Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 59

PHASE

TEAM 11 LHT 1
CHAN YI XIANG
GOH DI SHENG DICKSON
GOH JIANDA
GOH TIAN WEI JOEL
KOR XIAN THONG RONNIE
PEE XIU YI

Presentation Outline
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Summary of Phase 1 Presentation


Aircraft Drag Estimation
Aircraft Component Mass Estimation
Aircraft Mass Table
Mass & CG Balance
Stability & Control
Longitudinal/Lateral/Directional Control Adequacy
Mission Analysis
Performance Estimation
Payload vs. Range Trade off Studies
Compliance Matrix
Proposed Coverage for Final Report
Conclusion

Yi Xiang

Ronnie

Jianda

Principal Dimensions of Lugia


9.4m
2 Deg

6.7m

Front View

34 Deg

35 Deg
36 Deg

6.7m

70m

70m

20m

Side View
Plan View

A Quick Review of
Phase 1 Presentation
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Aircraft Data with Pictures


Tabulated Aircraft Data
Aircraft Specifications
Mission Profile and Applicable Regulations
Cabin Layout & Baggage Compartment
Fuselage Interior and Exterior Geometry
Payload & Weight Estimation
Constraint Analysis
Aircraft Sizing: Wing Area and Engine Thrust
Wing Design
Fuel Volume in Wing vs Mission Fuel
Horizontal Tail and Fin Geometry
Engine Selection
Locations of Engine and Landing Gears
Plan of Action for Phase 2
Conclusions

Aircraft Drag Estimation - Cruise

Note: Wave Drag not modeled

Aircraft Drag Estimation - Critical Phases

Aircraft Component Mass Buildup and


relook at MTOW
Parameter

Weight [kg]

APU
Instrumentation & Navigational
Equipment
Hydraulics and Pneumatics

1428

Electrical Equipment

2653

Electronics

680

Furnishings

20740

Air-Conditioning & Pressurization

3062

Operating Items Less Crew

8165

Total Ancillary Equipment

39154

544
1882

Aircraft Component Mass Buildup and


relook at MTOW
Parameter

Weight [kg]

Flight Crew

176

Flight Attendants

367

Passenger/Baggage

50010

Additional Cargo Consideration

4082

Wing mass

23035

Propulsion weight (Two engine)

16340

Main landing gear weight

9133

Nose gear weight

1312

Tail weight (total)

7759

Fin weight (total)

931

Fuselage weight

26000

Weight of surface controls

3144

Payload:
54635 kg
Components highlighted in blue:
Assumed improvements in structural
materials leading to a 10% reduction
in material weight.

Sum:
87655 kg

Aircraft Mass Table


Mass

Tons

Ancillary
Equipment

39.2

Aircraft Mass Table


Mass

Tons

Ancillary
Equipment

39.2

Fuselage

26.0

Tail

8.69

Aircraft Mass Table


Mass

Tons

Ancillary
Equipment

39.2

Fuselage

26.0

Tail

8.69

Wing

23.0

Aircraft Mass Table


Mass

Tons

Ancillary
Equipment

39.2

Fuselage

26.0

Tail

8.69

Wing

23.0

Engines

16.3

Aircraft Mass Table


Mass

Tons

Ancillary
Equipment

39.2

Fuselage

26.0

Tail

8.69

Wing

23.0

Engines

16.3

Landing Gear

10.4

Aircraft Mass Table


Mass

Tons

Ancillary
Equipment

39.2

Fuselage

26.0

Tail

8.69

Wing

23.0

Engines

16.3

Landing Gear

10.4

OEW

127

Aircraft Mass Table


Mass

Tons

Ancillary
Equipment

39.2

Fuselage

26.0

Tail

8.69

Wing

23.0

Engines

16.3

Landing Gear

10.4

OEW

127

Max. Fuel

125

Aircraft Mass Table


Respective Weights

Mass [Tons]

% of MTOW

Maximum Take-off Weight (MTOW)

308

Operating Empty Weight (OEW)

127

41.2%

Maximum Fuel Weight

125

40.5%

Ancillary Equipment

39.2

12.7%

Wing Mass

23.0

7.4%

Vertical and Horizontal Tail Mass

8.69

2.8%

Fuselage Mass

26.0

8.4%

Landing Gear Mass

10.4

3.3%

Engine Mass

16.3

5.3%

Mass Estimation Methods


Plot of WEmpty Available vs WTO
Thousands

Plot of WEmpty Required vs WTO


1,400

1,350
y = 6.400E-01x - 6.896E+05

Parameter

Op Empty
Weight
[kg]

MTOW
[kg]

Statistical
Correlation :

126493

307494

Component mass
build up :

126808

307981

Difference

0.25%

0.16%

1,300

WEmpty

1,250
y = 3.905E-01x + 6.278E+04

1,200

1,150

1,100
2,800

2,900

3,000

3,100

Gross Take-off Weight WTO


Empty weight - statistical
Empty weight - required
Linear (Empty weight - statistical)

3,200
Thousands

CG and Mass Balance of Aircraft


Thousands

CG Traverse
350

Forward most CG:


_=0.244 (34.34m)
SM = 31.5%

Aft most CG:


_=0.502 (35.36)
SM = 5.60%

NP = 0.5585
(35.8m)

Weight of Aircraft in Kg

300

Zero Fuel
Quarter Fuel

250

Half Fuel
3/4 Fuel
Full Fuel
Zero payload

200

Quarter payload
Half payload
3/4 payload
Full payload

150

15% Fuel

100
32.7963

33.2963

33.7963

34.2963

34.7963

CG position from nose point

35.2963

35.7963

CG and Mass Balance for Aircraft


9. Diversion to alternate airport 200n.m.
in distance

6. 10%
additional
range
5. Cruise to
full range

8. Climb
7. Descent to
destination
and refused
landing

4. Climb

10. Descent

12. Hold for


30 minutes

11. Climb to
15000 ft

13. Descent

1.Warm-up

MTOW, International Flight.


2. Taxi

3. Take-off

Airfoil: SC2-0714

14. Landing

Longitudinal Static Stability


Parameter

Figure normalised against


chord length (%)

Neutral Point

55.9

Aft CG

50.2

Aft CG Static Margin

5.6

Forward most CG

24.4

Fore CG Static Margin

31.5

Maximum SM

Minimum SM
Airfoil: SC2-0714

Neutral Point

Aircraft Properties for Stability Analysis


SC(2)-0714 Airfoil Properties (Wing)
Wing setting angle

1.7

Horizontal Stabilizer Properties (NACA-0006)


Tail setting angle []

-8.6

Elevator Properties

Elevator Angle at zero lift


Elevator Angle to trim [deg]

14.8
-1.5

Rudder Properties
Stall Speed at SL [m/s]

73.6

Approach Speed [m/s]

88.3

Beta (25 knots crosswind as per FAR25) [deg]

8.3

Rudder Angle for Asymmetric Thrust (Engine Failure)

3.8

Rudder Angle for Crosswind Takeoff & Landing

14.1

Stability Coefficients
Name/Symbol

Longitudinal

Static Margin,
SM

Value Requirement
0.32
>0
-1.25

<0

-11.3

<0

Type

Lateral-Directional

Type

Name/Symbol

Value Requirement
-0.19
<0

0.32

>0

-0.71

<0

-0.22

<0

Control Coefficients
Type
Longitudinal
LateralDirectional

Name, Symbol

Value
-1.51

Requirement
<0

0.12

>0

-0.19

<0

Longitudinal Stability
Cm versus alpha curves
1.2

Cm0

0.39

Cm0w
Cm0f
Cm0t

=
=
=

-0.11
-0.072
0.57

0.4

Cma

= -1.25

0.2

Cmaf
Cmaw
Cmat

=
=
=

0.8

0.6

C (Moment Coefficient about CG)

@ Cruise:

Wing
Fuselage
Tail
Aircraft

0.0094
0.25
-1.51

-0.2
-10

-5

5
10
Angle of Attack [deg]

15

20

Aircraft has positive Cm0 and


negative Cm_alpha
=> Statically Stable

Longitudinal Control Adequacy


de versus Cl curves

Cm versus alpha curves (CG Fore)

25

1.1

Maximum Deflection

de = -20deg
de = -10deg

20

de = 0deg
de = 10deg

0.9

15

de = 20deg

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4
-10

-5

0
5
Angle of Attack [deg]

10

15

Elevator Deflection [deg]

0.8

C (Moment Coefficient about CG)

10
5

Operating
Regime

0
Max Deflection
NP
Fore-most CG
Aft-most CG
Forward-most CG
Min Deflection

-5
-10

Cm versus alpha curves (CG Aft)


1.2

-15

de = -20deg
de = -10deg

-20

de = 0deg
de = 20deg

-25

0.6

0.4

0.2

-0.2
-10

Minimum Deflection

de = 10deg

0.8

C (Moment Coefficient about CG)

-5

0
5
Angle of Attack [deg]

10

15

0.5

1.5
2
Cl (Lift Coefficient)

2.5

3.5

Longitudinal Control Adequacy


Elevator deflection over loading conditions
20
15

Cruise Elevator
Trim [deg]

Aft CG
Forward CG

2.1
-6.4

10

Aft CG

delta

elevator

Loading Conditions
Payload
Fuel

0
-5

Forward CG

-10
Max Deflection
Forward CG
Aft CG
Min Deflection

-15
-20

0.32
0.26

-3.4
-5.2

Aircraft is able to trim for all posible


loading conditions and all flight conditions
of the mission profile, with elevator
deflection within the mechanical constraint
of 20 for the elevator

0.2

0.3

0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
chord length
Elevator deflection during Mission

0.8

0.9

15
10
5
elevator

Maximum
Minimum

Static Margin
[m]

0.1

20

delta

Mission
Profile CG Position [m]

Cruise
Elevator Trim
[deg]

Mission (Aft)

0
-5

Mission (Fore)

-10
Max Deflection
Max Req Delta
Min Req Delta
Min Deflection

-15
-20

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4
0.5
0.6
chord length

0.7

0.8

0.9

Directional Control Adequacy


Cn versus Rudder deflection curves
0.15

0.05

Aircraft has negative


Cn_dr
=> Statically Stable

-0.05

-0.1

C (Moment Coefficient about CG)

0.1

-0.15

-0.2
-20

-15

-10

-5
0
5
Rudder deflection [deg]

10

15

20

Dynamic Stability Aircraft Classification

Dynamic Stability Aircraft Classification

Dynamic Stability Aircraft Classification

Aircraft Handling Qualities


Phugoid Mode
Longitudinal

Level 1

Level 2

Zeta

> 0.4

>0

Omega

> 0.7

> 0.4

Zeta

> 0.3

> 0.2

Omega

> 0.4

> 0.4

Zeta

> 0.08

> 0.02

Omega*Zeta

> 0.15

> 0.05

Short Period Mode

Dutch Roll Mode

LateralDirectional
Spiral Mode

min time to double [s]

20

Roll Mode

max time constant

1.4

3.0

Phugoid Mode
Effect of Mach Number

Effect of Altitude
Effect of Altitude on Phugoid Mode (Damping Ratio zeta)

Effect of Mach Number on Phugoid Mode (Damping Ratio zeta)

0.4

0.4

Level 1

Level 1

0.35

0.35
0.3

0.25

0.25
Zeta

Zeta

np

np

0.3

0.2

0.2

0.15

0.15

0.1

0.1

0.05

0.05

, =

6 2
Level
Altitude

10

12

14

0
0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Level
2
Mach Number

0.8

2,

0.9

Short Period Oscillation


Effect of Altitude
Effect of Altitude on Short Period Mode (Natural Frequency omega)

Effect of Altitude on Short Period Mode (Damping Ratio zeta)

3.5

0.65
0.6

0.55
2.5

sp

Zeta

Omega

sp

0.5

1.5

0.45
0.4
0.35

Level 1

0.3

0.5

Level 2
0
0

Level 1

0.25

10

12

14

0.2

Altitude

, =

8
Altitude

10

Level 212

+ +
0

2,

14

Short Period Oscillation


Effect of Mach Number
Effect of Mach Number on Short Period Mode (Damping Ratio zeta)
0.34

1.6

0.32

1.4

0.3

1.2

0.28
sp

Level 1

Zeta

Omega

sp

Effect of Mach Number on Short Period Mode (Natural Frequency omega)


1.8

Level 1

0.8

0.26

0.24

0.6

0.22

Level 2
0.4
0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7
Mach Number

0.8

Level 2
0.9

0.2
0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7
Mach Number

0.8

0.9

Dutch Roll Mode


Effect of Altitude
Effect of Altitude on Dutch Roll Mode (zeta*omega)

Effect of Altitude on Dutch Roll Mode (Damping Ratio zeta)

0.9

0.4

0.8

0.35
0.3

0.6
0.25
nDR

0.5

Zeta

Omega

nDR

*Zeta

nDR

0.7

0.4

0.2
0.15

0.3
0.2

Level 1

0.1

0.1

Level 2

0.05

10

12

14

Level 1

Level 2
0

Altitude

, =

+ 0
0

10

Altitude

+ 0
1
=
2,
0

12

14

Dutch Roll Mode


Effect of Mach Number
Effect of Mach Number on Dutch Roll Mode (zeta*omega)

Effect of Mach Number on Dutch Roll Mode (Damping Ratio zeta)

0.25

0.2
0.18
0.16

0.2

nDR

Level 1

Zeta

0.15

Omega

nDR

*Zeta

nDR

0.14
0.12
0.1

Level 1

0.08
0.1

0.06
0.04

Level 2
0.05
0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7
Altitude

0.8

0.9

0.02
0.4

Level 2
0.5

0.6

0.7
Mach Number

0.8

0.9

Spiral Mode
Effect of Mach Number

Effect of Altitude

Effect of Altitude on Spiral Mode (t double)

Effect of Mach Number on Spiral Mode (t double)

140

35

120

30

100

25

Level 1
20

double

double

80

60

15
40

Level 1
0

Level10 2

Altitude

Level 2

10

20

12

14

5
0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7
Mach Number

0.8

0.9

Roll Mode
Effect of Altitude

Effect of Mach Number


Effect of Mach Number on Roll Mode (Time constant tau)

Effect of Altitude on Roll Mode (Time constant tau)


3

Level 2

Level 2

2.5

2.5

2
roll

Tau

Tau

roll

1.5

Level 1

1.5

Level 1

1
1

0.5

8
Altitude

10

12

14

0.5
0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7
Mach Number

0.8

0.9

Flight Testing
Critical Velocities:
Minimum Ground Control,
Minumum Air Control etc

Engine Failure + Crosswind


Landings/Takeoff

= 70.4

Rudder Angle for Engine Failure [deg]


Rudder Angle for Crosswind
Takeoff/Landing [deg]

= 38.4

Validates our Calculations for Type-Approval


Airplane Handling Characteristics
(at the limits)

Phugoid Mode
Short Period Mode
Dutch Roll Mode
Spiral Mode
Roll Mode

Zeta
Zeta
Omega
Zeta
Omega
Time to double
Time constant

Flying Qualities
Altitude Mach Number
Level 2
Level 2
Level 1
Level 1
Level 1
Level 1
Level 1
Level 1
Level 1
Level 1
Level 1
Level 1
Level 1
Level 1

3.8
18.8

Mission Analysis
Fuel Mass Usage Per Segment
Preliminiary Sizing

Mission Analysis
W(i) - W(i-1)

Stage

Mission Segment

W(i) - W(i-1)

Engine start and warm-up

3079

Taxi

3049

Take-off

1509

458

Climb

6006

5108

Cruise to full range

68376

10% additional range

5895

Descent to destination and refused landing

2200

2167

Climb

4357

2819

Diversion to alternate airport 200 nm away

1890

2573

10

Descent

2116

2091

11

Climb to 15000 ft

4190

1346

12

Hold for 30 min

2319

3174

13

Descent

2029

2099

14

Landing

1607

4157

108627

107952

Sum
% Difference

0.62

609

81346

Cruise Performance at 11km

0.18

0.16

0.14

0.12

0.1

5
0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Airspeed (m/s)
Fuel Flow Rate

Max Range
Max Endurance

13151 km
12.8 Hours

Specific Range

Vcruise

253.8 m/s

Cruise SR

0.14 km/kg

Cruise FF

1.76 kg/s

Specific Range (km/kg)

Fuel Flow Rate (kg/s)

10

Approximate Climb Schedule

Approx. Best Steady Climb

Cruise: M=0.86 at 11km

Takeoff
Vtakeoff = 73.5 m/s

Acceleration
246.3m/s

Balanced Field Length


4500
4000

Distance Required / m

3500
3000
To Takeoff

2500

To Decelerate

2000
1500

1000
500
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

V1 m/s

Decision speed, V1

64.2 m/s

Balanced Field Length

2308 m

70

80

Absolute and Service Ceilings


R/C = 0
Alt = 14.1 km

R/C = 0.508 m/s (100 ft/min)


Alt = 13.9 km

80

400

70

350

60

300

50

250
40

200
30

150

20

100

10

50
0

5000

10000

15000

0
20000

Flight Range (km)


Legend:

Constant payload

Constant MTOW

Constant Fuel

Payload (kg)

450

Thousands

Number of passengers

Payload versus Range Trade-off

Compliance Matrix
Subpart B--FLIGHT

Compliance:

General
25.21

25.23

Proof of compliance.

Complied

Load distribution limits.

Complied

Weight limits.

Complied

Center of gravity limits.

Complied

Additional
Remarks:

MTOW: 307,981kg
MZFW: 197,109kg

25.25

25.27
25.29

25.31
25.33

Empty weight and corresponding center of


gravity.
Removable ballast.
Propeller speed and pitch limits.

Complied

N.A.
N.A.

34.45m FW-most
CG & 36.43m Aftmost CG
35.75m @
126,809kg

Compliance Matrix
Subpart B--FLIGHT

Compliance:

Additional Remarks:

Performance

25.101
25.103
25.105
25.107
25.109
25.111

25.113
25.115
25.117
25.119
25.121
25.123
25.125

General.

Complied

Stall speed.

Complied

Takeoff.

Complied

Takeoff speeds.

Complied

Accelerate-stop distance.
Takeoff path.

Complied
Complied

Takeoff distance and takeoff run.

Complied

Takeoff flight path.

Complied

Climb: general.
Landing climb: All-engines-operating.
Climb: One-engine-inoperative.
En route flight paths.
Landing.

Complied
Complied
Complied
Complied
Complied

55.47m/s (based on
Cl-max)
V1 = 64.2m/s
Vr = 67m/s
BFL = 2309m
1607m (for dry
runway)
First 3200ft Average
R/C: 42.9m/s

Vref = 72.12m/s

Compliance Matrix
Compliance:

Controllability & Manoeuverability

General.
Longitudinal control.

Complied
Complied

Directional and lateral control.

Complied

Minimum control speed.

Complied

25.161
Stability

Trim.

Complied

25.171

General.

Compiled

Static longitudinal stability.

Complied

25.143
25.145
25.147
25.149
Trim

Additional Remarks:

25.173
25.175

Demonstration of static longitudinal stability.

Static lateral-directional stability.


25.177

Dynamic stability.
25.181

Complied

Compiled

Flying qualities of
Level 1 or 2 for most
flight regime

Compliance Matrix
Stalls
25.201
25.203

Stall demonstration.
Stall characteristics.
Stall warning.

Complied
Complied
Complied

Longitudinal stability and control.

Complied

Directional stability and control.

Complied

Taxiing condition.
Wind velocities.
Spray characteristics, control, and stability on
water.

Complied
Complied

25.207
Ground Handling Characteristics
25.231
25.233
25.235

25.237
25.239

N.A.

Final Report - Content


1. Introduction

Background, objectives, scope, outline

2. Request For Proposals

3.
4.
5.
6.

Analysis of requirements (design, mission, safety, etc.)

3-View Diagrams
Compliance with RFP and FAR requirements
Unique Selling Propositions
Preliminary design

Trade studies, aircraft dimensions, interior sizing and


arrangement, initial mass estimation.

Final Report - Content


7. Aerodynamics
8. Structures and Load
9. Propulsion
10. Aircraft Performance
11. Stability and control analysis
12. Aircraft systems
13. Cost Analysis
14. Conclusion

Conclusion
1.Drag analysis at cruise, takeoff and landing
segments.
2.Component mass buildup in good
agreement with statistical estimation.
3.SM range between 5.6% - 31.5% of chord
length.
4.CG Traverse within acceptable boundaries.
5.Stability and control coefficients fulfill
positive stability.
6.Aircraft is able to trim for all possible
conditions.

Conclusion
6. Aircraft handling qualities at least level 2,
the bulk exceeding level 1.
7.Flight test required to validate stability and
control calculations.
8.Fuel consumption in mission analysis in
good agreement with preliminary sizing.
9.Aircraft performance fulfill requirements
laid out in RFP.
10.Aircraft is compliant with FAR25.

Subsequent Activities
1.Integration of Aircraft Ancillary Systems
2.Aircraft Development Cost Analysis
3.Potential Challenges to the Assembly
and Manufacturing of our Aircraft

Thank You!

Q&A

Longitudinal & Lateral-Directional Control


Adequacy
SC(2)-0714 Airfoil Properties (Wing)
Lift Curve Slope (Wing)

Lift at zero angle of attack (Wing)


Zero angle of moment about aerodynamic center (wing)
Mean aerodynamic chord length
Wing setting angle

4.8649
0.4
-0.13
13
1.7132

Horizontal Stabilizer Properties (NACA-0006)


Tail area [m2]

140

Span [m]

24

Aspect Ratio

4.1143

Tail Lift Curve Slope (NACA 0006)

3.7081
33.11

Tail arm [m]


Mean aerodynamic chord length (tail) [m]
Tail setting angle []

3.9
-11.7

Elevator Properties
Elevator Area [m2]
Ratio of elevator to tail area

27
0.53

Elevator effectiveness parameter

0.68

Elevator Control Power

-3.3722

Elevator Angle at zero lift


Elevator Angle to trim [deg]

14.7641
-1.51

Longitudinal & Lateral-Directional Control Adequacy


Vertical Stabilizer Properties (NACA-0006)

Fin Area

55

Fin Span

9.5

Fin Aspect Ratio

1.6409

Fin Lift Curve Slope (NACA 0006)

2.2921

Fin Moment Arm

28

Mean aerodynamic chord length (tail)

4.5

Fin Volumetric Ratio


Rudder Properties
Rudder Area
Ratio of rudder to tail area
Rudder effectiveness parameter

0.1354

Rudder Control Power [deg]

-0.3479

Maximum Single Engine Thrust [kN]

14.25
0.25
0.4

755.3298

Thrust Moment Arm


Drag of single engine [kN]
Rudder Angle for Asymmetric Thrust (Engine Failure)
Rudder Angle for Crosswind Takeoff & Landing
Fuselage Contribution to Directional Stability
Empirical wing-body interference factor that is a function of the fuselage
geometry,
Empirical correction factor that is a function of the fuselage Reynolds number,

10.5
44.8015
3.789
18.7582
=
0.0008

2.16

Projected side area of the fuselage,

403.41

Length of the fuselage,

70

Longitudinal & Lateral-Directional


Control Adequacy