AS5210-Aerodynamic Design

Report-2

Second Weight Estimate

and
Aircraft Wing Design

By Group-6
AE10B027-M.S Sooraj
AE10B028-S.Suhas
AE10B029-Syam Sundar V
AE10B030-Ch. Umesh Maharshi
AE10B031-J.Vegnesh

Date of Submission: 11th February ,2013

Second Weight Estimate

In the previous weight estimate, fuel weight ratio is estimated using

historical data obtained from similar aircrafts. In this section the
fuel weight ratio is estimated based on mission prole using fuel
weight fractions and the empirical relations from Aircraft Design-A
Conceptual Approach by Raymer and Airplane design by Dr Jan
Roskam.

1.1 Fuel Fraction Weight

For analysis, the mission prole in gure 4.1 (in previous report) is
segmented into various phases. These phases are (1) Engine start,
warm up; (2) Taxi; (3) Take-o; (4) Climb; (5) Cruise; (6) Loiter;
(7) Reserved cruise and (8) Descent and Land.  Wi  denotes weight
of the aircraft at the end of phase  i e.g.  W1  denotes weight of
aircraft at the end of Engine start and warm up phase.

1.1.1

Phase 1: Engine start, warm up

The weight ratios at the end of phases Engine start, warm up, Taxi,
Take-o and Climb are chosen by following the standards given in
Airplane design by Dr Jan Roskam.

W1
= 0.999
W0

(1.1)

1.1.2

1.1.3

1.1.4

Phase 2: Taxi
W2
= 0.995
W1

(1.2)

W3
= 0.995
W2

(1.3)

Phase 3: Take o
Phase 4: Climb

The weight ratio at the end of this phase is chosen by following

the standards given in Aircraft Design-A Conceptual Approach by
Raymer.

W4
= 0.985
W3
1.1.5

(1.4)

Phase 5: Cruise

For a cruising aircraft, the fuel weight fraction can be determined

quite well using the Breguet range equation. For a jet the range can
be calculated by,

V L
W5
R = ( )( ) ln(
)
C D
W4

(1.5)

RC
W5
L
= eV(D)
W4

(1.6)

which gives,

Where R is the required design range which is 12000km for the

chosen mission, C is the specic fuel consumption (SFC) of the
aircraft,V is the velocity,L and D are the lift and drag forces acting
on the aircraft repectively.. The typical C value for business jet is
found to be 0.5 per hour from Airplane Design by Dr Jan Roskam.
Typical cruise speed of a business jet is 0.85 to 0.88 Mach number,
so cruise speed of Phoenix jet is taken to be 0.87 Mach Number
(approx. 256.38 m/s or 800 km/hr over 12200 metres altitude).
Most transport aircraft are recommended to y with the Carson's
speed that is 32% higher than the speed for maximizing range which

is at maximum lift-to-drag ratio (L/D). In a cruising ight with

the Carson's speed, the lift-to-drag ratio is slightly less than the
maximum lift-to-drag ratio; i.e. (From Raymer):

L
L
)cruise = 0.866 ( )max
D
D

From Airplane design by Dr.

Jan Roskam

(1.7)

L
D

= 16

for typical

business jets .

L
(D
)cruise = 13.856
W5
= 0.629.
gives
W4

Therefore
This
1.1.6

for the business jet.

Phase 6: Loiter

The weight ratio at the end of loiter phase is calculated using the
Endurance equation,

E=(

L 1
W6
)( ) ln(
)
D C
W5

(1.8)

which can be rearranged to give,

EC
W6
L
=e D
W5

(1.9)

E, the time taken for loiter is 20 minutes for Phoenix jet and the
L
L
value of C is found to be 0.4 per hour and ( )loiter = ( )max = 16
D
D
W6
(from Raymer) respectively. This gives
= 0.991 .
W5
1.1.7

Phase 7: Reserved cruise (Alternate)

In certain situations, the jet after descending to a particular altitude, may have to go to alternate airport, owing to abrupt changes
in local conditions(fog/gust) or due to issues with clearance for landing in that airport. In those cases it is assumed that the alternate
airport is located within the radius of 150 Km from previously destined airport. Due to the short distance, aircraft cannot cruise in
the normal cruise speed.

Assuming the acceptable time taken for

reaching alternate airport is 15 minutes implies that the required

cruising speed should be 600 Km/hr. Therefore, R = 150 Km, V =
600 Km/hr. Using Breguet range equation we get,

W7
= 0.991
W6

(1.10)

1.1.8

Phase 8: Descent and Landing

The weight ratio at the end of this phase is chosen by following

the standards given in Aircraft Design-A Conceptual Approach by
Raymer.

W8
= 0.995
W7

(1.11)

Having calculated the weight fractions for the various phases, the
cascade of the fractions is shown below,

W8
W8 W7 W6 W5 W4 W3 W2 W1
=
= 0.599
Wo
W7 W6 W5 W4 W3 W2 W1 Wo

(1.12)

Typically a 6% is allowed for reserved and trapped fuel, the fuel

fraction is estimated using equation from Raymer,

Wf
W8
= 1.06(1
) = 0.4249
W0
W0

(1.13)

1.2 Revised Take-o weight

WE
and W0 has been estimated using similar
W0
aircraft data which is given by equation (5.2.3) (given in Report-1)
The relation between

WE
= 1.267 106 W0 + 0.5706
W0
This gives,

W0 =

WCrew + WP ayload
WCrew + WP ayload
=
WE
WF
1.267 106 W0 + 7.817 103
1 W0 W0
(1.14)
TM

An iterative process was executed in MATLAB

guess

W0 = 40, 000kg

tions was found to be:

W0 = 35, 325kg .

W0 value
WF = 15, 009kg and

Substituting this

in equation (5.2.3) and (5.2.4) gave Fuel weight

Empty weight

for an initial

.The nal design take-o weight after itera-

WE = 18, 575kgs.

The weight of the aircraft at the end of each phase is shown in

table 1.1

Table 1.1 : Weights in dierent phases of Mission Prole

W0

35,325 kg

W1

35,289 kg

W2

35,113 kg

W3

34,937 kg

W4

34,413 kg

W5

21,646 kg

W6

21,451 kg

W7

21,258 kg

W8

21,151 kg

Wing Design

2.1 Airfoil Selection

Airfoil selection is a pivotal part of designing an aircraft. It aects
cruise speed, take-o and landing distances, stall speed, handling
qualities and overall aerodynamic eciencies.
Phoenix jet, being a business jet falls under the category of high
speed subsonic airplane. The mach number at cruise for a typical
business jet is around 0.87. The following factors were considered
for selecting the airfoil:

1.

Airfoil Thickness Ratio(t/c): It is the ratio of the maximum

thickness of the airfoil to its cord length The selection of the
airfoil thickness ratio has a direct eect on drag, maximum lift,
stall characteristics and structural weight. The selection of the
thickness ratio for the Phoenix jet is done using the historical
trend of t/c Vs design mach number as shown in the gure
(2.1).
Thickness ratio(t/c) ratio for design mach number 0.87 is pproximately equal to .0.14 as predicted by the historical trend.

2.

Lift-to-Drag ratio(L/D): It is an important design parameter

which is characteristic of the aircraft.For high speed subsonic
airplanes which y just under the speed of sound, the faster air
travelling over the upper surface of the airfoil will reach supersonic speeds causing the shocks to appear on the upper surface.
The speed at which supersonic ow rst appears on the airfoil
is called the  Critical Mach Number . The upper surface shock

Figure 2.1: Thickness Ratio vs Design Mach No.

creates a large increase in the drag along with reduction in lift

and also changes the pitching moment.

The tendency of the

rapid pressure rise across the shock to thicken or separate the

boundary layer is responsible for the increase in drag due to
which the L/D ratio decreases considerably.
In order to minimize the above eect, a  supercritical airfoil
is chosen. In supercritical airfoils, the upper surface shocks is
minimized or ever eliminated by spreading the lift in the chord
wise direction. This increases the critical mach number and lift
to drag (L/D) ratio.

From the above considerations, the data for supercritical airfoils having a thickness ratio (t/c) of 0.14(14 %) was considered.

Among the three NASA SC series airfoils considered,NASA

SC(2)-0714 was chosen because it had the highest CL(max) and
design lift coecient.

Table 2.1: Design Lift Coecients for NASA SC series having 14%
thickness.

Airfoil

Design Lift Coecient

NASA SC(2)-0414

0.4

NASA SC(2)-0614

0.6

NASA SC(2)-0714

0.7

Figure 2.2: Plot of C

L(max)

vs thickness(%)

2.2 Airfoil Characteristics

The characteristics of NASA SC(2)-0714 airfoil are as follows:
Table 2.2: Characteristics of airfoil
Thickness

14.0%*

Camber

1.5%*

Trailing Edge angle

3.5

Lower atness

9.4%

Leading edge radius

2.9%

max cL
max cL angle

1.442

max L/D

27.881

max L/D cL

1.182

15

Stall angle

4.5

Zero Lift angle

-5

Figure 2.3: NASA SC(2)-0714

The cL vs

,cD vs

and Drag Polar(cL vs cD ) for the NASA

SC(2)-0714 airfoil at Re=10,00,000 are shown in the gures 2.5,2.6

and 2.7 respectively.

2.3 Wing Geometry and Characteristics

2.3.1
Aspect Ratio
Aspect ratio is dened as the ratio of the square of wing span to that
of the wing area.From historical data,the aspect ratio for business
jet is found to be 7.5.

Figure 2.4: C vs
L

Figure 2.5: C vs
D

10

Figure 2.6: C vs C (Drag Polar)

L

2.3.2

Taper Ratio

The ratio of the chord length of the airfoil section at the wing tip to
that of the airfoil section at the wing root is dened as taper ratio.
The selection of the taper ratio involves many considerations.

A constant chord rectangular wing is easier and cheaper to

manufacture but is aerodynamically less ecient.

An elliptical wing is the most aerodynamically ecient but not

easy to manufacture.

Taper ratios of order 0.2-0.5 are found to be only slightly less

ecient than elliptical wing congurations.

Moreover, an increased taper leads to reduction in the root

bending moment as the centre of lift moves inboard as taper is
increased.

This decreases the structural weight of the wing considerably.

Therefore we go with a taper ratio() of 0.2

11

Wing Area and Wing Span

2.3.3

Wing span and wing area for similar aircrafts obtained from historical data(Table 2.3).
Table 2.3: Wing span and Wing Area for Similar Aircrafts

Aircraft

Wing Span(m)

Wing Area(m )

Dassault Falcon 7x

26.21

70.7

Gulfstream G500

28.49

105.6

Bombardier Global 5000

28.65

94.94

Gulfstream G650

30.41

119.2

The average value of the wing span is found to be 28.44 m and

2

that of wing area is found to be 97.61 m .

2.3.4

Lift Coecient(CL ) of the wing

The CL of the wing at cruise speed was determined using the following formula:

CL =

Wcruise g
qS

where S(wing area)=97.61 m

Wcruise =34,413

q = 0.5 V 2

(2.1)
and

kg.

The coecient of lift during cruise for the wing is

2.3.5

,g=9.8 m/s

CL = 0.347

Sweep Angle

Sweepback is mainly used to reduce drag from local ow velocities

at or near to supersonic speeds. Sweeping the wing planform (usually backwards) allows thicker wing sections to be used and delays
the onset of critical Mach number. Our Sweep angle (leading edge

LE )

is taken to be 30

from the graph taken from Raymer, (see

gure 2.5)and for a Mach number of 0.8. The quarter chord sweep
angle(C/4 ) is given by the equation.

tan LE = tan C/4 +

A= Aspect Ratio and
C/4 = 26.030

=Taper

12

1
A(1 + )

Ratio.

(2.2)

Figure 2.7: Leading Edge Sweep vs Maximum Mach No.

13

2.3.6

Dihedral Angle

Dihedral is the angle the wing plane makes with a horizontal plane
as viewed from the front. Dihedral wing geometry increases lateral
stability in yaw.
0

For low wings dihedral angle is typically 3 -6 .

0

The dihedral angle is chosen as 6

to provide sucient ground

clearance.
2.3.7

Root and Tip Chord Length

Figure 2.8: Illustration of Root and Tip Chord length

The root chord length is given by the equation:

Croot =

2S
(1 + )b

(2.3)

where S is the wing area, b is the wing span and

is the taper

ratio.
2

Substituting S=97.61 m , b=28.44 m and

=0.2 , the Croot =5.72

m.
The tip chord length is given by the equation :

Ctip = Croot
Hence the value of

Ctip =1.144m

14

(2.4)

Conclusion
The second weight estimate of the Phoenix Jet was determined using
the mission prole and the following results were obtained.
Design Take-O Weight (W0 )=35,325 kg
Fuel Weight (WF )= 15,009 kg
Empty Weight (WE )=21,538 kg
The NASA SC(2)-0714 supercritical airfoil was chosen as the airfoil section for the Phoenix Jet's wings.The geometric and aerdodynamic characteristics for the airfoil and the wing were obtained
using analtyical methods and historical data.

15

References
[1] www.lyx.org (LATEX GUI)
[2] www.airfoiltools.com
[3] Janes All World's Aircraft
[4] Aircraft Design - Dr Roskam
[5] www.planes.ndthebest.com
[6] Aircraft Design -A Conceptual Approach By Raymer
[7] Aircraft Design Projects for Engineering Students-By Jenkinson
& Marchman
[8] Bombardier, Gulfstream, Dassault websites.
[9] www.wikipedia.org

16