DOCSLIB.ORG

Design Synthesis of Advanced Technology, Flying Wing Seaplanes Uninhabited Aircraft Design

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Design Synthesis of Advanced Technology, Flying Wing Seaplanes Uninhabited Aircraft Design Design Synthesis of Advanced Technology, Flying Wing Seaplanes Uninhabited Aircraft Design Optimised forby Close Formation Air-Refuelling Flight Errikos Levis Supervisor: Dr.by V.C. Serghides Sma ilsuwan Department of Aeronautics Imperial College London A thesis submitted for the degree of A Thesis Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Doctor of Philosophy 2011 2010 Department of Aeronautics Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine Prince Consort Road London SW7 2BY Declaration I hereby certify that the research presented in this thesis has been carried out at Imperial College London, and has not been previously submitted to any other university for any degree or award. The thesis comprises only my original work. Due acknowledgments are made where appropriate. Errikos Levis i Abstract Over the past decades there has been increasing pressure for ever more efficient and environmen- tally friendly aircraft to be designed. The use of waterborne aircraft could be a means of satisfying those requirements in the future. The aim of the PhD research program presented in this thesis was to develop the methodologies necessary for the preliminary design of large passenger seaplanes and evaluate the performance of such an aircraft compared to the current state of the art. The ma- jor technological and operational constraints in designing large waterborne aircraft were identified through an extensive feasibility study. A number of subject areas necessitating further investigation were also identified. To ensure that waterborne takeoff distance requirements are met, a novel initial sizing methodology was generated, relating the aircraft's thrust and lifting characteristics to the take- off Balanced Field Length. To allow the design of a broad family of aircraft based on a predefined baseline configuration, the seaplane geometry was fully parameterized. The aerodynamic properties of the entire aircraft were determined using a vortex-lattice potential flow solver, written specifically for the configuration being investigated, combined with other commonly used empirical methods. Novel methodologies for estimating the hydrodynamic characteristics of a broad range of parametric hulls were developed using the wealth of experimental hydrodynamic test data available. These methods can be used not only to predict the resistance and trim characteristics of a seaplane throughout the entire takeoff and landing manoeuvre but also give an initial estimate of the attitudes where hydrody- namic instabilities may be encountered. The airborne and waterborne performance characteristics of each resulting aircraft design were estimated using the aforementioned methods. The resulting design synthesis has been integrated into a single algorithm, written in FORTRAN, intended to allow the easy and prompt analysis of any parametric variant of the baseline configuration. ii Contents Abstract i Contents iii List of Figures ix List of Tables xiv Nomenclature xvi 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Motivation..........................................1 1.2 Objectives...........................................2 1.3 Background..........................................2 1.3.1 Seaplanes.......................................2 1.3.2 The Flying Wing...................................5 2 Feasibility Study 6 2.1 Possible Uses of Large Seaplanes..............................6 2.1.1 Passenger and Cargo Transport...........................6 2.1.2 Maritime Search and Rescue............................7 2.1.3 Firefighting......................................8 2.1.4 Troop and Cargo Transport.............................8 2.1.5 Electronic and Anti-Submarine Warfare......................9 2.1.6 Aerial Refueling...................................9 2.2 Technological Feasibility...................................9 2.2.1 Fluid Dynamics....................................9 iii 2.2.1.1 Wing Design................................9 2.2.1.2 Hull Design................................. 10 2.2.1.3 Extreme Ground Effect.......................... 11 2.2.2 Propulsion...................................... 12 2.2.3 Stability and Control................................. 13 2.2.3.1 Airborne.................................. 13 2.2.3.2 Waterborne................................. 14 2.2.3.3 Rough Water Performance........................ 15 2.2.4 Configuration Layout................................ 16 2.2.5 Structural Design................................... 16 2.3 Seaplane Operations..................................... 17 2.3.1 Implications of Seaborne Operation........................ 17 2.3.1.1 Effect Of Sea State on Operations.................... 17 2.3.1.2 Icing.................................... 18 2.3.1.3 Attachment of Sedentary Marine Organisms.............. 20 2.3.1.4 Interaction with other Vessels...................... 20 2.3.1.5 Floating Debris.............................. 21 2.3.1.6 Bird Hazards................................ 21 2.3.1.7 Safety Equipment............................. 22 2.3.2 Maintenance..................................... 22 2.3.2.1 Inspection of Submerged Parts...................... 22 2.3.2.2 Beaching.................................. 23 2.3.3 Seaplane Base Design................................ 24 2.3.3.1 Requirements for Water Area....................... 24 2.3.3.2 Marking and Lighting........................... 25 2.3.3.3 Airport Boundaries............................ 26 2.3.3.4 Mooring and Docking........................... 27 2.4 Environmental Impact.................................... 28 2.4.1 Wildlife........................................ 28 2.4.2 Noise......................................... 29 2.4.3 Fuel Consumption and Emissions.......................... 29 iv 3 Literature Review 31 3.1 Introduction.......................................... 31 3.2 Aircraft Design........................................ 31 3.3 Aerodynamic Design..................................... 33 3.4 Hull Design.......................................... 34 4 Baseline Configuration & Initial Sizing 37 4.1 Baseline Configuration.................................... 37 4.1.1 Baseline Design Justification............................ 37 4.1.2 General Arrangement................................ 39 4.2 Initial Sizing......................................... 41 4.2.1 Mission Profile.................................... 41 4.2.2 Initial Weight Estimation.............................. 42 4.2.2.1 Empty Weight............................... 44 4.2.3 Thrust-to-Weight and Wing Loading........................ 45 4.2.3.1 Design to Requirements.......................... 45 4.2.3.2 Takeoff & Landing Distance....................... 46 4.2.4 The Carpet Plot................................... 57 5 Geometrical Modelling 59 5.1 Hull Parametrization..................................... 59 5.2 Planform Parametrization.................................. 62 5.3 Airfoil Parametrization.................................... 64 5.4 3D Modelling......................................... 67 5.4.1 Hull Section & Seawing............................... 68 5.4.2 Outer Wing Section................................. 72 6 Systems Packaging 74 6.1 Pressurised hull sizing.................................... 74 6.1.1 Passenger Cabin................................... 74 6.1.2 Cargo bays...................................... 76 6.1.3 Cabin placement & centreline thickness estimation................ 78 6.2 Fuel System.......................................... 79 6.3 Propulsion System...................................... 80 v 6.4 Fins.............................................. 81 7 Aerodynamics 84 7.1 Pressure loads......................................... 84 7.2 Lift Distribution & Optimum Twist............................ 88 7.3 Viscous Effects........................................ 90 7.4 Transonic Effects....................................... 91 7.5 Control Surfaces & High Lift Devices............................ 93 7.6 Maximum Lift........................................ 93 7.7 Step Effects.......................................... 95 8 Hydrostatics & dynamics 103 8.1 Hull Sizing.......................................... 103 8.2 Hydrostatic Analysis..................................... 106 8.3 Hydrodynamic Analysis................................... 107 8.3.1 Parameter Choice.................................. 109 8.3.2 Resistance....................................... 111 8.3.3 Pitching Moment................................... 113 8.3.3.1 Centre of Pressure............................. 113 8.3.3.2 Equilibrium Trim Angle.......................... 116 8.4 Validation........................................... 118 9 Weight, Balance & Stability 126 9.1 Weight & Balance...................................... 126 9.1.1 Empty Aircraft.................................... 126 9.1.2 Fuel & Payload.................................... 130 9.2 Static Stability........................................ 131 9.2.1 Aerodynamic..................................... 131 9.2.2 Hydrostatic...................................... 134 9.3 Dynamic Stability...................................... 136 9.3.1 Aerodynamic..................................... 136 9.3.2 Hydrodynamic.................................... 138 9.3.2.1 Lower Trim Limit............................. 142 9.3.2.2 Upper Trim Limit - Increasing Trim................... 143 vi 9.3.2.3 Upper Trim Limit - Decreasing Trim.................. 145 10 Performance 147 10.1 Engine Performance..................................... 147 10.2 Specific Excess Power.................................... 149 10.3 Mission Analysis......................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Conceptual Design Study of a Hydrogen Powered Ultra Large Cargo Aircraft
    Conceptual Design Study of a Hydrogen Powered Ultra Large Cargo Aircraft R.A.J. Jansen University of Technology Technology of University Delft Delft Conceptual Design Study of a Hydrogen Powered Ultra Large Cargo Aircraft Towards a competitive and sustainable alternative of maritime transport by R.A.J. Jansen to obtain the degree of Master of Science at the Delft University of Technology, to be defended publicly on Tuesday January 10, 2017 at 9:00 AM. Student number: 4036093 Thesis registration: 109#17#MT#FPP Project duration: January 11, 2016 – January 10, 2017 Thesis committee: Dr. ir. G. La Rocca, TU Delft, supervisor Dr. A. Gangoli Rao, TU Delft Dr. ir. H. G. Visser, TU Delft An electronic version of this thesis is available at http://repository.tudelft.nl/. Acknowledgements This report presents the research performed to complete the master track Flight Performance and Propulsion at the Technical University of Delft. I am really grateful to the people who supported me both during the master thesis as well as during the rest of my student life. First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor, Gianfranco La Rocca. He supported and motivated me during the entire graduation project and provided valuable feedback during all the status meeting we had. I would also like to thank the exam committee, Arvind Gangoli Rao and Dries Visser, for their flexibility and time to assess my work. Moreover, I would like to thank Ali Elham for his advice throughout the project as well as during the green light meeting. Next to these people, I owe also thanks to the fellow students in room 2.44 for both their advice, as well as the enjoyable chats during the lunch and coffee breaks.
    [Show full text]
  • Airframe Integration
    Aerodynamic Design of the Hybrid Wing Body Propulsion- Airframe Integration May-Fun Liou1, Hyoungjin Kim2, ByungJoon Lee3, and Meng-Sing Liou4 NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio, 44135 Abstract A hybrid wingbody (HWB) concept is being considered by NASA as a potential subsonic transport aircraft that meets aerodynamic, fuel, emission, and noise goals in the time frame of the 2030s. While the concept promises advantages over conventional wing-and-tube aircraft, it poses unknowns and risks, thus requiring in-depth and broad assessments. Specifically, the configuration entails a tight integration of the airframe and propulsion geometries; the aerodynamic impact has to be carefully evaluated. With the propulsion nacelle installed on the (upper) body, the lift and drag are affected by the mutual interference effects between the airframe and nacelle. The static margin for longitudinal stability is also adversely changed. We develop a design approach in which the integrated geometry of airframe (HWB) and propulsion is accounted for simultaneously in a simple algebraic manner, via parameterization of the planform and airfoils at control sections of the wingbody. In this paper, we present the design of a 300-passenger transport that employs distributed electric fans for propulsion. The trim for stability is achieved through the use of the wingtip twist angle. The geometric shape variables are determined through the adjoint optimization method by minimizing the drag while subject to lift, pitch moment, and geometry constraints. The design results clearly show the influence on the aerodynamic characteristics of the installed nacelle and trimming for stability. A drag minimization with the trim constraint yields a reduction of 10 counts in the drag coefficient.
    [Show full text]
  • B-52, the “Stratofortress”
    B-52, The “StratoFortress” Aerodynamics and Performance Build-up Service • Crew – Upper Deck • 2 Pilots • Electronic Warfare Officer • Latest Model – Lower Deck – B-52H • Bombardier – Last B-52H delivered in 1962 • Radar Navigator • Transonic Bomber – Nuclear Payload capable • Deployment – 20 Cruise Missiles – 102 B-52H’s • AGM-86C – 192 B-52G’s • AGM-12 Have Nap • AGM-84 Harpoon – All in Service of USAF as – Up to 50,000 lb ordnance far as we can tell payload – $53.4 million each [1998$] – 51 bombs of 750-lb class Additional Payload • In addition to attack ordnance, B-52H carries: – Norden APQ-156 Multi-mode targeting radar – Terrain Avoidance Radar – Electro-Optical Viewing System (EVS) • Infra-red and low light display used in conjunction with terrain avoidance sensors to navigate in bad weather at low altitudes, or with the nuclear windscreen shielding in place – ECM • ALT-28 jammer • ALQ-117, -115, -172 deception jammers – Optional Stinger Air to Air missiles in aft gun-turret Weight Breakdown • Max TOGW – 505,000 lb • Fuel Weight – 299,434 lb internal – 9,114 lb on non-jettisonable under- wing pylons • Ordnance Weight – 50,000 lb • Airframe operational empty – 146452 lb Basic Geometry • Length: 160.9 ft • Tail Plane • Wing – Horizontal Tail Span: – Span: 185 ft 55.625 ft – Horizontal Tail Plan Area: – Area: 4000 ft^2 ~1004 ft^2 – Root Chord: ~34.5 ft – Mean Chord: 21.62 ft – Vertical Tail Height: – Taper Ratio: 0.37 24.339 ft – Leading Edge Sweep: – Vertical Tail Plan Area: 35° ~451 ft^2 – AR: 8.56 Wing Geometry • Wing Root: 14%
    [Show full text]
  • History of Solar Flight July 2008
    History of Solar Flight July 2008 solar airplane aircraft continuous sustainable flight solar-powered solar cells mppt helios Sky-Sailor sun-powered HALE platform solaire avion vol continu dévelopement durable énergie solaire cellules plateforme History of Solar flight André Noth, [email protected] Autonomous Systems Lab, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zürich 1. The conjunction of two pioneer fields, electric flight and solar cells The use of electric power for flight vehicles propulsion is not new. The first one was the hydrogen- filled dirigible France in year 1884 that won a 10 km race around Villacoulbay and Medon. At this time, the electric system was superior to its only rival, the steam engine but then with the arrival of gasoline engines, work on electrical propulsion for air vehicles was abandoned and the field lay dormant for almost a century [2]. On the 30th June 1957, Colonel H. J. Taplin of the United Kingdom made the first officially recorded electric powered radio controlled flight with his model “Radio Queen”, which used a permanent-magnet motor and a silver-zinc battery. Unfortunately, he didn’t carry on these experiments. Further developments in the field came from the great German pioneer, Fred Militky, who first achieved a successful flight with a Radio Queen, 1957 free flight model in October 1957. Since this premises, electric flight continuously evolved with constant improvements in the fields of motors and batteries [12]. Three years before Taplin and Militky’s experiments, in 1954, photovoltaic technology was born at Bell Telephone Laboratories. Daryl Chapin, Calvin Fuller, and Gerald Pearson developed the first silicon photovoltaic cell capable of converting enough of the sun’s energy into power to run everyday electrical Gerald Pearson, Daryl Chapin equipment.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Collection
    A, AIR & SPA ID SE CE MU REP SEU INT M AIRCRAFT COLLECTION From the Avenger torpedo bomber, a stalwart from Intrepid’s World War II service, to the A-12, the spy plane from the Cold War, this collection reflects some of the GREATEST ACHIEVEMENTS IN MILITARY AVIATION. Photo: Liam Marshall TABLE OF CONTENTS Bombers / Attack Fighters Multirole Helicopters Reconnaissance / Surveillance Trainers OV-101 Enterprise Concorde Aircraft Restoration Hangar Photo: Liam Marshall BOMBERS/ATTACK The basic mission of the aircraft carrier is to project the U.S. Navy’s military strength far beyond our shores. These warships are primarily deployed to deter aggression and protect American strategic interests. Should deterrence fail, the carrier’s bombers and attack aircraft engage in vital operations to support other forces. The collection includes the 1940-designed Grumman TBM Avenger of World War II. Also on display is the Douglas A-1 Skyraider, a true workhorse of the 1950s and ‘60s, as well as the Douglas A-4 Skyhawk and Grumman A-6 Intruder, stalwarts of the Vietnam War. Photo: Collection of the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum GRUMMAN / EASTERNGRUMMAN AIRCRAFT AVENGER TBM-3E GRUMMAN/EASTERN AIRCRAFT TBM-3E AVENGER TORPEDO BOMBER First flown in 1941 and introduced operationally in June 1942, the Avenger became the U.S. Navy’s standard torpedo bomber throughout World War II, with more than 9,836 constructed. Originally built as the TBF by Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation, they were affectionately nicknamed “Turkeys” for their somewhat ungainly appearance. Bomber Torpedo In 1943 Grumman was tasked to build the F6F Hellcat fighter for the Navy.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Study of a Supersonic Business Jet with Variable Sweep Wings
    27TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THE AERONAUTICAL SCIENCES DESIGN STUDY OF A SUPERSONIC BUSINESS JET WITH VARIABLE SWEEP WINGS E.Jesse, J.Dijkstra ADSE b.v. Keywords: swing wing, supersonic, business jet, variable sweepback Abstract A design study for a supersonic business jet with variable sweep wings is presented. A comparison with a fixed wing design with the same technology level shows the fundamental differences. It is concluded that a variable sweep design will show worthwhile advantages over fixed wing solutions. 1 General Introduction Fig. 1 Artist impression variable sweep design AD1104 In the EU 6th framework project HISAC (High Speed AirCraft) technologies have been studied to enable the design and development of an 2 The HISAC project environmentally acceptable Small Supersonic The HISAC project is a 6th framework project Business Jet (SSBJ). In this context a for the European Union to investigate the conceptual design with a variable sweep wing technical feasibility of an environmentally has been developed by ADSE, with support acceptable small size supersonic transport from Sukhoi, Dassault Aviation, TsAGI, NLR aircraft. With a budget of 27.5 M€ and 37 and DLR. The objective of this was to assess the partners in 13 countries this 4 year effort value of such a configuration for a possible combined much of the European industry and future SSBJ programme, and to identify critical knowledge centres. design and certification areas should such a configuration prove to be advantageous. To provide a framework for the different studies and investigations foreseen in the HISAC This paper presents the resulting design project a number of aircraft concept designs including the relevant considerations which were defined, which would all meet at least the determined the selected configuration.
    [Show full text]
  • Analytical Fuselage and Wing Weight Estimation of Transport Aircraft
    NASA Technical Memorandum 110392 Analytical Fuselage and Wing Weight Estimation of Transport Aircraft Mark D. Ardema, Mark C. Chambers, Anthony P. Patron, Andrew S. Hahn, Hirokazu Miura, and Mark D. Moore May 1996 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California 94035-1000 NASA Technical Memorandum 110392 Analytical Fuselage and Wing Weight Estimation of Transport Aircraft Mark D. Ardema, Mark C. Chambers, and Anthony P. Patron, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, California Andrew S. Hahn, Hirokazu Miura, and Mark D. Moore, Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California May 1996 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California 94035-1000 2 Nomenclature KF1 frame stiffness coefficient, IAFF/ A fuselage cross-sectional area Kmg shell minimum gage factor AB fuselage surface area KP shell geometry factor for hoop stress AF frame cross-sectional area KS constant for shear stress in wing (AR) aspect ratio of wing Kth sandwich thickness parameter b wingspan; intercept of regression line lB fuselage length bs stiffener spacing lLE length from leading edge to structural box at theoretical root chord bS wing structural semispan, measured along quarter chord from fuselage lMG length from nose to fuselage mounted main gear bw stiffener depth lNG length from nose to nose gear CF Shanley’s constant lTE length from trailing edge to structural box at CP center of pressure theoretical root chord C root chord of wing at fuselage intersection R l1 length of nose
    [Show full text]
  • CFD Investigation of 2D and 3D Dynamic Stall
    CFD Investigation of 2D and 3D Dynamic Stall A. Spentzos1, G. Barakos1;2, K. Badcock1, B. Richards1 P. Wernert3, S. Schreck4 & M. Raffel5 Contact Information: 1 CFD Laboratory, University of Glasgow, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Glasgow G12 8QQ, United Kingdom, www.aero.gla.ac.uk/Research/CFD 2 Corresponding author, email: [email protected] 3 French-German Research Institute of Saint-Louis (ISL) 5, rue du General Cassagnou, 68300 Saint-Louis. 4 National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 1617 Cole Blvd Golden, CO 80401, USA. 5 DLR - Institute for Aerodynamics and Flow Technology, Bunsenstrasse 10, D-37073 Gottingen, Germany. Abstract The results of numerical simulation for 2D and 3D dynamic stall case are presented. Square wings of NACA 0012 and NACA 0015 sections were used and comparisons are made against experimental data from Wernert et al.for the 2D and Schreck and Helin for the 3D cases. The well-known 2D dynamic stall configuration is present on the symmetry plane of the 3D cases. Sim- ilarities between the 2D and 3D cases, however, are restricted upto the midspan and the flowfield is markedly different as the wing-tip is approached. Visualisation of the 3D simulation results revealed the same omega-shaped dynamic stall vortex which was observed in the experiments by Freymuth, Horner et al.and Schreck and Helin. Detailed comparison between experiments and simulation for the surface pressure distributions is also presented along with the time histories of the integrated loads. To our knowledge this is the first detailed study
    [Show full text]
  • BY ORDER of the SECRETARY of the AIR FORCE AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION 11-2B-52 VOLUME 3 14 JUNE 2010 Flying Operations B-52--OPERATI
    BY ORDER OF THE AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION 11-2B-52 SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE VOLUME 3 14 JUNE 2010 Flying Operations B-52--OPERATIONS PROCEDURES COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY ACCESSIBILITY: Publications and forms are available for downloading or ordering on the e- Publishing website at www.e-publishing.af.mil (will convert to www.af.mil/e-publishing on AF Link. RELEASABILITY: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication. OPR: AFGSC/A3TO Certified by: HQ USAF/A3O-A Supersedes: AFI11-2B-52V3, (Col Scott L. Dennis) 22 June 2005 Pages: 61 This volume implements AFPD 11-2, Aircraft Rules and Procedures; AFPD 11-4, Aviation Service; and AFI 11-202V3, General Flight Rules. It applies to all B-52 units. This publication applies to Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) units and members except for paragraphs 2.5.1, 2.5.2, and A4.2. This publication does not apply to the Air National Guard (ANG). MAJCOMs/DRUs/FOAs are to forward proposed MAJCOM/DRU/FOA-level supplements to this volume to HQ AFFSA/A3OF, through AFGSC/A3TV, for approval prior to publication IAW AFPD 11-2, paragraph 4.2. Copies of MAJCOM/DRU/FOA-level supplements, after approved and published, will be provided by the issuing MAJCOM/DRU/FOA to HQ AFFSA/A3OF, AFGSC/A3TV, and the user MAJCOM/DRU/FOA and AFRC offices of primary responsibility. Field units below MAJCOM/DRU/FOA level will forward copies of their supplements to this publication to their parent MAJCOM/DRU/FOA office of primary responsibility for post publication review.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Symbols
    List of Symbols a atmosphere speed of sound a exponent in approximate thrust formula ac aerodynamic center a acceleration vector a0 airfoil angle of attack for zero lift A aspect ratio A system matrix A aerodynamic force vector b span b exponent in approximate SFC formula c chord cd airfoil drag coefficient cl airfoil lift coefficient clα airfoil lift curve slope cmac airfoil pitching moment about the aerodynamic center cr root chord ct tip chord c¯ mean aerodynamic chord C specfic fuel consumption Cc corrected specfic fuel consumption CD drag coefficient CDf friction drag coefficient CDi induced drag coefficient CDw wave drag coefficient CD0 zero-lift drag coefficient Cf skin friction coefficient CF compressibility factor CL lift coefficient CLα lift curve slope CLmax maximum lift coefficient Cmac pitching moment about the aerodynamic center CT nondimensional thrust T Cm nondimensional thrust moment CW nondimensional weight d diameter det determinant D drag e Oswald’s efficiency factor E origin of ground axes system E aerodynamic efficiency or lift to drag ratio EO position vector f flap f factor f equivalent parasite area F distance factor FS stick force F force vector F F form factor g acceleration of gravity g acceleration of gravity vector gs acceleration of gravity at sea level g1 function in Mach number for drag divergence g2 function in Mach number for drag divergence H elevator hinge moment G time factor G elevator gearing h altitude above sea level ht altitude of the tropopause hH height of HT ac above wingc ¯ h˙ rate of climb 2 i unit vector iH horizontal
    [Show full text]
  • Commercial Aircraft Performance Improvement Using Winglets
    Nikola N. Gavrilović Commercial Aircraft Performance Graduate Research Assistant Improvement Using Winglets University of Belgrade Faculty of Mechanical Engineering Aerodynamic drag force breakdown of a typical transport aircraft shows Boško P. Rašuo that lift-induced drag can amount to as much as 40% of total drag at Full Professor cruise conditions and 80-90% of the total drag in take-off configuration. University of Belgrade Faculty of Mechanical Engineering One way of reducing lift-induced drag is by using wing-tip devices. By applying several types of winglets, which are already used on commercial George S. Dulikravich airplanes, we study their influence on aircraft performance. Numerical Full Professor investigation of five configurations of winglets is described and Florida International University preliminary indications of their aerodynamic performance are provided. Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Miami, Florida, USA Moreover, using advanced multi-objective design optimization software an optimal one-parameter winglet configuration was detrmined that Vladimir Parezanović simultaneously minimizes drag and maximizes lift. Researcher Institute PPRIME, CNRS UPR3346 Poitiers, France Keywords: Winglet, Bionics, Computational fluid dynamics, Drag reduction, Lift-induced drag, Optimization 1. INTRODUCTION of soaring birds and their use of tip feathers to control flight, continued on the quest to reduce induced drag The main motivation for using wingtip devices is and improve aircraft performance and further develop reduction of lift-induced drag force. Environmental the concept of winglets in the late 1970s [4]. This issues and rising operational costs have forced industry research provided a fundamental knowledge and design to improve efficiency of commercial air transport and approach required for extremely attractive option to this has led to some innovative developments for improve aerodynamic efficiency of civilian aircraft, reducing lift-induced drag.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 12 Design of Control Surfaces
    Aileron Design Chapter 12 Design of Control Surfaces From: Aircraft Design: A Systems Engineering Approach Mohammad Sadraey 792 pages September 2012, Hardcover Wiley Publications 12.4.1. Introduction The primary function of an aileron is the lateral (i.e. roll) control of an aircraft; however, it also affects the directional control. Due to this reason, the aileron and the rudder are usually designed concurrently. Lateral control is governed primarily through a roll rate (P). Aileron is structurally part of the wing, and has two pieces; each located on the trailing edge of the outer portion of the wing left and right sections. Both ailerons are often used symmetrically, hence their geometries are identical. Aileron effectiveness is a measure of how good the deflected aileron is producing the desired rolling moment. The generated rolling moment is a function of aileron size, aileron deflection, and its distance from the aircraft fuselage centerline. Unlike rudder and elevator which are displacement control, the aileron is a rate control. Any change in the aileron geometry or deflection will change the roll rate; which subsequently varies constantly the roll angle. The deflection of any control surface including the aileron involves a hinge moment. The hinge moments are the aerodynamic moments that must be overcome to deflect the control surfaces. The hinge moment governs the magnitude of augmented pilot force required to move the corresponding actuator to deflect the control surface. To minimize the size and thus the cost of the actuation system, the ailerons should be designed so that the control forces are as low as possible.
    [Show full text]