Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and

Technology, Kumasi
Department of Mechanical Engineering

Thesis Title
Enhancing Aerodynamic Performance
Estimate in small Aircraft Development
using Object-Oriented Technique
By

YESUENYEAGBE ATSU KWABLA FIAGBE

 Presentation Outline
• Background Information
• Research Problem
• Literature Survey
• Object-Oriented Programming
• Research Goal & Objectives
• Research Activities
• Aircraft Performance Analysis Results
• Conclusion & Recommendations
30-Mar-10 2
 Background of Study
• Future of Small Aircraft Transportation
The SATS Project (1985-Present, NASA and partners)
• High-volume operations at airports without control towers or terminal radar
facilities are possible
• Available Technologies enabling safe landings at more airports.
• Integration of Small aircrafts into a higher capacity air traffic control system
• Improved single-pilot ability to function competently in evolving, complex
national airspace

• Expected Leapfrog in Small Aircraft use

• Performance Estimate is based on Wing Profile

30-Mar-10 3
A SATS Aircraft Candidate, © Hearst Corp. A New Civil Aviation Industry, © NASA
 Research Problem
• Performance Estimate is based on Wing Profile
• Lift & Drag coefficients & derived coefficient
Aircraft Design Concept
F=F(Fixed, Design)

Performance Analysis Creation of Objects,

Numerical wind
Mission Optimized Design Configuration
Tunnel Development
Object Oriented Implementation
of Design Concept

30-Mar-10 4
Subsonic Aircraft Design
 Literature Survey as Related to Research

Some Review of Related Works

• USAF: Digital DATCOM – developed and used mainly for the control
system design
• Turevskiy at el, (1999) used combination of free and commercial off-the-shelf
(COTS) modeling and simulation software and Digital Datcom for flight
vehicle design process.
• Raymer, D. (2002) in his doctoral thesis uses Multidisciplinary Optimization
(MDO) technique to enhance the conceptual design process of the aircraft
design. He employed various techniques such as orthogonal steepest descent
(full factorial stepping search), Monte Carlo, a mutation-based evolutionary
options with his design code called RDS - selection of various components
• Neufeld, D et al (2007) developed Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm
(MOGA) optimizer to assist in the design process for Very Light Jet (VLJ) and
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). The total lift was projected from the wing
geometry.
• Trevor S. Ferguson, (2007) –Used Microsoft Excel spreadsheet to create a
numerical RC design tool (Master thesis)
• In all these cases, the aerodynamic analysis is based on the wing geometry
and coefficients to determine the projected lift and drag.

30-Mar-10 5
 Aircraft Shape & Influence
Configuration = Function(Aerodynamic*, Propulsion, Structure, Mission)

30-Mar-10 6
 Possible Shapes of Small Aircraft Configurations

30-Mar-10 7
 Discipline of Aircraft Design
• Multidisciplinary Process
– Aerodynamics
– Structural Mechanics
– System Controls
– Propulsion
– Materials Engineering
– others
• Aircraft Design Stages
– Conceptual Design: shape, arrangement of components
and such features as, size, weight and general performance are
considered
– Preliminary Design: specialists in areas e.g.. structures, landing
gear, and control systems will design and analyze aircraft portion
– Detail Design: actual pieces to be fabricated are designed
30-Mar-10 8
 Object-Oriented Programming
• Object-Oriented programming (OOP) is a programming
model that uses "objects" and their interactions to design
applications and computer programs.
• Object capable of receiving messages, processing data,
and sending messages to other objects
• Each object is viewed as an independent little machine
with a distinct role or responsibility
• Advantages: Makes program discrete units and re-usable,
expandable and maintainable.

30-Mar-10 9
 Research Goal & Objectives
Goal
Develop Subsonic Aircraft Configurations with Optimal
Performance Capability and Improve estimation of
Aerodynamics Performance parameters

Major Objectives:
1. Develop Subsonic Aircraft Design Concept

2. Identify & Exploit Engineering Design Parameters to

Construct Aircraft Configurations with Optimal Capability

3. Develop Object Oriented Program/Code to Implement the

Design Concept

4. Develop Aerodynamic Analysis Tools to Evaluate the

integrated Aircraft Configurations

5. Validate (Individual) Aircraft Subsystems & Tools

30-Mar-10 10
To achieve Objective 1: Develop Subsonic Aircraft Design Concept

Aircraft Design Concept

F = f ( x)
Fixed_ parameters
Geometry x⇒
F ⇒ Design_ parameters
Performanc
e(Lift, Drag)

Geometry/ Construction
F performance = ∫∫ f ds routings
s

F = Di + L j + Sk f = f (P,τ)
Boundary Layer
Euler Equation Equation
Drag Lift Slip force
30-Mar-10 11
 To achieve Objective 3. Develop an Object Oriented Program/Code to Implements ADC

Mapping Aircraft Reality into OOP Environment

Vertical Tail
Tail Boom Aircraft

Luggage
Cabin

Landing
Wing Fuselage Empennage
Gear
Propeller Horizontal Tail

Nose Cabin
Nose
Luggage Horizontal Vertical
Nose Cabin Cabin Tail Boom
Cabin Tail Tail
Interface
Nose-Cabin Wing
Interface

OO Implementation of the Design Concept (FORTRAN 95)

Functions Development
Module Development
30-Mar-10 12
To achieve Objective 2. Identify & Exploit Engineering Design Parameters to Construct
Aircraft Configurations with Optimal Capability

Design Variables Definition

α3
α6
α5
a
α2

α1
α4 α7

NOSE NOSE-CABIN INTERFACE CABIN

α9
α10

α8

30-Mar-10 Tail Boom 13

LUGGAGE CABIN
To achieve Objective 2. Identify & Exploit Engineering Design Parameters to Construct
Aircraft Configurations with Optimal Capability

Design Variables Definition

α18 α15

α19 α16
½α17 α14

Wing/horizontal tail

Vertical Tail

30-Mar-10 14
 Illustration of Required Design Variables
Component Fixed Parameter Controlling Design Parameter Symbol Range
Dimension
Aircraft Length L 1.0
Mach Number M 0.01 – 0.30
Altitude A Upto 5.0km
Nose α
Nose tip diameter Nose Length Nose Length to Plane Length α1 0.05 – 0.30
3
ratio
a
α
2 Location End Height End Height to Plane Length ratio α2 0.05 – 0.20
α
1

End Width End Width to Plane Length ratio α3 0.05 – 0.40

Nose Cabin Start coordinates Length Length to Plane-Length ratio α4 0.02 – 0.15
Interface (from Nose)
α
α
6
5
Width Height to Plane Length ratio α5 0.05 – 0.40
α
4
Offset Height Offset Height to Length ratio α6 0.0 0– 0.20

Cabin Start coordinates Length Cabin Length to Plane- Length α7 0.10 – 0.40
(from Nose-Cabin ratio
α
7
Interface)
Luggage Cabin Start coordinates Length Length to Plane-Length ratio α8 0.1 – 0.25
(from Cabin)
α
9 End Diameter End Diameter to Plane-Length α9 0.05 – 0.20
α
8
ratio
Tail Boom Start coordinates End Diameter End Diameter to Plane-Length α10 0.01 – 0.05
α (from Luggage Cabin) ratio
1
0

30-Mar-10 15
 Illustration of Required Design Variables Con’t

Component Fixed Parameter Controlling Design Parameter Symbol Range

Dimension

Horizontal Tail Profile Span Span to Plane-Length ratio α11 0.15 – 0.50

Angle of Attack Root Chord Root-Chord to Plane-Length α12 0.05 – 0.15

α
1
ratio
8

Sweep angle Tip Chord Tip Chord to Root-Chord α13 0.25 – 1.00
½
α
1
ratio
α 9
1
7
Dihedral angle

Vertical Tail Profile Span Span to Plane-Length ratio α14 0.07 – 0.25

Angle of Attack Root Chord Root-Chord to Plane-Length α15 0.05 – 0.15

α
1 ratio
5

Sweep angle Tip Chord Tip Chord to Root-Chord α16 0.25 – 1.00
α
α
1
ratio
1 6
4

Dihedral angle

Wing Profile Span Span to Plane-Length ratio α17 0. 50 – 2.00

Angle of Attack Root Chord Root-Chord to Plane-Length α18 0.10 – 0.25

α
1
8
ratio

Sweep angle Tip Chord Tip Chord to Root-Chord α19 0.25 – 1.00
α
½
α
1
9
ratio
1
7

Dihedral angle

30-Mar-10 16
 Aircraft Design Flow Chart
Start

Input Data

Numerical
Wind Tunnel Horizontal Surface
Wing Empenna Tail Integration
Numerical ge (Area)
Surface Wind
Integration Tunnel
(Area) Vertical Tail

L, D
L, D

Nose

Fuselage Nose-Cabin Surface

Interface Integration
(Area)
Numerical
Wind Cabin
Tunnel
Luggage-
Cabin

Tail Boom

L, D

End L, D
30-Mar-10 17
 Aircraft Design Flow Chart

Input Data

Create Nose Create Nose- Create Cabin Create Lug- Create

Geometry Cabin Geometry Cabin Tailboom
Geometry Geometry Geometry
A B C D E

Surface Surface Surface Surface Surface

Integration Integration Integration Integration Integration
(Area) (Area) (Area) (Area) (Area)

F G H I J

Evaluate Evaluate Evaluate Evaluate Evaluate

L&D L&D L&D L&D L&D

L, D

30-Mar-10 18
 Aircraft Design Flow Chart
A B C D E

Create Fuselage
Profile

Wind Tunnel
Experiment

Surface Properties
(Pressure, Tau)

Nose Surface Nose-Cabin Cabin Surface Lug-Cabin Tailboom

Properties Surface Properties Surface Surface
Properties Properties Properties

30-Mar-10 F G H I J 19
 Aircraft Design Flow Chart
Input Data

Create H-Tail Create V-Tail

Geometry Geometry
Create Wing
Geometry
Numerical
Surface Wind
Surface
Integration Tunnel Integration
(Area) (Area)

Wind
Surface
Tunnel
Integration
Experiment
(Area) Evaluate Evaluate
L&D L&D
Surface
Properties

L, D
Evaluate
L&D

30-Mar-10 20
Illustration of Aircraft Configurations Generated

F = f ( x)
 Fixed _ parameters
Geometry x⇒
F⇒  Design _ parameters
30-Mar-10  Performance( Lift , Drag ) 21
To achieve Objective 4. Develop Aerodynamic Analysis Tools to Evaluate Aircraft Configurations

Wetted and Projected Areas

Projection onto the
Projection onto xz plane z yz plane (x=constant)
(y=constant) : dSx
: dSy F Wetted cell of any
orientation

Projection onto the

xy plane (z=constant)
x : dSz
Heron’s formula for area of a triangle
y
∆ area = l (l − AB)(l − BC )(l − AC ) An element

l = ( AB + BC + CA) 2 C

{(
AB = λ x X A − X B ) + λ (Y
2
y A − YB ) + λ (Z
2
z A − ZB )}
2 0.5

AC = {λ (X ) + λ (Y ) + λ (Z )}
2 2 2 0.5
x A − XC y A − YC z A − ZC

BC = {λ (X ) + λ (Y ) + λ (Z )}
2 2 2 0.5 A B
x
30-Mar-10 B − XC y B − YC z B − ZC x 22
 To achieve Objective 5. Validate (Individual) Aircraft Subsystems & Tools
Surface Integration Plane Area Area (Exact) Error
Validation (Integration)

Truncated Cone
A = ((C1 +C2)s/2)/4 0.0007346
Surface 2.427975 A= π(r1+r2)((r1- 9
r2)2+h2)0.5 /4 (0.0302%)
= π(1.0+0.5)(2.0615)/4
= 2.42870969
Circle
Y-Z 0.5884430 A = A2-A1 0.0010056
=π(r22 – r12)/4 (0.1707%)
= π(1.02 – 0.52)/4
= π(0.75)/4
=0.58904862
Trapezium
X-Z 1.5 A=(a+b)h/2 0.0
=(0.5+1.0)(2.0)/2 (0.0%)
=1.5
Trapezium
X-Y 1.5 A=(a+b)h/2 0.0
=(0.5+1.0)(2.0)/2 (0.0%)
30-Mar-10 23
=1.5
 To achieve Objective 5. Validate (Individual) Aircraft Subsystems & Tools

Surface Integration Area Area (Exact) Error

Validation Plane (Integration)
A=2πrh/2
Surface 3.138356 =2π 0.003236
(0.5)(2.0)/(2.0) (0.103%)
=π
= 3.141592

Front Rectangular
Y-Z 1.000001 A=LB 0.000001
Rear = (1.0)(1.0) (0.0001%)
1.0 = 1.0 0.0

X-Z 0.0 A=0.0 0.0

(0.0%)
Rectangular
X-Y 2.000001 A=LB 0.000001
=(2.0)(1.0) (0.00005%)
30-Mar-10 =2.0 24
 Forces Acting on Aircraft
• Lift : The Aerodynamic force component acting perpendicular to free
airstream direction.
• Drag: The Aerodynamic force component in free airstream direction

Thrust ≥ Drag

Lift ≥ Weight

30-Mar-10 25
 Aircraft Aerodynamics Analysis

Possible Solution/Analysis Methods

Full NS Solution using CFD/COTS Tools

Coupled 3D Euler & Boundary Analysis Tools (COTS)
Coupled 2D Euler & Boundary Analysis Tools
30-Mar-10 26
 Full System of Navier Stoke Equation
Solving the following Coupled Equations
• Mass Equation: ∂ρ
+ ∇ • ( ρV ) = 0
∂t
• Momentum Equation:
∂ ( ρu ) ∂p
+ ∇ • ( ρuV ) = − + ρf x + ( Fx ) viscous
∂t ∂x
∂ ( ρv) ∂p
+ ∇ • ( ρvV ) = − + ρf y + ( Fy ) viscous
∂t ∂y
∂ ( ρw) ∂p
+ ∇ • ( ρwV ) = − + ρf z + ( Fz ) viscous
∂t ∂z
• Energy Equation:
∂   V 2    V2   • • •
ρ e +  + ∇ • ρ e + V = ρ q− ∇ • ( pV) + ρ(f • V) + QViscous+ WViscous
∂t   2    2 

• Boundary Conditions & Grids

30-Mar-10 27
 Euler Equation & Boundary Analysis
Tools
Solving the following Coupled Equations:
• Mass Equation: ∂ρ
+ ∇ • ( ρV ) = 0
∂t
• Momentum Equation:
∂ ( ρu ) ∂p
+ ∇ • ( ρuV ) = −
∂t ∂x
∂ ( ρv) ∂p
+ ∇ • ( ρvV ) = −
∂t ∂y
∂ ( ρw) ∂p
+ ∇ • ( ρwV ) = −
• Energy Equation: ∂t ∂z
∂   V2    V2   •
 ρ  e +   + ∇ •  ρ  e +  V  = ρ q − ∇ • ( p V )
∂t   2    2  
• Boundary Conditions, BLA & Grids
30-Mar-10 28
 2D Euler Equation
• For Incompressible flow and
• Irrotational steady flow
Mass Equation
∇•V = 0
Momentum Equation
∇×V = 0
Defining the Stream function, ψ, the two equations reduced to
∇ 2ψ = 0 ∂ 2ψ ∂ 2ψ
+ = 0
∂x 2
∂y 2
30-Mar-10 29
 Method of Implementation

∇ 2ψ = 0

∂ 2ψ ∂ 2ψ
+ = 0
∂x 2
∂y 2

2D Sliced-Aero-Model with Grids

30-Mar-10 30
To achieve Objective 4. Develop Aerodynamic Analysis Tools to Evaluate Aircraft Configurations

Aerodynamic Analysis (NWT)

Ψb = K5
Ψu = K1
ΨLeft = K3

y x ΨL = K2 ΨRight = K4

Wind Tunnel
• ∇2 Ψ = 0
x
• Boundary conditions: Ψ = Constant

30-Mar-10 31
 Implementation
Boundary Fitted Grid method
• Laplace equation with the variable (η, ξ) on the transformed or
computational grid and (x, y) on the physical grid
∂ ξ
2
∂ ξ2
+ = 0
Physical plane (x, y) → Computational plane (η, ξ) ∂x 2
∂y 2
ξ = ξ (x, y), η = η (x, y).
and inverse (η, ξ) → (x, y) ∂ 2η ∂ 2η
x = x(ξ, η) and y = y(ξ, η). + = 0
∂x 2
∂y 2

• Interchanging the independent and dependent variables, we have

transformed elliptic equation given by Thompson et al, (1974)
∂2x ∂2x ∂2x 2
 ∂x   ∂y 
2
α 2 − 2β +γ =0 α =   +  
∂ξ ∂ξ∂η ∂η 2
 ∂η   ∂η 
∂2 y ∂2 y ∂2 y  ∂x  ∂x   ∂y  ∂y 
α 2 − 2β +γ =0 β =    +   
∂ξ ∂ξ∂η ∂η 2  ∂ξ  ∂η   ∂ξ  ∂η 
2 2
 ∂x   ∂y 
γ =   +  
30-Mar-10  ∂ξ   ∂ξ  32
 Grid Transformation
y
y

Boundary 2 Boundary 4
Boundary 1

Object A
B

Region Boundary 3

η Boundary 1
A1
A
x

Boundary 3
Boundary 4 Region

B
Bl

30-Mar-10 Boundary 2 ξ
33
 Implementation
Boundary Fitted Grid method ∂ 2ψ ∂ 2ψ
+ 2 =0
∂x 2
∂y

• The Governing Equation of interest is transformed

∂ 2ψ ∂ 2ψ ∂ 2ψ
α 2 − 2β +γ =0
∂ξ ∂ξ ∂η ∂η 2

• at the object boundary

ψ (ξ ,η ) = 0
• at far field boundary

ψ (ξ ,η ) = U ∞ y (ξ ,η )Cosθ − U ∞ x(ξ ,η ) Sinθ

30-Mar-10 34
 Wing Application

NACA 2414 at AoA=0 NACA 2414 at AoA=3

Fuselage Application

30-Mar-10 35
Fuselage at AoA=0 Fuselage at AoA=3
 Velocity Estimation

∂f 1  ∂f ∂y ∂x ∂f ∂y ∂x 
=  ∂ξ ( g ′ + ) − ( g ′ + )
∂n J (1 + ( g ′) 2 ) 2 ∂η ∂η ∂η ∂ξ ∂ξ 
1


∂ψ 1  ∂ψ ∂y ∂x ∂ψ ∂y ∂x 
V= =  ∂ξ ( g ′ + ) − ( g ′ + )
∂n J (1 + ( g ′) 2 ) 2 ∂η ∂η ∂η ∂ξ ∂ξ 
1


30-Mar-10
36
 Pressure
f = f (P,τ)
• Solution to Euler equation

ρ V   V 
2
2
 + P
P= 1 − 
∞
 ∞
2   V∞  
 
N

∑P i
Pavg = i =1

Number ⋅ of ⋅ po int s ( N )

30-Mar-10 37
 Shear Stress
f = f (P,τ)
• Solution to Boundary Layer Equation
(Blasius Solution) c f = f (Re) ρVD
Re =
µ
0.664
• Lamina Flow cf =
Re x

• Turbulent Flow 0 .0592

cf =
Re 0x.2
• Transition: Re = 5х105
• Shear Stress ρV 2
τ= ∞
cf
2
30-Mar-10 38
 Aerodynamic Force Evaluation

• Force due to Pressure, P

• Force due to Shear stress, τ

} r r r
F = F p + Fτ

r r r r
( r
F p = ∫∫ pdS = pavg ∫∫ dS = pavg ∫∫ dS x i + dS y j + dS z k
r
)
S S S
r r r
(
r r r
Fτ = ∫∫τ dS = τ avg ∫∫ dS = τ avg ∫∫ dS x i + dS y j + dS z k )
S S S

r r r r
F = D i + Lj + Gk
30-Mar-10 39
 To achieve Objective 5. Validate (Individual) Aircraft Subsystems & Tools

Validation

Velocity Distribution

Velocity Distribution, Ref @

30-Mar-10 40
 Sample Velocity Distributions

30-Mar-10 41
To achieve Objective 2. Identify & Exploit Engineering Design Parameters to Construct Aircraft
Configurations with Optimal Capability

Results
Comparative Analysis of 5 Aircraft
Configurations

42 30-Mar-10
 Aircraft Sample Design Parameters
No. Sample #1 #2 #3 #4 #5
1 Nose Length to Plane Length Ratio 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100
2 Nose End Height Plane Length Ratio 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.150 0.120
3 Nose End Width Plane Length Ratio 0.120 0.120 0.100 0.150 0.130
4 Nose Cabin Length Plane Length Ratio 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.150
5 Nose Cabin Offset Height Length Ratio 0.030 0.010 0.000 0.000 0.060
6 Nose Cabin End Width Plane Length Ratio 0.140 0.140 0.100 0.150 0.150
7 Cabin Length Plane Length Ratio 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.400 0.300
8 Luggage Cabin Length Plane Length Ratio 0.300 0.200 0.200 0.200 0.100
9 Luggage Cabin End Diameter Plane Length Ratio 0.060 0.020 0.060 0.150 0.050
10 Tail End Diameter Plane Length Ratio 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010
11 H_Root Chord Plane Length Ratio 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100
12 H_Tip To Root Chord Ratio 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500
13 H_Span To Plane Length Ratio 0.200 0.200 0.200 0.200 0.300
14 V_Root Chord Plane Length Ratio 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100
15 V_Tip To Root Chord Ratio 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500
16 V_Span To Plane Length Ratio 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100
17 Wing Root Chord to Plane Length Ratio 0.200 0.300 0.300 0.300 0.300
18 Wing Tip To Root Chord Ratio 0.500 0.700 1.000 0.300 0.300
19 Wing Span To Plane Length Ratio 1.500 1.500 1.500 1.500 1.500
20 Wing Profile
30-Mar-10 NACA NACA NACA NACA NACA
43
1412 2412 2424 2410 2410
#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

30-Mar-10 44
#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

30-Mar-10 45
 Object Performance

30-Mar-10 46
 Object Performance

30-Mar-10 47
 Cabin Height Analysis

30-Mar-10 48
 Luggage Cabin Analysis

30-Mar-10 49
30-Mar-10 50
 Conclusion & Recommendation
• Conclusion
– Design Tool is Developed capable for more accurate aerodynamic
performance estimate
– Angle of Attack between 2o and 4o for Small aircraft
– Luggage cabin range between 0.02 & 0.10 for optimum drag
– Limitations: Incompressible flow regime, Small aircraft
• Recommendation
– Physical Experimental validation of Luggage cabin length
parameter
– Complementary areas need to be developed (structural design,
Propulsion)
30-Mar-10 51
 Thank You

52 30-Mar-10