Initial Thesis Report 2009, UNSW@ADFA

1
Design and analysis of a composite forward swept wing
Konstantin V. Jensen
1

Recent operational requirements demand a new type of military transport aircraft that is
capable of shorter take-off distance, better fuel efficiency and better handling qualities at
low speeds. It has been demonstrated that forward swept wings exhibit favourable
aerodynamic qualities in terms of low speed characteristics and drag reductions. These
benefits can thus be used to design a medium range tactical transport aircraft that can fulfil
the operational requirements. It has also been shown that the forward swept wings are prone
to structural divergence, which can limit their applications with transport aircraft.
Nevertheless, using advanced composite materials it is possible to tailor the carbon fibres
orientation in order to eliminate the divergence phenomenon without any weight penalty.
This thesis will aim to examine the benefits of a forward swept wing and to design a wing for
a medium transport aircraft using advanced composite materials. A brief study into the
aerodynamic advantages has been conducted as well as the study into the use of composite
materials to eliminate structural divergence of the forward swept wings. Two conceptual
designs for a transport aircraft forward swept wing have also been presented.
Nomenclature
E = Youngs Modulus [Mpa]

= Poissons ratio
G = Shear Modulus [Mpa]
J = Torsion constant
K = Permeability
g = K/GJ
i = Stress in i direction [Pa]
j = Strain in j direction [Pa]
AR = Aspect Ratio
= Taper Ratio
C/4 = Quarter Chord wing sweep angle [deg]
= Sweep angle [deg]
cr = Critical Sweep angle [deg]
= Angle of attack [deg]
= Variable fibre orientation angle (to be determined through analysis) [deg]
= Fibre orientation angle [deg]
I = Second moment of inertia
VD = Divergence Velocity [m/s]
VD0 = Normalised Divergence Velocity [m/s]
| = Rib angle [deg]
S = Wing area [m]
Croot = Root chord [m]
Ctip = Tip chord [m]
C = Mean aerodynamic chord [m]
Y = Mean aerodynamic chord location from wing centre line [m]
Q()ij = Reduced stiffness coefficient as a function of , in the i-j plane

1
Aeronautical Engineering Thesis, ZACM 4049/ZACM 4050

Initial Thesis Report 2009, UNSW@ADFA

2
I. Introduction

A. Background
The forward swept wing (FSW) concept is not entirely new and has in fact been used by design engineers since
World War II (Johnson et al. 2004). The Luftwaffes Junkers Ju-287V1 was a test bed for a jet-powered bomber that
could escape allied fighters. The initial development began in 1943, where favourable aerodynamic performance
was observed during the wind tunnel tests. Convair XB-53 was another FSW concept designed between 1946 and
1949 as an attack aircraft for the US Air Force (USAF 2009). However, despite its clear aerodynamic advantages the
design never left the drawing board. The design engineers were well aware that divergence associated with FSW
was a serious problem in the structural design. A study conducted by Diedrich et al. (1948) indicated that the
divergence speed is dropped by 90% if the wing is swept from 0 to 28 degrees of forward sweep. As during 1940s
only metallic materials were available for aircraft construction this study discouraged further research and
development of FSW aircraft, as the weight penalty associated with using metal materials to overcome the
divergence of the wing would limit any benefits. Nevertheless, some engineers still saw a potential in the FSW
design as indicated by the successful design and construction of Hamburger Flugzeugbau (HFB) 320 HANSA
executive jet. This small jet-powered aircraft was designed as a VIP transport for business operations and the
German air force (Johnson 1964). This aircraft had relatively small forward wing sweep and as such the wing
divergence phenomenon did not place a lot of limitations on the construction of the wing.
A serious study and development of FSW wings began with the advancement in composite technology in 1970s
(Ford 1985). As such a program initiated by the Defence Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) in 1977
lead to the development of the X-29 FSW Flight Demonstrator by Grumman (Krone 1980). The X-29 was used to
explore the benefits of lower trim drag, lower stall speed, better low speed handling qualities, canard configuration
and other benefits associated with the FSW. The test results were able to confirm the theoretical advantages of the
FSW and had also shown that the use of carbon fibre laminates, with aeroelastic tailoring, was able to eliminate the
divergence of the FSW without any excess weight penalty. A more recent development of the FSW ceoncept is the
Su-47 Berkut designed by Sukhoi OKB in 1997 (Gretchikhine et al. 1997). The SU-47 was build as a possible
production aircraft and used composite honey-comb structure in its wings to eliminate the divergence phenomenon.
A variety of other FSW concepts and aircrafts can be found in appendix E.
In recent years the advancement of composite materials took off with rapid speed. Various aircraft companies
began to use advanced composite materials due to its light weight. The Boeing 787, Dreamliner, used composite
materials in its wing skin and fuselage due to their low cost and superior performance (Marsh 2004). Carbon Fibre
Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) was used for 40% of the wing-box construction. The fuselage of the 787 utilised the
toughened carbon fibre/epoxy laminate and sandwich material in primary construction. The Airbus A-380 had also
employed the use of composite materials and utilised Glass reinforced Aluminium (GLARE) to create the central
wing box. However, despite the advancement of composite materials and the aerodynamic advantages of the FSW
here has been little research into the design of a FSW transport aircraft.
The advantages of forward swept wings have been very widely explored for a fighter type aircraft, as was shown
by the design of X-29 and the SU-47 jet fighters. The forward swept wing allows these fighters to have higher
manoeuvrability with a smaller stall speed, provides spin proof characteristics and reduced drag at transonic speeds.
As majority of the dog fights occur at subsonic speeds, the FSW characteristics make a near perfect dog fighter.
However, within the current operational tempo a modern air superiority fighter should be capable of destroying an
enemy opponent without having to engage in a dog fight as well as be able to destroy multiple ground targets. As
such, the benefits of a FSW cannot be applied to a modern day jet fighter due to the strong disadvantages of a FSW
at supersonic speeds (Uhuad et al. 1983). As such, it is understandable why the research program for the X-29 was
stopped in the early 1990s.
Nevertheless, the benefits of the FSW at transonic and subsonic speeds can be utilised for a tactical transport
aircraft. The smaller stall speed, increased lift curve and reduced drag make the FSW a perfect design for a medium
range transport aircraft. The smaller stall speed would enable the aircraft to land and take-off at shorter distances,
while the increased lift curve could provide more lift and increase the aircraft payload. The reduced drag could aid
in reducing the fuel costs as well as minimizing required power.

B. Scope
The scope of this thesis report will be limited to the design of a FSW for a medium range transport aircraft. The
report will examine a range of benefits of the FSW and ways to eliminate structural divergence of the FSW, using a
variety of composite materials. The sizing and design of the wing will be based on in-production aft swept wing

Initial Thesis Report 2009, UNSW@ADFA

3
(ASW) transport aircraft and will use the data collected by previous research. The main emphasis of this thesis
report will be placed on the use of composite materials to eliminate divergence for a selected wing design.

C. Aim
This thesis aims to investigate the benefits of the FSW over an equivalent ASW and to design a FSW that could
be used on a medium range transport aircraft. This thesis will also aim to investigate the use of composite materials
for the FSW to eliminate structural divergence without any weight penalty.
II. Advantages of Forward Swept Wings
A. Introduction
In a detailed report Krone (1980) had indicated a variety of benefits that were noticed with the use of a FSW
compared to an equivalent ASW. These benefits included; lower trim drag, lower stall speeds, better low speed
handling, lower wave drag and higher usable lift coefficient. During a wind tunnel study of a FSW these advantages
were confirmed, as shown in a study conducted by Uhuad et al. (1982) This study has also shown that FSW can
reduce the gross take-off weight, extend the angle of attack for lateral controllability and retain aileron effectiveness
at high angles of attack. These benefits can be exploited to their maximum advantage in providing an aircraft with
greater manoeuvrability, better fuel efficiency and lower required power. Furthermore it has also been shown that
the FSW can perform better over a range of speeds compared to an equivalent ASW (Ford 1985).
A lot of advantages that are described are based on measurements and assumptions for a fighter configuration
aircraft and as such some arent applicable for a transport aircraft with a thicker airfoil and a higher aspect ratio.
Nevertheless most advantages can still be used for tactical transport aircraft. Improved leading edge sweep/shock
sweep relationship, use of canard trip surface in conjunction with a FSW and improved lower speed characteristics
are all applicable to a transport aircraft (Smith et al. 1983). The benefits associated with the FSW are mainly related
to two main phenomenon exhibited by the FSW, the reduction of drag and improved control of the wing at slow
speeds and at high angles of attack.

B. Reduced Drag
In order to reduce drag over a wing designers have
been utilizing wing sweep to reduce and delay the
compressibility effects. It is thus desired to force the
shock on the upper surface of the wing to be as weak
as possible and to occur close to the trailing edge. A
study conducted by Whitford (et al. 1987) indicates
that the shock is reduced and is more swept for a FSW
compared to an ASW that has the same wing area,
leading edge sweep angle and taper ratio. This effect
can be more beneficial as a more highly swept and
weaker shock allows a reduction in wave drag, as
shown in Fig. 1. The increase of the shock sweep angle can be beneficial for a transport aircraft as it can be used to
achieve a higher drag divergence Mach number, increase wing thickness to chord ratio or reduce the leading edge
sweep. As such this can allow reduced fuel consumption for a transport aircraft and a subsequent reduced
operational cost.
If the FSW maintains the same shock sweep angle as an equivalent ASW it is possible for a FSW to have a
smaller leading edge sweep angle. For example, a FSW with an aspect ratio of 10.5 and a taper ratio of 0.4 has a
leading edge sweep reduction of 12% for a constant shock sweep, when compared to an equivalent ASW (Smith et
al. 1983). Drag component produced by shock-induced flow separation is a function of the leading edge sweep and
as such lowering the leading edge sweep would reduce the shock induced flow separation and thus reduce the
induced drag (Whitford 1987). This would also allow the FSW to have a higher lift curve slope which would allow
for higher lift during take-off and landing and allow the transport aircraft to operate on poorly prepared and short
airfields. The reduction in leading edge sweep can also improve the manoeuvrability of the aircraft, allowing for a
smaller sustained turn rate or allow a smaller wing to be used (Whitford 1987). These benefits would allow for
greater control and would allow the transport aircraft to land in difficult conditions and operate in hard to reach
areas.
Figure 1. Shock Location of a FSW compared to an
ASW (Whitford 1987)

Initial Thesis Report 2009, UNSW@ADFA

4
A drag over a wing is composed of minimum drag and the drag
associated with the creation of lift. Keeping that in mind, the drag due
to lift can then be broken down into profile drag and induced drag.
During Grummans Highly Manoeuvrable Aircraft Technology
(HiMAT) study it has been shown that for a FSW supercritical airfoil
a reduction in profile drag proportional to the difference in leading
edge sweep between the FSW and the ASW can be achieved (Uhuad
et al. 1982).
Under the conditions of equal lift and if the wing area, aspect
ratio, taper ratio as well as the shock sweep are maintained for a FSW
with a comparable ASW, the wing aerodynamic centre (centre of
pressure) will be closer to the wing root. This in turn will create a
smaller pivot (root bending) bending moment about the wing pivot
point for FSW, as shown in Fig. 2 (Uhuad et al. 1982). Using this to
our advantage, it is possible to develop a FSW with a higher aspect
ratio that has the aerodynamic centre at the same distance away from
the pivot point as an equivalent ASW. As such, the increase in the
aspect ratio can reduce the induced drag over the FSW. Using the
same principle it is thus possible to increase the wing area or create a
longer structural span for a FSW compared to an equivalent ASW (Withford 1987). This would allow the aircraft to
save fuel, carry more payload, or reduce the required engine power.

C. Improved Control
It is known that for a conventional aft swept wing the flow starts from the root and ends up at the tip of the wing,
creating a thicker boundary layer at the tip region, as indicated in Fig. 3. Together with the higher tip loads this can
cause a tip stall at high angles of attack and reduce the effectiveness and control of ailerons (Bertin 2002). The flow
for a FSW is completely opposite; it starts at the tip and follows the span ending at the root of the wing. As such, the
root of the wing will tend to stall before the tip, as indicated by the wind tunnel tests (More et al. 1983). This means
that the flow separation begins at the roots leaving the flow at the tips of the wings to remain attached, allowing
better control of the ailerons at higher angles of attack. This theory was proven by the X-29, where roll control
moments were maintained at very high angles of attack, and as such the lateral control was also maintained at high
angles of attack (Bertin 2002). This can be very benefit a transport aircraft during high angles of attack, takeoff or
banking. Due to better aileron control at higher angles of attack the aircraft will have greater manoeuvrability should
the aircraft need to bank in an emergency or descent at steep angles. For example if, the aircraft was hit by a Surface
to Air Missile (SAM) during tactical operations it would be able to effectively bank and return to the runway for an
emergency landing.

III. Structural Divergence

Structural divergence can be described as a
static aeroelastic phenomenon that affects every
elastic wing regardless of the sweep angle (Blasi
et al. 2007). Basically it is the undesirable
twisting of the wing when it is subject to bending
from the application of aerodynamic forces
during flight conditions (Whitford 1987). For a
conventional ASW, the wing twists in a manner
so that the tips twist downwards. The opposite
occurs for a FSW, where during bending the wing
twists in a manner where the angle of attack of
the wing tips is increased. This effect increases
the tip loading and further increases the tip angle
of attack until maximum structural threshold of
the wing is reached (Whitford 1987). As we can
Figure 3. Geometric layout and divergence of FSW and
ASW (Blasi et al. 2007)
Figure 2. FSW reduces pivot moment at
pivot point for same wing geometry
(Uhuad et al. 1982).

Initial Thesis Report 2009, UNSW@ADFA

5
see in Fig. 3, the ASW receives a certain amount of displacement along the points C and D that reduces the airfoil
incidence angle. For an FSW a difference reaction occurs that causes the displacement along line connecting points
C and D, causing an increase in the wings incidence angle and destabilising the torsion equilibrium.
Divergence also defines a critical speed known as the divergence speed, which defines the maximum airspeed of
the wing without infliction structural divergence (Blasi et al. 2007). Due to the different behaviour of the wings,
much higher divergence speed is possible for an ASW compared to a FSW.
In order to combat the structural divergence the FSW would have to be significantly stiffened, which would
inflict a weight penalty if conventional metallic structures are used for wing skin surfaces. In fact it has been shown
that the metal FSW wings are limited to only 15of forward sweep before divergence effects become critical
(Whitford 1987). However, this problem can be overcome if laminates composites are used instead of metals for
wing skins (Weisshaar 1979). As such it is possible to overcome the structural divergence effects by aeroelastic
tailoring, a process involving aligning lamina fibres at certain angles, that are calculated by the design requirement
of the wing.

IV. Composite Materials
A. Introduction
Composite materials are widely known for their properties of good strength-to-weight ratio and stiffness-to-
weight ratio, making them ideal for use in primary aircraft structures (Reddy et al. 1992). Several design engineers
took advantage of these properties and have used composite materials in the design of various aircrafts. For example
the F/A-18 E/F is composed of 19% composite materials (Baker et al. 2002). Composite materials are generally
composed of layers of unidirectional or bi-directional orientated
fibres, in a laminated or plywood type of construction. In order
to obtain a specific mechanical property, the fibres are arranged
at certain angles relative to the reference axis and the primary
loading direction, as shown in Fig. 4. The laminate layers can
then be stacked together to make up a material specimen of a
desired shape, size and mechanical property. A variety of
composite materials can be used including graphite-epoxy,
GLARE or glass/carbon. A variety of techniques can also be
used to manufacture composites, such as filament winding,
compression moulding or automated lay-up.
As a general rule the fibres are arranged from 0 to 90
following a sequence and symmetry rules to avoid any
distortion of the materials after production. Most basic
composite materials are quasi-isotropic, meaning that the ply
orientation is made up of equal number of plies set at 0, 45
and 90to the reference axis. In quasi-isotropic material the in-
plane mechanical properties dont vary with loading direction, and as such this type of configuration is mostly used
where the in-plane loading is bi-directional (Baker et al. 2004). An orthotropic laminate, on other hand, is where the
laminate is strongest and stiffest in direction with the highest concentration of 0 fibres, but has reduced strength and
stiffness in the other fibre directions.
Using the basic stress-strain law for a single ply in a laminate axes, it is possible to calculate the mechanical
properties (such as E and G) of the laminate. For this theory the x-axis is taken as the reference axis, with the y-axis
being perpendicular and the orientation of the fibres at an angle , being positive in the counter-clockwise direction,
as shown in Fig 5. Using this orientation all calculations are made using the x-y or laminate axes (Baker et al.
2004). The classical laminate theory defines the response of a laminate by relating the stresses and strains to the
physical properties of a composite. The relationship between the stresses and the strains can be defined by Eq. (1)
(Baker et al. 2004).

(
(
(

(
(
(

=
(
(
(

xy
y
x
ss ys xs
ys yy xy
xs xy xx
xy
y
x
Q Q Q
Q Q Q
Q Q Q

c
c
u u u
u u u
u u u
t
o
o
) ( ) ( ) (
) ( ) ( ) (
) ( ) ( ) (
(1)
Figure 4. Fibre orientation (Baker et al. 2004)

Initial Thesis Report 2009, UNSW@ADFA

6

Equation 1 can be used to determine the stresses and strains in a laminate by altering the fibre orientation angle ,
the number of plies or other physical properties related to the reduced stiffness coefficient, ) (u
ij
Q . This can be
very beneficial for the design of a composite FSW, as it would be possible to change the structural properties of the
laminate to suit the loading requirements of the wing.

B. Aeroelastic Tailoring
Aeroelastic tailoring is a concept first proposed by Waddoups et al. (1972) and involves using the directional
stiffness properties of fibrous composites to eliminate structural divergence (Isogai 1991). This concept uses the
basic concept of changing fibres orientation and layer layout allowing an improved structural performance without
any excess weight penalty. This theory was confirmed by Krone (1980) in his study using Tailoring and Structural
Optimisation Program and proved successful with the design of a FSW flight demonstrator, X-29 (Moore et al.
1983).
As majority of the study conducted regarding aeroelastic tailoring was with respect to wings designed for fighter
aircraft, which were of short aspect ratio, it was unknown if the same principles
could be applied to transport wings of a high aspect ratio. In order to
investigate this issue, Isogai (1992) conducted a study based on a typical
transport wing with; AR= 9.5, = 0.324 and C/4=15, at M=0.75 and = 2. In
this wing design the laminate construction of the upper and lower surfaces
were assumed to be at; : 66%, 45: 17% and -45: 17%. The angle of the
predominant layer was to be determined by analysis and parametric study to
meet the specific design requirements. It should also be notes that Isogai
(1992) used Graphite-Epoxy T300/5208 as the composite material in his study.
His study confirmed that = -10 degrees was the best angle for this type of
FSW construction. In order to see the effects of aeroelastic tailoring on a wing,
a scaled aeroelaticaly tailored wing was compared to a non-tailored wing in a
wind tunnel under the same conditions as described before. This wind tunnel
test was able to confirm that it is possible to reduce structural divergence by 60-80% if aeroelastic tailoring is
employed for this type of high aspect ratio wing.
In a similar study Weisshaar (1979) also indicated that it is possible to eliminate wing divergence for highly
forward swept wings, with proper tailoring of composite materials. Using a typical relationship between stress and
strain for a lamina, as shown in Eq. (1), a fibre direction angle was developed with respect to the wing sweep angle,
as shown in Fig. 5. Weisshaar (1979) introduces a concept of a critical sweep angle, which defines the maximum
sweep of an angle before divergence takes place. For an un-tapered FSW, the critical angle is defined as:

g l Y I
GJ EI l Y g
cr
) / ( 56 . 2
) / )( / ( 56 . 2
tan
+
+
= A (2)

In this instance, it was shown that the parameter g is
zero for a conventional metallic wing and as such a
metallic wing should be swept at > 0 to avoid
divergence. However, for a composite wing, the parameter
g is less than zero and as such it is possible to produce a
FSW with no divergence at any flight speed. A study was
also conducted to determine how the critical sweep angle
was related to the orientation of the fibres. In a first case,
100% of fibres were fixed at an angle while in the
second case 10% of the fibres were fixed at 0, 25% at
45 (symmetrical), and 65% at variable angle . Using
Eq. (2), it was shown that if fibres are at = 102 it is
possible to eliminate any divergence up to critical angle of
49. For a tapered wing, a similar relationship occurred,
and it was shown that taper ratio has almost no effect on
the critical angle of the wing. As is shown in Fig. 6, the divergence speed VD, normalised with respect to VD0, is
Figure 5. Fibre Orientation
angle (Weisshaar 1979)
Figure 6. Critical wing sweep angle with respect to fibre
orientation (Weisshaar 1979)
(Weisshaar, 1979)

Initial Thesis Report 2009, UNSW@ADFA

7
dependant of the fibre orientation. The study has shown that an optimal orientation for FSW wing divergence
performance can occur if the fibres are aligned at angles of 10 - 15 forward of the reference axis. This result is
very similar to that of Isogai (1992), and can be very beneficial for the development of transport FSW.
Using the classical laminate theory Blasi et al. (2007), carried out a Finite Element Parametric study of FSW
using a Glass/Carbon composite structure. This study assumed a FSW designed for an uninhabited aircraft vehicle
(UAV), operating under M=0.323 and at = 2. This study indicated that for this type of wing, the most suitable
fibre orientation angle proves to be set at = 70.
These three distinct cases were able to show that aeroelastic tailoring is possible to achieve for high aspect ratio
wings and as such can be applied to the design of a FSW for a tactical transport aircraft.
The selection of fibres for composite construction is very important as they play an important role in determining
the physical and structural properties of the composite materials. A more detailed study will be conducted later on
that will assist in determining the best fibre for the selected FSW design.

C. Anisogrid Lattice
The materials used in the construction of the outer wing
structure must also be considered as they carry the majority
of the structural load and thus have a significant contribution
to wings weight. Majority of the wings use black
aluminium in construction of the outer wing structure,
however, a new technique using anisogrid lattice has been
proposed by Mountain (2007).
An anisogrid lattice is a method by which the outer wing
structure can be reinforced using a geometrical pattern of
ribs. Anisogrid lattice is similar to isogrid lattice, however, it
is anisotropic with regard to its in-plane properties rather
than isotropic (Vasiliev et al. 2001). The most common
isogrid lattice structures are made in the form of thick-
walled cylinders or conical shells and consist of a system of
| helical ribs and circumferential ribs. The original use for composite lattice structure was found in cylindrical
structures, such as those used for the fuselage of an aircraft.
Analysis has shown that, if properly designed, the latticed structure is capable of self-stabilisation, where helical
ribs can transform compressions into circumferential tension. Mountain (2007) demonstrated that it is possible to
use anisogrid lattice structure to construct upper wing panels, where he redesign an A-6 wing panel using anisogrid
lattice structure.
The selection of the lattice pattern was based on orthogrid and anglegrid structures in order to combine the high
axial strength of orthogrid and high shear strength of anglegrid. With

60 = | the final structure is shown in Fig. 7.

A quasi-isotropic laminate composite, composed of carbon-fibre/epoxy was used as the outer wing skin material.
The final design of the wing panel proved a 23% weight saving compared to black aluminium, under the same load
conditions. Such weight savings would be very beneficial for a medium range transport aircraft.
Although the anisogrid lattice structure has been shown to be effective for a wing panel design, it is unknown if
the same principle can be applied to a forward swept wing. Perhaps combining this method with aeroelatic tailoring
method using composite materials can prove to be effective for FSW design. Nevertheless, the structure of a FSW
will need to be specifically tailored to withstand any structural divergence and as such further study will be
conducted into the anisogrid lattice structures.

V. Conceptual Design
A. Aircraft Mission Selection
Understating the mission of the aircraft is of vital importance as it will guide the structural and geometric
parameters for the FSW design. For this thesis the mission selection was based on the specifications of a typical
medium military transport aircraft. In order to understand these technical specifications a list of several military
transport aircraft was compiled with relevant specifications. The list in appendix F shows various current transport
military aircraft arranged according to their size and payload.
Two conceptual wing designs will be presented in this model, the first being based on the C-130H aircraft. The
second aircraft base model will have the following specifications; max payload; 25,000 kg, cruise altitude; 12,000m,
Figure 7. Orientation of anisogrid panel on an
upper wing (Mountain 2007)

Initial Thesis Report 2009, UNSW@ADFA

8
cruise speed; M0.75. These base specifications will assist in determining the geometrical specifications of the FSW
as well as the atmospheric conditions in which the FSW will operate.

B. Fuselage and wing position
The pressure distribution analysis of the FSW will take into account the
wing position relative to the fuselage in order to avoid any excessive
fuselage upwash. This problem was encountered by Uhuah (et al. 1983),
where the test data was miscalculated as the FSW was operating in regions
of excessive fuselage up-wash. A fuselage diameter of 4.5m was selected
and was based on the size of a transport aircraft with the same payload
characteristics.
A high wing position was chosen as this improves the longitudinal static
stability of the aircraft, allows for better access in loading and unloading of
cargo and provides sufficient ground clearance for engines placement. A
high wing position also allows for better short take-off and landing
capabilities as it allows room for large wing flaps required to improve the
lift coefficient (Raymer 2006). It has also been shown that a high wing
position for a FSW improves chord wise pressure and span wise load
distribution. Figure 8 shows that by making the crest point of the centreline
airfoil coincide with the top of the fuselage the shock exhibits a rearward
movement and the span load increased near the fuselage (Uhuad et al.
1983). A high wing position also allows for easy construction and assembly
of the wing, as the main wing box and spar can pass through the top of the aircraft, limiting the stress that the
fuselages will be required to take.

C. Wing geometry selection
The geometrical selection is generally governed by the aerodynamic and structural requirements. The
aerodynamic requirements refer to the geometry of the wing that is necessary to provide lift, reduce drag and overall
efficiency of the wing. The structural requirements on other hand take into account the orientation of fibres and the
structural limit of the wing that must be maintained to avoid any divergence.
A very simple solution for a FSW desing is to make a mirror image of an already made aft swept wing of a
transport aircraft. This is a good starting point; however, some adjustments must be made to the wing design as
shown by Smith et al. (1983). In an analysis using a developed code it was shown that a simple mirror image of a
wing with C/4 =30.5 produced unacceptable strong upper shocks over the inboard wing section. However, this
problem was easily overcome by adding a large training edge extension at the root in order to obtain a platform
change which would thin the non-dimensional thickness-to-chord ratio. As such the trailing edge extensions will be
incorporated into the FSW design. It is important to note that the two conceptual designs were selected based on
data from other aircrafts and from previous research, and as such it is very likely that some parameters, such as the
sweep angle will change throughout the design process.
The first geometrical design concept is based on the C-130H aircraft, where wing area (S), taper ratio () and
aspect ratio (AR) were maintained. As explained earlier, cr governs the sweep of the FSW, and should not be
exceeded if structural divergence is to be prevented. For a wing with AR= 6, Weisshaar et al. (1979), defines
cr=49. As the C-130H has no sweep, it was decided that; C/4 =-20 will be used, where LE was calculated using
Eq. (3) (Raymer 2002), with the working out shown in appendix G.

| | ) 1 ( / ) 1 ( tan tan
4 /
+ + A = A AR
C LE
(3)

The aspect ratio (AR = 10.04) was maintained, as well as the wing area (S =161.12 m) and the wing span (b=
40.41m). As the taper ratio has little effect on the critical sweep angle (Weisshaar et al. 1979), the taper ratio of the
C-130H wing was changed to =0.3. Root chord and tip chord were calculated using Eqs. (4) and (5), with full
working shown in appendix G.

| | ) 1 (
2
+
=
b
S
C
root
(4)
Figure 8. Effect of wing height on
shock location (Uhuad et al. 1983).

Initial Thesis Report 2009, UNSW@ADFA

9

root tip
C C = (5)

The centre of pressure of the C-130H wing was also obtained and using this it was possible to determine the
aerodynamic centre of the aircraft. In a similar fashion the centre of pressure was also obtained for the FSW wing
design, and in order to keep the same aerodynamic centre of the plane, the FSW was moved back, as calculated in
appendix G. A sketch of the first conceptual design can be seen in appendix H.
The second conceptual design, shown in appendix H, was selected to suit an aircraft similar to A-400M, with
specifications described in the aircraft mission selection. The following specifications were chosen for the aircraft;
b=40, S=200m, = 0.31, C/4 =-25. A taper ratio of 0.31 was chosen to create a smaller wing section at the tip,
which would create less lift and assist with preventing any divergence. As described above, it is very likely that this
will changed during further design and development of the wing, especially once the pressure distribution has been
determined. For this wing it was calculated that LE=-21.81. It was also calculated that; Croot = 7.63m, Ctip = 2.37m,
C = 5.45m and Y =8.24m. Please refer to appendix G for full working solution.

D. Airfoil Selection
The airfoil selection was made based on the airfoils of medium transport aircraft. A typical transport aircraft has
a relatively greater thickness-to-chord (t/c) ratio than a fighter aircraft. The airfoil section is also thicker at the root
by about 20-60% due to fuselage effects (Raymer 2002). For the conceptual design of the FSW a base 4 digit NACA
airfoil was selected. In a NACA four digit airfoil the first digit refers to the percent camber, the second digit defines
the location of the maximum chamber, in tenth percent, while the last two digits define thickness in percent of
chord. For this conceptual wing design the t/c ratios were chosen to be 13% and 10% for the root and tip
respectively, the percent chamber will be 6% and the location of maximum chamber will be 40%. As such the root
airfoil is NACA 6413 while the tip airfoil is NACA 6410. The profile of these airfoils was created using
DesignFOIL and will assist in developing the design of the wing in CATIA.

E. Control surfaces and high lift devices
The control surfaces on the main wing control the roll of the aircraft and are known as ailerons. Ailerons are
located on the outboard of the wing flaps and usually extended from 50 to 90% of the wingspan, being typically
about 15-25% of the wing chord (Raymer 2002).
High lifting devices can take form of trailing and leading edge flap. Throughout the FSW design only trailing
edge flaps will be considered as leading flaps are mainly used for fighter aircraft. Flaps are used to increase the wing
area and improve the lift coefficient during take-off and landing. Trailing edge flaps are positioned closest to the
fuselage and their size depends on the lift requirements of the wing. This will be further investigates during detailed
design of the FSW. Rough estimation of aileron and flaps position can be found in appendix H.

VI. Summary
This initial thesis report gave an introduction to the composite FSW design for a medium military transport aircraft.
The advantages of the FSW design, with specific applications for a transport aircraft were discussed as well as the
adverse effect of structural divergence. A variety of methods using composite materials to combat structural
divergence were also explained, as well as the possible use of anisogrid lattice structures to create the FSW. Two
conceptual designs based on current transport aircraft were also presented in this initial thesis report.
The two conceptual sketches will be modelled in CATIA, which would allow them to be used in Fluent in order
to determine the pressure distribution of the designs. This will assist in finding the forces that are applied to the
wing during all aspects of flight, which will be carried out using CATIA. During this process, the design of the
wings is likely to change and based on best results a final design will be selected. This will then allow us to carry out
a detailed design of the selected wing, taking into account control surfaces, high lifting devices, a more detailed
study of airfoil selection and wing twist distribution. In order to make sure that the pressure distributions across the
FSW designs are accurate, a model of C-130H wing will be used in Fluent. The obtained data will be compared with
the original data obtained from 37SQN, Royal Australian Air Force. This will help in determining the accuracy of
the Fluent program in calculating the pressure distribution over a wing and as such will assist in the error analysis.
Once the wing loadings and external forces acting on the wings have been determined, it will be possible to
select a composite material for construction of the wing. Detailed investigation into the use of composite materials

Initial Thesis Report 2009, UNSW@ADFA

10
to combat the structural divergence for the selected FSW will also be conducted. Furthermore, methods of assembly
and attachment of the wing to the fuselage will also be discussed.
References
Baker, A.A., Dutton, S. & Kelly, D.W. 2004, Composite materials for aircraft structures, Second Edition, American Institute Of
Aeronautics and Astronautics Education Series, Virginia, USA, pp, 4-5, 56, 61-64, 174-177.
Bertin, J. 2002, Aerodynamics for Engineers, Fourth Edition, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA, pp375-377.
Blasi, L., Caputo, F., D'Amore, A., Golia, C., Grassia, L., Iuspa, L., Scaramuzzino, F. & Soprano, A. 2007, "The Twist-Bending
Behavior of Forward Swept Wings: A Case Study of a Glass/Carbon Hybrid Composite Structure", Macromolecular
Symposia WILEY-VCH Verlag Weinheim.
Diederich, F.W. & Budiansky, B. Aug 1948, "Divergence of Swept Wings", NACA TN 1680.
Donald, D. & Lake, J. 2000, The Encyclopedia of World Military Aircraft, Grange Books, London, UK, pp 28-29, 37-39, 211,
226-135.
Ford, T. 1985, "New Shape in the Sky", Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, vol. 57, pp. 2-5.
Gretchikhine, A, Suchoi S-37 Berkut, Russian Aviation Page, http://aeroweb.lucia.it/rap/RAFAQ/six5th_5.html
[cited 24 March 2009]
Isogai, K. 1992, "Transonic flutter/divergence characteristics of aeroelastically tailored and non-tailored high-aspect-ratio
forward-swept wings", Journal of Fluids and Structures, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 525-537.
Johnson, E.R. (ed) 2004, The Luftwaffe's first jet-propelled medium bomber test-bed featured forward-swept wings, Aviation
History, pp. 18-19
Krone Jr, N. 1980, "Forward swept wing flight demonstrator", American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Aircraft
System and Technology Meeting, Anaheim, CA.
Marsh, G. 2004, "Composites lift off in primary aerostructures", Reinforced Plastics, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 22-27.
Moore, M. & Frei, D. 1983, "X-29 forward swept wing aerodynamic overview", American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics, Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Danvers, MA.
Mountain, J. 2007, FE based design of A-6 inner upper wing panels using Anisogrid Lattice concept, Cranfield University,
Cranfield.
National Museum of the US Air Force, United States Air Force (USAF) CONVAIR XB-53 Fact Sheet,
http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=2665 [cited 3 April 2009]
Raymer, D.P. 2006, Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, Fourth Edition, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics Education Series, Virginia, USA, pp 37-46, 51-62, 64-68, 476, 484.
Reddy, J.N. & Murty Krishna, A.V. 1992, Composite Structures: Testing, Analysis and Design, Narosa Publishing House, New
Delhi, India.
Smith, P.R. & Srokowski, A.J. 1983, "High aspect ratio forward sweep for transport aircraft", American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Danvers, MA.
Smock, D. (ed) 2009, New Fastener Problems Plague Boeing 737s, Design News pp. 35-37.
Uhuad, G.C., Weeks, T.M. & Large, R. 1983, "Wind tunnel investigation of the transonic aerodynamic characteristics of forward
swept wings.", J.AIRCRAFT., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 195-202.
Vasiliev, V., Barynin, V. & Rasin, A. 2001, "Anisogrid lattice structuressurvey of development and application", Composite
structures, vol. 54, no. 2-3, pp. 361-370.
Waddoups, M. E., Smithm C. B. & McMickle, R. W. 1972 "Composite wing of transonic improvement, composite wing
aeroelastic response study", Airforce Flight Dynamics Laboratory, Vol. 1.
Weisshaar, T.A. 1980, "Divergence of forward swept composite wings", Journal of Aircraft, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 442-448.
Whitford, R. 1987, "Design for air combat" Jane's Information Group, London, UK, pp. 72-75.
Wocke, H. 1964, "Sweptforward Wings for the HFB 320 Hansa", Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, vol. 36, pp.
248-250.
Appendices

A. Client brief
B. Thesis task list
C. Milestone chart
D. Gantt chart
E. Forward Swept Wing aircraft
F. Transport aircraft
G. Wing geometry calculations
H. Concept sketches