DOCSLIB.ORG

Wing Mass Formula for Subsonic Aircraft

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wing Mass Formula for Subsonic Aircraft J. AIRCRAFT, VOL. 29, NO. 4: ENGINEERING NOTES 725 lytical Methods Inc., Washington, DC, 1982. Inboard Midboard wing Outboard wing 7 wing ^ Lan, C. E., and S. C. Mehrotra, "An Improved Woodward's "fuselage joint Panel Method for Calculating Leading-Edge and Side-Edge Suction Force t Subsonisa Supersonid an c c Speeds," NAS 3205R AC , 1979. 8Hardy . PS . Fiddesd C.B ,an , , "Predictio f Vorteno x Lifn o t Non-Planar Wings by the Leading-Edge Suction Analogy," Aero- nautical Journal, Vol. 92, No. 914, 1988, 154-164. Wing Mass Formula for Subsonic Aircraft Serge . UdinV iWillia d *an m J. Andersont University of Michigan, Arbor,Ann Michigan 48109 Fig. 1 Wing geometry. Description OST wing mass formulae1-2 are based on statistical in- The relative masses of structure counteracting the bending M formation. As a consequence, these formulae usually momen shead e an t ar r have good accuracy onlrestrictea n winf yo o t gdse data A . theoretical wing mass derivation based on a simplified concept Plower , Pup model of a wing is presented in Ref. 3. This method takes 4pT into consideratio detail e aircrafe th th l f nal so t wing, including lactic complicated geometry and concentrated loads, such as the engines. Formulae to estimate mass due to swept moment, mQ = 0.1 mM (3) twiso t mas e t du smoment sheao t masd pree e ar an r, - sdu sented below. The mass of other wing components, which where p, powed uppedensitiee an r ar r lowef so uppe d ran r panel total about 30% of the wing mass, can be estimated by known structural materials desige ,th gs i dn overload factor gravs i a , - methods. readee 1'4Th referres i r completa o dt detailed ean d itational acceleration, JJL is the mass of the aircraft, and p is derivation in Ref. 5. wing loading. The approximate value of effective airfoil thick- The geometry of a subsonic aircraft wing with span b is ness coefficient ET is shown in Fig. 1. We define the inboard wing as the part of the wing between the fuselage joints. It is assumed that the 4!T, 1.1 1.2 •• 1.4 (4) inboard wing section is not tapered and not swept. The mid- 2T2 + T3 board wine pare th wing f gth o tbetwees i fuselage nth e joint ane sweedth p joint e outboardTh . wing lies betweee th n where Tl is the first spar height, T2 is the maximum airfoil swee wine p th join gd considee tipan t W . r thaaircrafe th t t height, and T3 is the most rearward spar height. The values has no inboard wing concentrated loads, has nm /-numbered of actual stresses averaged over the lower panel volume an< tne midboard wing concentrated loads, and has n0 /-numbered ^act lower ^ value f actuao s l stresses averaged ovee th r outboard wing concentrated loads. The relative mass of each upper panel volume cr can be obtained from the statistics l j j actuppcr loa \ms di r ?mo c c (i.e. mase , m'th r m botf o s co i c h sym- of an aircraft with approximately the same mass, size, and metric loads located in both parts of the wing). The relative manufacturing quality. These values also can be estimated as coordinat concentratea f o e d load (absolute r ZZ'o J coor- dinate divided by half-span) is z'c or z{. = Slowe . r = ^tt upper ( C\ The estimated relative mass of the wing structure is "act lower £. fc > "act upper i » > \J) ^s/lower man 'Vs/uppcr man mw = ktm(m mri mai mfla (1) wher coefficiene eth t &lowee 5/lowcth s i r panel ultimate stress Slower divided by the permissible fatigue lower panel stress, formulae Th estimato et e relative masse ribf so s mrib, ailerons s u r kiupper i PP^ panel ultimate stress o-Muppcr divided by the per- mail, load-free skin raflapd skan , s m presentee flaar p Refsn di . missible fatique upper pane e manufacturinl th stres d an s g 1,2, and 4. The twist moment factor ktm is coefficient kman has expert value within bounds presented in e valuTablTh f fc. eo 1 e decreases whe e dimensionnth s Q.015V]4( 12A,+ ) man + 1 k = and mass of aircraft are increased. If the absolute root wing tm 1 -I( - A,)cosA (2) thickness T does not exist, it can be inferred from the overall geometrs ya where A is the aspect ratio, A, is the taper ratio to wing tip (wing tip chord divided by wing root chord), and A is the 2t half-chord wing sweep. T = r (A, - z,) - zf) Receive , 19916 y ; Ma daccepte r publicatiofo d , 199128 y . nMa (6) . AndersonCopyrighJ . W Udi V d . 199nS an © t . y 1Publisheb y db e Americath n Institut f Aeronauticeo Astronauticsd an s , Inc. with where t is the root relative thickness; \ is the taper ratio to permission. r s * Visiting Research Scholar, Aerospace Engineering Department. the sweep joint (chord at sweep joint divided by root chord); Permanent affiliation: Graduate Student, Moscow Aviation Institute, zs is the relative coordinate of sweep joint; and zyis the relative Moscow, Russia. coordinate of fuselage joint. The coefficients KMo, KMm, and tProfessor of Aerospace Engineering. Senior Member AIAA. KMi in Eq. (3) are 726 J. AIRCRAFT : 4 ENGINEERIN . , VOLNO , 29 . G NOTES 2 - Z. ~ z,) h, h] 3 *:*,M„ = h? ° (h, - h,)cos A0 3(* - .h, T - 2 1- A , m , ,( A - lA + r) 9z ,- z,)-f1 . 6(z2( - ,+ z f) A, zs(l - A,) + A, H- 1 (1 + ifc)(zs - zf) + (ifc + i/f,)(l - zs) 9zf + 6(zs - zf) + 2(1 /7-z-T(*.-*.) + *ATI » (l-)cosA 9zf -f 6(z5 - zf) + 2(1 - z,) - zf) 2 - 2* r*, + ,(A. - 2A A )? , z,( A - lA, + ) 6(zs - zf) + 2(1 - z,) (1 - z,)(l - A,) :,(! - A,) + A, + 2(1 - z,)m: ,)(! - z,) 9zr + 6(zs - zf) + 2(1 - z,) h mfu 3V' (- z.i ) - A,) + A, - zr) 6(zs - zf) + 2(1 - z,)/ m - 2 «i *i - - A. /z+ —1 )s( - 2A,) z zz ~ f\~ ~ f s z,(l - A,) + A, + 1 2 (z. - - z,)(^ +*)(z. - zf) + (1 - z,) ',)(! - z,) 2 - z,)(z1 (z z- 2( f+ z,),)s + (7) 9zf + 6(z, - zf) + 2(1 - z.) . AIRCRAFTJ : 4 ENGINEERIN . , VOLNO , 29 . G NOTES 727 Table 1 Bounds on manufacturing coefficient Mashinostroenie, Moscow, 1983 (in Russian). 3Udin, S. V., and Anderson, W. J., "A Method of Wing Mass *1 Stepped thickness (rather than tapered) 0.1 . .0.13 Formula Derivation," Univ f Michigano . , Aerospace Engineering k2 Dead joint mass penalty 0.153 0. Rept. SM 90.1, Nov. 1990. 4 k3 Standard thicknes f websso , ribs othed an , r . 1 0. .0.13 Udin, S. V., and Anderson, W. J., "The Complete Derivation of elements Wing Mass Formula for Twin Fuselage Aircraft," Univ. of Michigan, k4 Joint fittings and joint defects 0.1. .0.15 Aerospace Engineering Rept. SM 90.2, Nov. 1990. 5 k5 Plus toleerances 0.04. .0.09 Udin, S. V., and Anderson, W. J., "The Complete Derivation of k6 Manufacturing thicknesses 0.03 . 0.05 Wing Mass Formula for Subsonic Aircraft," Univ. of Michigan, Aer- k7 Breakdown joint mass penalty 0.1. .0.2 ospace Engineering Rept. SM 91.1, April 1991. 1.62 . 2.05 kman = * + *1 + ^2 + ^3 + ^4 + ^5 + ^6 + ^7 Table 2 Sample calculations for current transports Aircraft , kg actual formula Error, % Whirl-Flutter Stabilit Pushea f yo r B-727-100 72,600 0.111 0.1109 - 0.02 Configuration in Nonuniform Flow B-747-100 322,000 0.122 0.1248 2.3 DC-9-30 49,000 0.106 0.0946 -10.8 DC-10-10 195,000 0.114 0.1048 -8.1 F. Nitzsche* and E. A. Rodriguest Dc-10-30 252,000 0.106 0.1109 4.6 EMBRAER—Empresa Brasileira de Aerondutica, A-300-B2 137,700 0.145 0.1337 - 7.8 C-5A 349,000 0.13 0.1344 3.4 S.A., Sao Jose dos Campos, 12225, Brazil C-130E 68,700 0.0772 0.0759 -1.7 Tu-154 90,000 0.102 0.1066 4.6 An-10 54,000 0.0981 0.1028 4.8 An-22 250,000 0.119 0.1226 9.5 Introduction An-24 21,000 0.1142 0.1196 4.7 N the new aircraft configurations with pusher power plants I1-76T 171,000 0.121 0.1237 2.2 I located at the rear fuselage, the whirl-flutter stability char- acteristics of the engine-propeller installation may be affected by the nonuniform freeflow induced by the aircraft compo- wher half-chore th A s mi d swee midboarf po d winge ; th A s 0i nents positioned upstream in the flowfield. Assuming that the half-chord sweep of outboard wing; m* is the previously it- flowfield may still be considered stationary, the effect of the erated or expert-estimated relative wing structure mass; mfu aforementioned interferenc s investigatedi e . Under thi- as s relative isth e fuel mass; hs = thicknese tsth \ s/ts i r s tapeo t r sumpton, the propeller aerodynamics may be adjusted to be- sweep joint; ht = t,\Jtr is the thickness taper to wing tip; \fis com periodiea c functio aeroelastie th f timo nd ean c system wine h= th sg\s i s airfoil area sweee tapeth o pt r joint; s ti s stability may be studied using any theory developed to analyze the sweep joint relative thickness; tt is the wing tip relative periodic systems e presenth n I .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wing Root & Landing Gear Door Seal Replacement
    Wing Root & Landing Gear Door Seal Replacement One of the oldest original components remaining on my Baron (and likely other members planes) was surely the stiff and ragged wing root seal. In researching this component I learned that the wing root and tail seals were installed on the wings and tails before the marriage to the airframe. What lies below the top skin of the wing and tail is a length of rubber “finger” (Figure 1) as an integral part of the seal. Figure 1 This “finger” holds the seal in place and was likely glued at the factory, grabbing the backside of the wing and tail skin. With time and age these original rubber seals have taken quite a beating. With an extended winter annual downtime this year I chose to tackle this really tedious project while waiting for other components that were out for overhaul. A word of caution, this is as tedious as it gets if you choose to dig out the finger from below the top surface skins using the very narrow gap between the skin and the fuselage. Here is a pirep from a Bonanza A36 owner on how he tackled his seal replacement: “I cut the majority of the old seal off using razor blade, leaving a small lip sticking above the wing. I then used a small pick bent at a 90 degree angle, with about a 3/8" 'hook' on the end. Using the hook, I stuck it under the wing skin, between the skin and the old rubber wing seal lip under the skin, and forced it along the chord of the wing.
    [Show full text]
  • Automated Generic Parameterized Design of Aircraft Fairing and Windshield
    Automated generic parameterized design of aircraft fairing and windshield Vijaykumar Govindharajan Aakash Narender Singh LIU-IEI-TEK-A-12/01271-SE Department of Management and Engineering Division of Flumes Department of Management and Engineering SE-581 83 Linköping, Sweden i ii Upphovsrätt Detta dokument hålls tillgängligt på Internet – eller dess framtida ersättare – under 25 år från publiceringsdatum under förutsättning att inga extraordinära omständigheter uppstår. Tillgång till dokumentet innebär tillstånd för var och en att läsa, ladda ner, skriva ut enstaka kopior för enskilt bruk och att använda det oförändrat för ickekommersiell forskning och för undervisning. Överföring av upphovsrätten vid en senare tidpunkt kan inte upphäva detta tillstånd. All annan användning av dokumentet kräver upphovsmannens medgivande. För att garantera äktheten, säkerheten och tillgängligheten finns lösningar av teknisk och administrativ art. Upphovsmannens ideella rätt innefattar rätt att bli nämnd som upphovsman i den omfattning som god sed kräver vid användning av dokumentet på ovan beskrivna sätt samt skydd mot att dokumentet ändras eller presenteras i sådan form eller i sådant sammanhang som är kränkande för upphovsmannens litterära eller konstnärliga anseende eller egenart. För ytterligare information om Linköping University Electronic Press se förlagets hemsida http://www.ep.liu.se/. Copyright The publishers will keep this document online on the Internet – or its possible replacement – for a period of 25 years starting from the date of publication barring exceptional circumstances. The online availability of the document implies permanent permission for anyone to read, to download, or to print out single copies for his/her own use and to use it unchanged for non-commercial research and educational purpose.
    [Show full text]
  • Propulsion and Flight Controls Integration for the Blended Wing Body Aircraft
    Cranfield University Naveed ur Rahman Propulsion and Flight Controls Integration for the Blended Wing Body Aircraft School of Engineering PhD Thesis Cranfield University Department of Aerospace Sciences School of Engineering PhD Thesis Academic Year 2008-09 Naveed ur Rahman Propulsion and Flight Controls Integration for the Blended Wing Body Aircraft Supervisor: Dr James F. Whidborne May 2009 c Cranfield University 2009. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written permission of the copyright owner. Abstract The Blended Wing Body (BWB) aircraft offers a number of aerodynamic perfor- mance advantages when compared with conventional configurations. However, while operating at low airspeeds with nominal static margins, the controls on the BWB aircraft begin to saturate and the dynamic performance gets sluggish. Augmenta- tion of aerodynamic controls with the propulsion system is therefore considered in this research. Two aspects were of interest, namely thrust vectoring (TVC) and flap blowing. An aerodynamic model for the BWB aircraft with blown flap effects was formulated using empirical and vortex lattice methods and then integrated with a three spool Trent 500 turbofan engine model. The objectives were to estimate the effect of vectored thrust and engine bleed on its performance and to ascertain the corresponding gains in aerodynamic control effectiveness. To enhance control effectiveness, both internally and external blown flaps were sim- ulated. For a full span internally blown flap (IBF) arrangement using IPC flow, the amount of bleed mass flow and consequently the achievable blowing coefficients are limited. For IBF, the pitch control effectiveness was shown to increase by 18% at low airspeeds.
    [Show full text]
  • Root Seal Installation Intro
    Root Seal Installation Intro: Replacing the wing and stabilizer seals on a plane is not a small job, but it can be done one seal at a time if trying to fit the work into a busy flying schedule. It took us two days to replace one seal. I’m not an expert and made several mistakes on the first try due to a lack of information. I would expect it to take one day or less per seal for the next ones. What follows tries to capture what we learned. Background: The wing root seals have a complex cross section with a center root and a wide lip attached to that root. The root and lip essentially grasp the wing skin out-of- sight below the seal. The root and lip must be pushed through the gap between the wing skin and fuselage such that the lip flips back under the skin and the root is trapped between the edge of the skin and the side of the fuselage. At some point before I owned my Baron, the original seal had been cut off, leaving the root and lip in place glued to the underside of the wing skin. This was a shortcut that is not uncommon but creates later problems. A new seal, after having the center root and lip removed, had been glued to the wing and fuselage using the 3M yellow contact cement. Over time the 3M cement degraded and since there was no root/lip to hold it in place, the replacement seal was torn away by the slipstream.
    [Show full text]
  • A-7 Strut Braced Wing Concept Transonic Wing Design
    A-7 Strut Braced Wing Concept Transonic Wing Design by Andy Ko, William H. Mason, B. Grossman and J.A. Schetz VPI-AOE-275 July 12, 2002 Prepared for: National Aeronautics and Space Administration Langley Research Center Contract No.: NASA PO #L-14266 Covering the period June 3, 2001– Nov. 30, 2001 Multidisciplinary Analysis and Design Center for Advanced Vehicles Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, VA 24061 Executive Summary The Multidisciplinary Analysis and Design (MAD) Center at Virginia Tech has investigated the strut-braced wing (SBW) design concept for the last 5 years. Studies found that the SBW configuration showed savings in takeoff gross weight of up to 19%, and savings in fuel weight of up to 25% compared to a similarly designed cantilever wing transport aircraft. In our work we assumed that computational fluid dynamics (CFD) would be used to achieve the target aerodynamic performance levels. No detailed CFD design of the wing was done. In this study, we used CFD to do the aerodynamic design for a proposed SBW demonstration using a re-winged A7 aircraft. The goal was to design a standard constant isobar transonic cruise wing, together with the strut. The wing/pylon/strut junction would be an integral part of the aerodynamic design. We did this work in consultation with NASA Langley Configuration Aerodynamics branch members through a weekly teleconference, using PDF files to allow them to visualize the progress. They provided us with the codes required to do the work, although one of the codes assumed to be available was not.
    [Show full text]
  • Sizing and Layout Design of an Aeroelastic Wingbox Through Nested Optimization
    Sizing and Layout Design of an Aeroelastic Wingbox through Nested Optimization Bret K. Stanford∗ NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, 23681 Christine V. Juttey Craig Technologies, Inc., Cape Canaveral, FL, 32920 Christian A. Coker z Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS, 39759 The goals of this work are to 1) develop an optimization algorithm that can simulta- neously handle a large number of sizing variables and topological layout variables for an aeroelastic wingbox optimization problem and 2) utilize this algorithm to ascertain the ben- efits of curvilinear wingbox components. The algorithm used here is a nested optimization, where the outer level optimizes the rib and skin stiffener layouts with a surrogate-based optimizer, and the inner level sizes all of the components via gradient-based optimization. Two optimizations are performed: one restricted to straight rib and stiffener components only, the other allowing curved members. A moderate 1.18% structural mass reduction is obtained through the use of curvilinear members. I. Introduction Layout optimization of a wingbox structure, a form of topology optimization, involves deciding upon the best placement of ribs, spars, and stiffeners within a semimonocoque structure. There are numerous examples of layout design in the literature, including Refs.1-6. Some of these papers adhere to conventional orthogonal layouts of ribs, spars, and stiffeners,3 others blend the roles of these components through angled and/or curved members,2,5,6 and others abandon this convention entirely with a complex network of full- and partial-depth members.1,4 Regardless of how the layout design is conducted, sizing design must be included as well, by optimizing the thickness distribution of the various shell components: ribs, spars, stiffeners, and skins (cover panels).
    [Show full text]
  • Piper Pa-34 Wing Root Fairing Installation and Maintenance Manual
    Piper PA-34 Wing Root Fairing Issue Date: 7-4-87 STC No. SA1238GL Rev. D Manual No. 34WR-M Rev Date: 3-31-10 PIPER PA-34 WING ROOT FAIRING INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL Aircraft Eligibility: Piper PA-34-200, PA-34-200T, PA-34-220T Knots 2U, Ltd. 709 Airport Road Burlington, WI 53105 www.knots2u.com Knots 2U, Ltd. 709 Airport Road Burlington, WI 53105 Ph 262.763.5100 Fax 262.763 5125 www.knots2u.com Page 1 of 7 Piper PA-34 Wing Root Fairing Issue Date: 7-4-87 STC No. SA1238GL Rev. D Manual No. 34WR-M Rev Date: 3-31-10 Revision Control Rev. Date Effect No. A 09/15/92 Added revision page, revised table of contents, and revised fairing installation procedures. B 06/01/97 Changed name and address. C 01/04/99 Moved revision to front cover, general cleanup, changed to #6 Stainless Steel hardware, installation procedure changes. D 07/01/09 ECO 0173 Knots 2U, Ltd. 709 Airport Road Burlington, WI 53105 Ph 262.763.5100 Fax 262.763 5125 www.knots2u.com Page 2 of 7 Piper PA-34 Wing Root Fairing Issue Date: 7-4-87 STC No. SA1238GL Rev. D Manual No. 34WR-M Rev Date: 3-31-10 Table of Contents Section Title Page Cover Page 1 Revision Control 2 Table of Contents 3 1.0 Right Side Installation P/N CWRR 4 1.1 Locating Holes in Fairing P/N CWRR 4 1.2 Drilling Holes in Fuselage and Fairing 4 1.3 Enlarging Mounting Holes in Fairing 4 1.4 Application of Foam Tape P/N 189-715 4 1.5 Mounting Fairing P/N CWRR 4 2.0 Left Side Installation P/N CWRL 4 3.0 Fairing Removal 4 4.0 Paper Work 5 5.0 Parts List 5 Detail 1 6 6.0 Maintenance / Instructions for Continued Airworthiness 7 Knots 2U, Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Volume 1 – No.1, September 2014 Preliminary Design Approach of the Wing Box
    ISSN (O): 2393-8609 International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Volume 1 – No.1, September 2014 Preliminary Design Approach of the Wing Box Vikas kumar Pushpraj Harpreet Singh Punjab Technical University Punjab Technical University Punjab Technical University Gurukul Vidyapeeth Institute Of Gurukul Vidyapeeth Institute Of Gurukul Vidyapeeth Institute Of Engineering And Technology Engineering And Technology Engineering And Technology Banur Banur Banur [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] m m m ABSTRACT 3. high toughness For designing of wing box it should be noted that the structure 4. low weight should be strong enough to withstand the load forces and exceptional circumstances in which aircraft has to be operate. Table 1 Material specification Wing is essentially a beam which transmits and gathers all the No. Part Name Material Thickness applied loads to the fuselage. Spar, ribs, stringers and skin are the major essential part of the wing. The primary function of 1 Upper skin Al 1.2 wing is to generate a lift. Wing requires longitudinal member to withstand the bending moments which are greatest during 2 Spar web Al 3 flight and landing of aircrafts. Ribs are structural members which maintain the aerodynamic shape of the wing. In this 3 Spar top flanges Al 2 paper we study a wing box, this wing box is subjected to flight loads. We design a wing box in CATIA V5. Load 4 Spar bottom flanges Al 2 distribution on wing is also carried out in this paper. L stringer 5 Al 3 Keywords (horizontal) Aircraft, wing box, skin, spar, stringer and ribs.
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamental Study on Adaptive Wing Structure for Control of Wing Load Distribution*
    Trans. JSASS Aerospace Tech. Japan Vol. 15, No. APISAT-2016, pp. a83-a88, 2017 Fundamental Study on Adaptive Wing Structure for Control of Wing Load Distribution* 1) 1) 2) 2) By Kanata FUJII, Tomohiro YOKOZEKI, Hitoshi ARIZONO and Masato TAMAYAMA 1) Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan 2) Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Chofu, Japan (Received February 8th, 2017) When damage occurrs on a wing during flight, the stress at the damage site becomes large and the risk of catastrophic failure increases. In order to deal with this problem, Objective Stress Reduction (OSR) is considered by controlling the wing load distribution using an adaptive wing. The purpose of OSR is to reduce all or part of the stress acting on the wing. OSR also helps to adjust the extent of reduction depending on the condition in order to avoid increasing drag as much as possible. Static aeroelastic analysis is conducted for an adaptive wing model that has plain flaps at its leading- and trailing-edges using MSC/NASTRAN. From the results of a parametric study, it is revealed that the bending moment and drag are in a trade-off, and that OSR can adjust the extent of stress reduction depending on the various flight conditions by controlling the set of flap deflection angles. Key Words: Adaptive Wing, Aeroelasticity, Structural Analysis Nomenclature effective ways to reduce the weight of the aircraft is to introduce lightweight materials, such as carbon fiber reinforced δ : flap deflection angle plastics (CFRP). Another remarkable feature is to introduce a δ’ : value calculated from lift distribution high aspect ratio wing to reduce the induced drag.
    [Show full text]
  • Cessna Model 150M Performance- Cessna Specifications Model 150M Performance - Specifications
    PILOT'S OPERATING HANDBOOK ssna 1977 150 Commuter CESSNA MODEL 150M PERFORMANCE- CESSNA SPECIFICATIONS MODEL 150M PERFORMANCE - SPECIFICATIONS SPEED: Maximum at Sea Level 109 KNOTS Cruise, 75% Power at 7000 Ft 106 KNOTS CRUISE: Recommended Lean Mixture with fuel allowance for engine start, taxi, takeoff, climb and 45 minutes reserve at 45% power. 75% Power at 7000 Ft Range 340 NM 22.5 Gallons Usable Fuel Time 3.3 HRS 75% Power at 7000 Ft Range 580 NM 35 Gallons Usable Fuel Time 5. 5 HRS Maximum Range at 10,000 Ft Range 420 NM 22. 5 Gallons Usable Fuel Time 4.9 HRS Maximum Range at 10,000 Ft Range 735 NM 35 Gallons Usable Fuel Time 8. 5 HRS RATE OF CLIMB AT SEA LEVEL 670 FPM SERVICE CEILING 14, 000 FT TAKEOFF PERFORMANCE: Ground Roll 735 FT Total Distance Over 50-Ft Obstacle 1385 FT LANDING PERFORMANCE: Ground Roll 445 FT Total Distance Over 50-Ft Obstacle 107 5 FT STALL SPEED (CAS): Flaps Up, Power Off 48 KNOTS Flaps Down, Power Off 42 KNOTS MAXIMUM WEIGHT 1600 LBS STANDARD EMPTY WEIGHT: Commuter 1111 LBS Commuter II 1129 LBS MAXIMUM USEFUL LOAD: Commuter 489 LBS Commuter II 471 LBS BAGGAGE ALLOWANCE 120 LBS WING LOADING: Pounds/Sq Ft 10.0 POWER LOADING: Pounds/HP 16.0 FUEL CAPACITY: Total Standard Tanks 26 GAL. Long; Range Tanks 38 GAL. OIL CAPACITY 6 QTS ENGINE: Teledyne Continental O-200-A 100 BHP at 2750 RPM PROPELLER: Fixed Pitch, Diameter 69 IN. D1080-13-RPC-6,000-12/77 PILOT'S OPERATING HANDBOOK Cessna 150 COMMUTER 1977 MODEL 150M Serial No.
    [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]
  • CEAS 2015: Book of Abstracts (25-08-2015)
    CEAS 2015: Book of Abstracts (25-08-2015) 5th CEAS Air & Space Conference 7-11 Sept 2015 Delft University of Technology (The Netherlands) Book of Abstracts 1 CEAS 2015: Book of Abstracts (25-08-2015) # Paper title Author Co-author(s) Abstract 1 Methodology for the Validation of Loads in Rational Turning Analysis Chorro Martínez, José Manuel (Airbus Defence and Space) Parra Adan, S., Martínez Pérez, A.D., Gómez Viñas, J.E., Juan Antonio, J.A. (Airbus Group), Tito Carrillo, J. (Sertec) A methodology for the validation of the turning loads is needed when the aircraft has a non- conventional landing gear configuration. This is the case for the A400M aircraft in which the main landing gear (LH and RH) consists of three independent articulated-type struts positioned along the aircraft longitudinal axis. As the legs are positioned along the aircraft in the longitudinal axis, during the turning manoeuvres the lateral loads reacted by the main landing gears are distributed between each of the three legs. The complexity of the landing gear is increased as all the struts have a twin wheel arrangement, fitted to the main fitting by a trailing arm assembly. Aircraft regulation for turning load calculation is not entering in how the tyres mechanics affects the lateral load sharing in a multi-leg landing gear. In fact, the paragraph CS25.495 is sharing the lateral loads between the legs proportional to the vertical load of the leg. For the calculation of this vertical load, it is considered the aircraft in a static condition with the shock absorbers and tyres in their static position.
    [Show full text]