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔
CDO wing = (C f) wing (F) wing (Q)wing [ ]
𝑅𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔
= 0.0031 x 1.4425 x 1.4 x 1
CDO wing = 0.0062
Where CDO wing is the Profile drag of Wing.
34
(iii) HORIZONTAL TAIL
The profile drag of Horizontal tail is

𝑊𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝐻𝑇
CDO HT = (C f) HT (F) HT (Q) HT [ ]
𝑅𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝐻𝑇
5.359
= 0.0033 x 1.419 x 1.2 x
28.6
CDO HT = 0.00105
Where CDO HT is the Profile drag of Horizontal tail.
(iv) VERTICAL TAIL
The profile drag of Horizontal tail is

𝑊𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 VT
CDO VT = (Cf) VT (F) VT (Q) VT [ ]
𝑅𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 VT
2.88
= 0.0029 x 1.1818 x 1.2 x
28.6
CDO VT = 0.000414
7.4.4 TOTAL PROFILE DRAG BEFORE DEPLOYMENT

Total profile drag is the summation of profile drag of individual
components. i.e..,
CDO = (CDO)fuse + (CDO) wing + (CDO)HT + (CDO)VT
= 0.0084 + 0.0062 + 0.00105 + 0.000414
= 0.0161 [ Before Deployment in powered flight]
35
7.4.5 INDUCED DRAG COEFFICIENT

The Induced drag coefficient is estimated by the following equation
C1
𝒅𝑪𝑫𝒊 c2
= + 0.0004 + 0.15CDO
𝒅𝑪𝟐𝑳 (π .AR)
Where
C1 =1.01 for aspect ratio of 10 and taper ratio of 0.6 obtained from the figure 7.1
C2 = 1.113 – 0.0116*AR = 0.997 obtained from the figure 7.2
𝒅𝑪𝑫𝒊 1.01 1
=( x ) + 0.0004 +(0.15 x 0.0161 )
𝒅𝑪𝟐𝑳 0.997 𝜋 𝑋 10
= 0.035
CDi = 0.0351 CL2
= 0.0351 x 0.632
= 0.139 [Before Deployment in Powered flight]
Therefore Total Drag Before Deployment
CD = CDo + CDi
= 0.0161 + 0.0139
CD = 0.03
Therefore,
𝐿
(𝐷) = 21 [Before deployment and in Powered Flight]
𝐵𝑒𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑜𝑦𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡
𝐿
Where ( ) is the Lift to drag ratio of aircraft before the
𝐷 𝐵𝑒𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑜𝑦𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡
deployment of auxiliary wings and in powered flight at its cruising altitude.
36
7.5 IMPLEMENTATION OF AWD TECHNOLOGY

7.5.1 AUXILIARY WING DEPLOYMENT SYSTEM (AWD)
AWD technology is the concept of increasing the Aspect ratio , span and area
of at the Wing when thrust source have been lost. The current technology in
Aviation doesn’t ensure the safety of the passengers even after the engines were
failed. The following Figure 7.3 and 7.4 explain the Auxiliary wings extracting
from the main wing and attaching together tip of the main wing, thus increasing the
Aspect ratio, span and area of wing while sheet metal closing the groove created
during the extraction of Auxiliary wing which ensure maintaining the contour of
the wing.
These increase in Aspect ratio, span and area of wing increases the Lift-to-
drag of the aircraft, which in turn increases the glide ratio in an unpowered flight.
Figure 7.3 Before Deployment
37
Figure 7.4 Deployed state
Since the span has to be increased when the engine power is lost, the designed
taper ratio of 0.3 should be increased to 0.6 (Similar to the sailplanes).
Therefore, the Revised chord lengths before deployment of auxiliary wing

becomes
2𝑠
Crt =
𝑏(1+𝛾)
2 x 28.6
Crt = = 2.1141 m
16.91(1+0.6)
Tip chord C tip = 𝛾.Crt = 1.268 m
Mean chord C m = b/AR = 1.69 m
When the engines get failed, Aspect ratio of the wing has to increased to
18 (Similar to Sail planes) which gives increased Glide ratio and also high
lateral stability
38
Selecting the Span length (b AWD) of 30 m(Similar to Sailplanes), the

surface area at wing deployed state is calculated as follows.
SAWD = b WD /AR =30 2/18 = 50 m2
The root chord, tip chord and Mean aerodynamic chord at Wing
deployed state for taper ratio of 0.6 becomes
2 x 50
Crt = = 2.083 m
30 (1+0.6)
Tip chord C tip = 𝛾.Crt = 1.2498 m
Mean chord C m = 1.667 m
Making an assumption that both the engines were failed and now the aircraft’s
auxiliary wings will be deployed at the speed of 100 m/s at an altitude of 12000m
(12Km).
7.5.1 REYNOLDS No AND SKIN FRICTION DRAG

(i) FUSELAGE :
Reynolds No for fuselage at V =100m/s

ρvl
Re =
µ
0.2335 𝑋 100 𝑋 18
Re Fuse =
1.41 𝑋 10−5
Re Fuse = 2.9 x 107
Where
Free stream density (ρ) = 0.2335 Kg/m3 and viscosity(µ) = 1.41 x 10-5 Kgm-1s-1
at 12000 m.
39
Skin Friction for fuselage

0.455
C f fuse = [ at M = 0.33 ]
[(log 2.9x107 )2.58 X (1+0.144 M2 )0.65 )]
C f fuse = 0.0024
Where C f fuse is the skin friction drag of fuselage.
(ii)WING
Reynolds No for wing at V =100m/s

ρv𝑙
Re =
µ
0.2335 𝑋 100 𝑋 1.667
Re wing =
1.41 𝑋 10−5
Re wing = 2.7 x 106
Where l is the Mean aerodynamic chord after Deployment of auxiliary wings
Skin Friction for wing

0.455
C f wing = (from equation 7.2)
[(log 2.7x106 )2.58 X (1.058)]
C f wing = 0.0035
Where C f wing is the skin friction drag of wing
Reynolds No for horizontal tail at V =100m/s

ρv𝑙
Re HT =
µ
40
0.2335 𝑋 100 𝑋 1.036

=
1.41 𝑋 10−5
Re HT = 1.7 x 106
Where l is the Mean aerodynamic chord = 1.036 m.
Skin Friction for horizontal tail

0.455
C f HT =
[(log 1.7x106 )2.58 X (1.058)]
Cf HT = 0.038
Where C f HT is the skin friction drag of horizontal tail.
(iv) VERTICAL TAIL
Reynolds No for Vertical tail at V =100m/s

ρv𝑙
Re HT =
µ
0.2335 𝑋 100 𝑋 1.962
=
1.41 𝑋 10−5
Re HT = 3.2 x 106
Where l is Mean Aerodynamic Chord of Horizontal tail = 1.962m.
Skin Friction for Vertical tail

0.455
C f VT =
[(log 3.2x106 )2.58 X (1.058)]
C f VT = 0.0034
NOTE :
Form Factor for each components are as same as powered flight
41
7.5.2 PROFILE DRAG OF EACH COMPONENTS

(i) FUSELAGE
𝑊𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑔𝑒
( CDO )fuse = (C f)fuse (F)fuse (Q)fuse [ ]
𝑅𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑔𝑒
104.766
(CDO) fuse = 0.0024 x 1.0956 x 1 x
50
(CDO) fuse = 0.0055
(ii) WING
𝑊𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔
CDO wing = (C f) wing (F) wing (Q)wing [ ]
𝑅𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔
C DO wing = 0.0035 x 1.4425 x 1.4 x 1
CDO wing = 0.0071

𝑊𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝐻𝑇
CDO HT = (C f) HT (F) HT (Q) HT [ ]
𝑅𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝐻𝑇
5.359
CDO HT = 0.0038 x 1.419 x 1.2 x
50
CDO HT = 0.00069
(iv) VERTICAL TAIL

𝑊𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 VT
CDO VT = (C f) VT (F) VT (Q) VT [ ]
𝑅𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 VT
2.88
CDOVT = 0.0034 x 1.419 x 1.2 x
50
CDOVT = 0.00033
Total Profile Drag After Deployment
CDO = 0.01362 [After Deployment in Gliding Flight]

42
7.5.3 INDUCED DRAG COEFFICIENT

The induced drag coefficient is estimated by following equation
C1
𝒅𝑪𝑫𝒊 c2
= + 0.0004 + 0.15 CDO
𝒅𝑪𝟐𝑳 (π .AR)
Where
C1 = 1.04 for Aspect ratio of 18 and taper ratio of 0.6 from Figure 7.1
C2 = 1.113 – 0.0166 A.R = 0.9042 from Figure 7.2

𝑑𝐶𝐷𝑖 1.02 1
=( x ) + 0.0004 + (0.15 x 0.013)
𝑑𝐶𝐿2 0.9042 𝜋 𝑋 18
𝑑𝐶𝐷𝑖
= 0.02
𝑑𝐶𝐿2
Calculating CL at V=100 m and Area of wing = 50 m2

2 𝑊
CL = ( 2) ( )
𝜌𝑣 𝑆
2 9154
= 2
x x 9.81
0.2335 𝑋 100 50
CL = 1.538
C Di = 0.02 x CL2 = 0.049
Therefore Total Drag
CD = CDO + CDi
= 0.01362 + 0.049
CD = 0.063
43
Therefore, Lift to Drag ratio in Gliding flight is

𝐿 1.538
= = 24.4
𝐷 0.063
For Gliding flight, Lift to Drag ratio is equal to the Glide ratio.
Therefore, the estimated Glide ratio becomes 24.4, i.e, the aircraft glide
forward 24 m for 1m decend. This is the efficient glide ratio for our aircraft during
failure of Engines which will save several lives.
44
CHAPTER 8 - MESHING AND ANALYSIS OF

DEPLOYED WING
8.1 INTRODUCTION
The Meshing of Wing is carried out in Gambit and analysis is done using
Fluent. The steps involved in creation, meshing and Analysis of wing is as follows.
Step 1: Creating Wing in Gambit v2
Step 2: Meshing Wing in Gambit v2
Step 3: Flow Analysis of Meshed Wing in Fluent v6
8.2 CREATING WING IN GAMBIT

1. All points are created in gambit work bench using Naca 23012 airfoil
coordination obtained from Reference[6] for center line chord, tip chord(
before deployed) and tip chord( after deployed)
2. Join all the points to create a single face of center line chord, tip chord( before
deployed) and tip chord( after deployed).
3. Join all the airfoil faces to create more faces. The design of wing in Gambit is
shown in the Figure 8.1.
8.3 MESHING WING IN GAMBIT

1. To mesh the wing and make the flow around the wing, we need to create a
domain around the wing including boundaries, inlet and outlet.
2. Join Domain and Wing together to make a single volume so that we make a
volume mesh.
3. By giving spacing of 2 between each mesh for wing and spacing of 10 for
domain, finite mesh is made.
4. Using Mesh tool in Gambit, Tetra mesh is made around the wing and the
Domain. The figure 8.2 the meshed wing and domain.
45
Figure 8.1- Design of Wing in Gambit v2
FIGURE 8.2 Mesh of Wing and Domain In Gambit v2
MESHING AND ANALYSIS OF DEPLOYED WING
46
8.4 FLOW ANALYSIS OF WING IN FLUENT V6

1. Run Fluent 3ddp to analyze 3d model.
2. Read the .Msh file of Meshed wing created in Gambit V2.
3. In define tab, define solver, Viscosity, Operating conditions and Boundary
conditions.
(i) Define Viscosity to Laminar.
(ii) Operating Condition let the value to be 19097 pascal as Operating
pressure.
(iii) In Boundary condition - define inlet as pressure inlet and give value of
82228 pascal as Gauge pressure. Define working fluid as Air.
4. In Solve tab, define Initialize – inlet condition. In that give value of 82228
pascal as Gauge pressure and Velocity of 100 m/s.
5. To run Iteration, Click Solve—Iterate. In that give 1000 iteration and apply
to run the analysis. The following figures 8.3 show that analysis report of the
wing.
Figure 8.3 Top view of analyzed wing
47
Figure 8.4 Bottom View
Figure 8.5 isometric view
48
Figure 8.6 side View
8.5 ANALYSIS REPORT

The Coefficients CL and CD values are obtained at different point along the
wing span from the Flow analysis report. These Values are plotted such the plot
gives CL vs CD curve as shown below
The slope of Curve Cd vs Cl , shown in Figure 8.7, gives the Glide ratio of
one wing.
3250−2250
Cl/Cd = = 11.11 (for one wing)
890−800
49
Figure 8.7 – FLOW ANALYSIS REPORT OF THE WING
Glide ratio for both wings = 2 x 11.11 = 22.22 which equivalent to the
aircraft’s Glide ratio. Therefore, by increasing the Span, aspect ratio and area of
the wing it is possible to increase the overall Glide ratio of the aircraft.
50
RESULT
The analysis report proves that the aircraft will get glide ratio of 22.22
by increasing the aspect ratio, span and area of Wings using AWD system, thus
retaining Lift to drag ratio of gliding flight as that of powered flight . It produces
22.22 m forward motion for 1m decrease in height, ensuring safer flight even after
both the engines failed. In the modern aviation each second is most important
which may save many lives in such a disaster like aircraft ran out of fuel which
happened in Boeing 767-200 jet due to the fuel loading miscalculation, the
Technology like AWD should be adopted to ensure the safer flight.
51
Appendix - A
A.1Airfoil Ordinates
A.1.1 NACA Section 23012
(Stations and ordinates given in per cent of airfoil chord)

Upper Surface Lower Surface
Station Ordinate Station Ordinate
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.5000 1.8662 0.5000 -0.7567
0.7500 2.1724 0.7500 -0.9622
1.2500 2.6754 1.2500 -1.2594
2.5000 3.6187 2.5000 -1.7285
5.0000 4.9164 5.0000 -2.2616
7.5000 5.8065 7.5000 -2.6248
10.0000 6.4385 10.0000 -2.9371
15.0000 7.1849 15.0000 -3.5054
20.0000 7.4994 20.0000 -3.9784
25.0000 7.5967 25.0000 -4.2886
30.0000 7.5500 30.0000 -4.4563
35.0000 7.3891 35.0000 -4.5110
40.0000 7.1350 40.0000 -4.4738
45.0000 6.8038 45.0000 -4.3604
50.0000 6.4076 50.0000 -4.1830
55.0000 5.9561 55.0000 -3.9512
60.0000 5.4567 60.0000 -3.6723
65.0000 4.9152 65.0000 -3.3519
70.0000 4.3356 70.0000 -2.9940
75.0000 3.7208 75.0000 -2.6014
80.0000 3.0721 80.0000 -2.1754
85.0000 2.3899 85.0000 -1.7163
90.0000 1.6730 90.0000 -1.2231
95.0000 0.9196 95.0000 -0.6939
100.0000 0.1264 100.0000 -0.1257
52
A.1.2 NACA Profile 0012
(Stations and ordinates given in per cent of airfoil chord)
X Y dy/dx
0.0000 0.0000 ********

0.5000 1.2213 1.1819
0.7500 1.4849 0.9498
1.2500 1.8939 0.7159
2.5000 2.6147 0.4775
5.0000 3.5547 0.3029
7.5000 4.1999 0.2208
10.0000 4.6828 0.1687
15.0000 5.3452 0.1018
20.0000 5.7375 0.0577
25.0000 5.9412 0.0252
30.0000 6.0017 -0.0001
35.0000 5.9486 -0.0205
40.0000 5.8030 -0.0372
45.0000 5.5807 -0.0513
50.0000 5.2940 -0.0631
55.0000 4.9524 -0.0733
60.0000 4.5634 -0.0822
65.0000 4.1325 -0.0901
70.0000 3.6639 -0.0973
75.0000 3.1603 -0.1041
80.0000 2.6231 -0.1108
85.0000 2.0526 -0.1175
90.0000 1.4477 -0.1245
95.0000 0.8066 -0.1321
100.000 0.1260 -0.1403
53
REFERENCES
[1] Raymer, D. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, 4th edition. AIAA;
Reston, VA ; 2006.
[2] John D. Anderson, Jr. Aircraft performance and design, Tata McGraw- Hill
Edition 2010.
[3] Jenkinson, L. R., and Marchman, James F. Aircraft Design Project Studies.
Butterworth; 2003
[4] Jenkinson, L. R., Simpson, P., and Rhodes, D. Civil Jet Aircraft Design.
Arnold Publishers; London, UK; 1999.
[5] E. L. Houghton, Aerodynamics for Engineering Students, Fifth Edition.
[6] Websites:
http://www.pdas.com/sections6.html
http://www.oriontechnologies.net/Documents/Airfoil.htm
[7] Catia V5 Freedom Surface – Rebuild of P51 Mustang.
[8] Drag Estimation- IIT Madras
54
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] Raymer, D. Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, 4th edition. AIAA;

Reston, VA ; 2006.
[2] John D. Anderson, Jr. Aircraft performance and design, Tata McGraw- Hill
Edition 2010.
[3] Jenkinson, L. R., and Marchman, James F. Aircraft Design Project Studies.
Butterworth; 2003
[4] Websites:
http://www.pdas.com/sections6.html
http://www.oriontechnologies.net/Documents/Airfoil.htm
55
ACKNOWLEGEMENT FROM MIT FLIGHT ‘11
Flight 11 MIT to me show details Mar 3
Hi,
Thank you for your proposal. CONGRADULATION! Your work have been
selected for Project Presentation on MIT flight 11.Please send your completed
project report to our mail Id.
Regards
Flight 11 Team
56

Ijcrt 185926

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ijcrt 185926

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ijcrt 185926

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF AIRCRAFT HAVING AWD TECHNOLOGY

1.1 PROJECT REQUIREMENTS

CHAPTER 2- LITERATURE REVIEW

By considering the maximum weight requirement of 9000Kg, the new

TYPE PAX(Number of Max. Take Off Mass(kg)

Embraer phenom 300 6 7951

Beech jet 400A 8 7303

Cessna S500 Citation 8 6849

Cessna Citation Ultra 7 7394

MID JET AIRCRAFT

Citation XLS + 10 9163

Lear Jet 40 7 9545

Lear Jet 60 XR 10 10660

LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONFIGURATION SELECTION

2.2 INFORMATION RETRIEVAL

TYPE T/W W/S ME / MTO

Beech Jet 400A 0.360 325 0.624

Cessna S550 0.331 215 0.533

Cessna Citation 0.3736 247 0.576

Cessna Citation 0.407 266 0.555

Lear Jet 40 0.332 329 0.662

Lear jet 60 XR 0.391 433 0.662

2.2.1 SELECTED VALUES

2.3 CONFIGURATION SELECTION

LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONFIGURATION SELECTION

CHAPTER 3 - INITIAL SIZING AND LAYOUT

Fuel mass fraction = 0.35

Payload = 6 Business class passengers including baggage

[We will allow 120Kg per passenger]

Pilot = 2 [100Kg each]

Cabin attendants = 3[80Kg each]

M pay = ( 6 x 120 ) + ( 2 x 100 ) + ( 3 x 80 )

Therefore total Mass = 1190 Kg.

3.1.1 CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM TAKE OFF MASS

ME/MTO = Empty Mass Ratio

MF/MTO = Fuel Mass Ratio

Max. Take off Mass = 1190 / ( 1 – 0.53 – 0.35 )

= 9154 Kg [Nearer to the requirement Mass]

TABLE 3.1-The Initial mass estimation

Operational Empty 4760 52

MTOM 9154 100

3.2 ENGINE SIZE AND SELECTION:

Engine Total Take Of Thrust = 0.36 x 9154 x 9.81 = 32 KN

Pratt &Whitney PW545A

INTIAL SIZING AND LAYOUT

CHAPTER 4 - WING GEOMETRY AND

Using wing area and Aspect Ratio we can determine,

Wing Span (b) = (AR x S) 0.5 = 16.91 m

Mean Chord (C m) = (b/AR) = 1.69 m

Selecting Taper ratio(ᵧ) of 0.3 gives (approximately)

Root chord C rt is given by

Centre line chord C cen = 2.6 m

Tip chord C tip = ᵧ.C cen = 0.78 m

4.2 AIRFOIL SELECTION

should be close to the lift coefficient of the aircraft (C L) in the flight

In steady level flight ,

Reynolds number calculation

From the analysis of similar aircraft the cruise altitude is 15600 m.

Hence, Temperature, Density and Coefficient of Viscosity at 15600 m are