Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 34

AE-462

AIRCRAFT DESIGN II
FINAL REPORT

Structural Design of
Short Field Cargo Aircraft
Submitted by:
GROUP A2
Anant Goel(Y9227083)
Piyush Negi(Y9413)
Ayush Bhuyan(Y9162)

Department of Aerospace Engineering


Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur
April 2013
CONTENTS

________________________________________________________________

1. Summary Of Conceptual Design........................................................................................3

2. V-n Diagram ........................................................................................................................ 4

3. Distributed Shear, Bending and Torsional Moment in Wing......................................10

4. Idealization of Structural Members...................................................................................12

5. Materials Selection................................................................................................................16

6. Calculation of Stresses.........................................................................................................17

7. Redesign.................................................................................................................................20

8. Crushing Pressure.................................................................................................................21

9. Buckling of Spars and Skin.................................................................................................23

10. Aeroelastic Analysis..............................................................................................................24

11. Weight Estimation................................................................................................................26

12. Hardware Model...................................................................................................................27

References

________________________________________________________________
CHAPTER 1: Summary of Conceptual Design

Description and Features

The aircraft is a short field cargo aircraft required to take-off and land from short-unpaved runways at high
altitudes. The aircraft has a high wing with a conventional Tail configuration. Since an unconventional design is
required Piston engines have been used instead of the conventional Turboprop engines. Apart from this the cross
section of the fuselage has been taken as rectangular instead of the conventional circular fuselage. This feature
reduces the equivalent skin friction at the cost of strength of the structure of the fuselage. The design process has
been based on the base aircraft Dornier Do-228 and Cessna Cargomaster.

The important design specifications of the aircraft are listed in the table below:

Crew 2
Cabin Volume 10 m3
Cabin Height 1.5m
Cabin Floor Width 1.5m
Payload 2000 kg
Take off distance(MTOW 3km std. altitude) 850m(unpaved runway)
Landing Distance (max. payload 3km std. altitude) 600m(unpaved runway)
Cruise Speed 5km standard altitude (MTOW) 500 km/hr
Range(max. payload) 700 km
MTOW 16400 lbs

The aircraft is also required to operate from unpaved runways with a 15 knot crosswind. This type of aircraft may
be required to deliver supplies to airbases in mountainous regions where limited space is available for runways and
atmospheric conditions are stringent.

Aerodynamic Design

The airfoil used is NLF-0414 with a single slotted fowler flap. The wing details are as follows:

Specifications Wing H-Tail V-Tail


Span(feet) 55.35 16.01 8.38
Area(feet2) 306.36 55.6 40.1
Root Chord(feet) 7.479 3.84 6.207
Tip Chord(feet) 3.59 2.56 3.1
Mean Chord(feet) 5.76 3.25 4.82
Sweep Angle(LE) 3.5 9 30

Dihedral Angle(degrees) 2 0 0
Y mean (feet) 26.67 10.42 4.19
MAC from fuselage
nose 15.79 40.9 42.11
CHAPTER 2: V-n Diagram

The V-n Diagram and span wise distribution of Lift, Drag and Moment, for a medium Short Field Cargo
Aircraft is calculated in this report. The wing aerodynamic data obtained in the preliminary design course is used
as reference for calculating the Limit Load factors for different velocities of the aircraft.

The V-n diagram depicts the aircraft limit load factor as a function of airspeed. It has two components. The
Maneuver diagram and the Gust Load diagram. The Maneuver diagram is obtained by studying the extreme flight
conditions. The Limit Load Factors for the aircraft are -1.8 and 4.4. Gust velocities of -50 fps, -25 fps, 25 fps, 50
fps are applied.

Calculation of Wing-Body Aerodynamic Coefficients

The aerodynamic data for the airfoil, which shows the variation of Cl, Cd, Cm for the airfoil section was taken
from Reference [1] and [2]. The positive stall angle is 15 degrees and the negative stall angle is -9.25 degrees. The
data is extrapolated on the positive side to 1.25 time positive stall angle. The 3d effects are taken into account
using research papers by Schrenk [Reference 3] and Diedrich [Reference 4].

Cl for the airfoil is 0.12 per degree. The following formula [3] is used to calculate CL corrected for taper.

Where F is wing area, b is wing span, is correction factor for taper and a represents lift

This is further corrected for sweep using the following formula [4]

Where A is Aspect Ratio, is sweep angle of wing and m represents lift curve slope

Finally Total Lift is calculated, taking sweep into account using the following formula [3].

where t is chord, is twist and A represents total Lift. Integrating this function over x gives the relation between
Total Lift and alpha.

CD is obtained by using CD = Cd0 + K*CL2

CM is calculated by method from Raymer[5] using Cm of airfoil section.

The final values of CL, CD and CM vs are presented below.


3

2.5

1.5
CL

0.5

0
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
-0.5

-1

0.35

0.3

0.25

0.2
CD

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25

0
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
-0.01

-0.02

-0.03
CM

-0.04

-0.05

-0.06

-0.07

V-n Diagram

The value of Cz, the component of aerodynamic forces in vertical direction, was calculated

Cz = CL cos + CD sin

Czt = Ct = CM*cmean/lt

This gives the variation of Cz with . The slope of this curve Cza is 0.118 per degree.

V-n Diagram (Maneuvering)

Positive
Load
Factor: Cza,max = 2.584

n = 5.72E-5 v2 , where v is in fps.

At nmax = 4.4, v = 277.35 fps

Negative Load Factor: Cza,min = -0.722

n = -1.626E-5 v2 , where v is in fps.

At nmin = -1.8, v = 332.71 fps

Dive Speed

According to FAR regulations, Dive speed is 1.2 times the cruise speed, vD = 546 fps

V-n Diagram (Gust)

The relation between V and n due to gust is given by

Kua
n= 1 V
W
295 . 06
Sw where V is in fps, u is gust velocity in fps, a is slope of Cz vs

n= 1 6 . 406 10 V
4
Gust (25 fps)

n= 1 1. 2814 10
3
Gust (50 fps) V

Critical Points:
Point V(fps) n Cza alpha CLw
PHAA 277.35 4.4 2.57 18.75 2.6221
NHAA 332.7 -1.8 -0.73 -9.25 -0.7237
Drag Divergence(+ve n) 550 4.4 0.65 2.5 0.6803
Drag Divergence(-ve n) 455.5 -1.8 -0.39 -6.5 -0.395
G1(u = 50fps) 550 1.7 0.25 -1 0.262
G2(u = 25fps) 550 1.35 0.2 -1.25 0.232
G3(u = -25fps) 550 0.65 0.09 -2.25 0.113
G4(u = -50fps) 550 0.29 0.04 -3.5 -0.036

The following V-n diagram (Maneuvering + Gust) is obtained

Analysis of Spanwise Lift, Drag and Moment Distribution at critical points

The procedure described in class was used

1. Cz was calculated using Load Factor.

2. Corresponding and CL was found out.

3. w0 was calculated.

4. Local sectional Lift coefficients found out using Schrenk's approximation.

5. Local drag coefficient is calculated.

6. Local angle of attack distribution was calculated.


7. Distributed Loads were calculated and plotted.

The results are plotted below:


Spanwise Lift Distribution

3000

2500

2000
PHAA
1500 NHAA
Lift Distribution

Drag Divergence(+ve n)
1000
Drag Divergence(-ve n)
500 G1(u = 50fps)
G2(u = 25fps)
0 G3(u = -25fps)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-500 G4(u = -50fps)

-1000

-1500

-2000

Span(y in feet)

Spanwise Drag Distribution

300

250

PHAA
200 NHAA
Drag Distribution

Drag Divergence(+ve n)
Drag Divergence(-ve n)
150 G1(u = 50fps)
G2(u = 25fps)
G3(u = -25fps)
100
G4(u = -50fps)

50

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Span (y in feet)
Spanwise Moment Distribution

1800

1600

1400
PHAA
1200 NHAA
Moment Distribution

Drag Divergence(+ve n)
1000 Drag Divergence(-ve n)
G1(u = 50fps)
800
G2(u = 25fps)
G3(u = -25fps)
600
G4(u = -50fps)
400

200

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Span
CHAPTER 3: Distributed Shear, Bending and Torsional Moment in Wing

After obtaining Lift, Drag and Moment distribution along the span our next step is to determine the loads and
moment acting at each section throughout the span. For this we distribute our wing into various station and the
forces and moment is determined by using linear interpolation at each station.

The Loads acting on the wing are Aerodynamic Loads, Acting at Aerodynamic Centre, Inertial & Gravitational
Forces, Acting at CG. The Shear forces are obtained by taking the components of these forces. This is done at
each section. The Moments are obtained by numerically integrating the moments due to the loads over the wing.
All the moments are taken to be zero at the tip of the wing.

Vx(lbs) vs z(ft)
2000
PHAA
NHAA
0
Drag Div. +ve
Drag Div. -ve
-2000

-4000

-6000

-8000

-10000

-12000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

4
x 10 Vy(lbs) vs z(ft)
6
PHAA
5 NHAA
Drag Div. +ve
4 Drag Div. -ve

-1

-2

-3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
5
x 10 Mx(lbs-ft) vs z(ft)
8
PHAA
NHAA
6 Drag Div. +ve
Drag Div. -ve

-2

-4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

AA
AA
g Div. +ve
g Div. -ve

30

+ve
ve

30
CHAPTER 4: Idealization of Structural Members

Analysis is done for the load carrying members of the wing. Flaps are 20% of the wing chord, this portion is
excluded from the analysis since it is a separate structure. A two spar design was chosen for the wing since it is
the most common design used in aircrafts. Two I-section spars were used, placed at 20% and 60% of the chord
respectively. A web thickness of 4mm and flange width of 10 cm was chosen for the spars.

Ribs are used to provide a guide for the aerodynamic shape to the wing. 19 evenly spaced ribs 1.5 foot apart were
used in our wing. The thickness of the ribs is 2mm.

Skin panels of thickness 2mm are placed over the ribs and spars to complete the aerodynamic shape of the wing.
A total of ten Z section stringers were used to stiffen the skin panels. The stringers had web thickness of 2mm and
cross-section Area of 1 cm^2.

The skin was divided into 6 panels.


Each panel was idealized into two members
Each stringer was replaced by a boom of equal area.
The spars were idealized by replacing them with 2 booms each.

The final schematic for root section is as shown in the following figure.

Axis definition: The X and Y axes are as shown in the figure and the Z axis is along the span from root to tip.
The origin is taken at the aerodynamic centre at each section since it is unaffected by twist and taper and its locus
remains a straight line.
The area moment of inertia is required for calculation of stresses acting on the wing. The Inertia for the whole
wing is calculated by summing up the inertia for each boom.
Area moment of inertia is calculated about the centroid at each section.

(y i y cg )
2
I xx = Ai

(x i x cg )
2
I yy = Ai

I xy = Ai (x i x cg ) ( y i y cg )
Rib Design

The airfoil used in NLF0414F. Ribs are used to give aerodynamic shape to the wing. Based on data from existing
aircraft, evenly spaced ribs 1.5 foot apart are chosen for our design. A total of 19 ribs are used. The thickness of
each rib Is 2mm. To reduce the weight of the ribs circular holes are cut into the ribs.

The final design of the rib is as follows:


Cutaways of aircrafts were studied to find the average spacing between ribs.

Short SD 330 Cutaway: Weight =23000lbs , Wing Span =75ft , Number of ribs = 55

Dornier 328 Cutaway: Weight =30000lbs , Wing Span =68ft , Number of ribs = 50
CHAPTER 5: Material Selection

After evaluation of different materials available and initial bending analysis, we came to the conclusion that we
should use Al 2024 T3 in every structural component namely spars, ribs, stiffeners, and skin and spar caps. Also
the temper offers improved stress-corrosion cracking resistance.

Units 7075-T73 7075-T6 2024-T3 AlSI 422 SS


Density g/cc 2.81 2.81 2.78 7.825
Hardness - Rockwell A None 50.5 53.5 46.8 95
Tensile Strength Ultimate MPa 505 572 483 965
Tensile Strength Yield MPa 435 503 345 760
Modulus of Elasticity GPa 72 71.7 73.1 200
Fatigue Strength MPa for 5x10 8 cycles 150 159 138 96.5
Machinability % 70 70 70 80
Shear Modulus GPa 26.9 26.9 28 77.2
Shear Strength MPa 300 331 283 440

Duralumin was also preferred over steel in the case of spar caps; besides the weight penalty, the ratio of axial
stresses to the yield stress of the spar cap material (obtained after idealization) increased. The stresses increase
more (due to reduction in Aeff) as compared to the increase in yield strength.
CHAPTER 6: Calculation of Stresses

Normal Stress is acting in the spanwise direction because of the two bending moments Mx and My acting on the
wing. zz is obtained by the following formula for each idealized boom. The maximum value of stress is obtained
at boom 15 from the schematic which is the top of the airfoil

4
x 10 Max Normal stress vs span
4

3.5

3
Max Normal stress(psi)

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
span(feet)

Shear flow Calculation

Shear Flow due to Torsion


The wing section is a 3 cell structure subjected to Torsion. For structural integrity the twist of each cell should be
the same.

Torque at Rth section of the wing cross section is given by the formula
The rates of twist for each cell can be obtained as

For each station a set of 4 simultaneous equations in qI,qII,qIII,twist are obtained. These can be solved to obtain
shear flow due to Torsion.

Shear Flow due to Bending

The 3 cell structure has to be solved to obtain shear flow due to bending.

External torque at each element is zero.

The twist in each cell still has to be the same.

Using the idealized section we break the skin at one point in each cell. The shear flow due to that section
becomes zero. The change in shear flow can be obtained and a resultant shear flow is required to keep the cell in
equilibrium.

The q across each boom can be obtained from the following formula

Shear Flow due to Torsion and Bending is added.


The total shear stress is obtained by
xs = q/t
xz and yz are calculated by taking components along respective panel
Maximum xz between boom 15 and 17
Maximum yz between boom 19 and 19'

The Maximum Shear stresses are plotted in the following figures


Max X Shear stress vs span
12000

10000

Max X Shear stress(psi)


8000

6000

4000

2000

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
span(feet)

30
Factor of Safety Calculation

Factor of Safety is the ratio of yield stress to maximum principal stress acting on the wing section.

The principal stresses are the eigen values of the stress tensor at each idealized section

The yield stress for Aluminium 2024-t3 is 47000 psi

Minimum Factor of safety obtained for Positive High Angle of attack case at the root = 1.19

factor of safety vs span


50
PHAA
45 NHAA
DDP
40
DDN

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

The wing structure is safe but does not satisfy the FAR regulation of factor of safety for transport aircraft which is
1.5
CHAPTER 7: Redesign

The wing has a minimum factor of safety of 1.2 which is safe but does not satisfy FAR criteria for transport
Aircraft. To increase the factor of safety, we increase the thickness of the spar web and flange. The thickness is
increased from 0.4 mm to 1 cm. Since the flange was thin earlier it was idealized as part of the skin, but now two
additional booms are needed for each flange. No change is done to the skin or the ribs.

The new schematic is obtained as follows:

Recalculation of Moment of Inertia's is shown below:

Ixx
0.035

0.03

0.025

0.02
Ixx(ft4)

0.015

0.01

0.005

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
span(feet)
Iyy
0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4
Iyy(ft4)

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
span(feet)

-3
x 10 Ixy
10

6
Ixy(ft4)

1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
span(feet)

The loads acting on each section remain the same. The new stresses acting at each each spanwise section are
calculated and the maximum stresses are plotted below:
Factor of Safety Calculation
CHAPTER 8: Crushing Pressure

The crushing load occurs on a beam due to its curvature, as shown in the figure below. This load can be ignored
on solid beams but not on box beams. When an up-bending moment acts on a box beam, the upper panel is in
compression which produces downward crushing load normal to the upper surfaces; the opposite occurs on the
lower surface. In a box beam, these crushing loads are reacted by intermediate ribs (vertical stiffeners).

Where,
tc = equivalent panel thickness including skin and stringer
hc = Beam depth
M = Applied moment

The crushing pressure calculation is done for both the spars.


CHAPTER 9: Buckling Analysis

The buckling of spars is treated using the buckling of a simple 1D column using Euler Buckling Theory. The
boundary conditions employed are the clamped-free case, fixed at the root and free at the tip.

This _critical was then compared with the maximum acting on the wing.
5
x 10 Critical Buckling Stresses and Actual Stresses
8
Critical Load
7 Actual Load

6
Normal Stresses(psi)

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
span(feet)

The wing structure is safe from Buckling.

Buckling of stiffened panels


Buckling of skin panels - the critical buckling stress for the skin panels is obtained with the following
formula:

E = 73.1 GPa. The skin thickness tsk is 2mm and the minimum panel thickness bsk is 229.2mm.
critical stress is obtained as 4301.82 PSI and the maximum shear stress in the X direction acting on the
panel is 3700 PSI (approx) so the panel is safe from buckling.

Buckling of stiffeners - the critical buckling stress for the stiffeners simply supported on three sides with
one edge free is obtained with the following formula:

The stringer thickness tst is 1mm and the stringer length bst is 10mm.
Critical stress is obtained as 46328 PSI and the maximum normal stress in the Z direction acting on the
stringer is 22000 PSI (approx) so the stringer is safe from buckling.
CHAPTER 10: Aeroelastic Analysis

Elastic Axis

The shear centre, a geometrical property of the cross section of the wing-box is determined from the following
procedure:

We assume a shear force with components Vy and Vz act at the shear centre. From a zero reference, we assume
that the location of shear centre is ey and ez along the respective coordinate axes. The moment generated by this
shear force is then M = Vz* ey + Vy* ez
We then proceed to find the shear flow in the thin walled structures caused due to the shear forces. The shear
flow is a linear function of Vy and Vz and q, the constant shear flow running in the closed structure. q can be
determined by putting = 0, where q can be obtained in terms of Vy and Vz. Hence, the entire shear flow is a
linear function of Vy and Vz.
We then find the moment resulting from the shear flow as M = where i denotes the thin walled members carrying
the shear force. We then equate the two moments obtained, match the coefficients and obtain the location of the
shear center.
We shift the shear force and the moment from the aerodynamic center of the airfoil to the shear center of the
wing-box, by simply equating the moments. The shear force undergoes a change in order to compensate for the
moment about the aerodynamic center.

Shear Centre Calculation


(A q (V y ))
2
e x=
V y

(A q (V x ))
2
e y=
Vx
Elastic Axis is the locus of the Shear Centre. The Elastic Axis lies between the Aerodynamic Centre and the Centre
of Gravity in x direction. The Elastic Axis lies ahead of the Aerodynamic Centre and the Centre of Gravity in y
direction. On the whole the elastic axis lies between the aerodynamic center and the centre of gravity.

Shear Centre(x)
1.4
Shear Centre
CG
1.2
X distance from Aerodynamic Centre(feet)

AC

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
span(feet)
Shear Centre(y)
0.25
Shear Centre
CG
0.2

Y distance from Aerodynamic Centre(feet)


AC

0.15

0.1

0.05

-0.05

-0.1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
span(feet)

Since the aerodynamic centre is ahead of Elastic axis, it is possible that the wing may flutter.

()
2
n x G +x E

( )
x E xG
xE 1+
r 2EA

Divergence

Divergence occurs when a lifting surface deflects under aerodynamic load so as to increase the applied load or
move the load so that the twisting effects on the structure is increased. The increased load deflects the structure
further which brings the structure to the limit loads and to failure. The speed at which divergence occurs is called
critical divergence speed

Critical Divergence Speed

2 k
U d=
1. S CL e

k =G J
2.
Mt
3. J=
G

To calculate J for the entire wing, a twisting moment M1 is applied at the tip of the wing. The twist created due to
this moment at the tip is obtained by integrating the twist rates at the sections. The final value of twist obtained is
placed in equation 3 with Mt = M1. This gives us the value of ktheta and J
ktheta = 1.49e5
J = 2.55e-4 feet^4
Minimum Divergence Speed = 598.21 fps which is greater than the maximum speed from the V-n diagram 550
fps
CHAPTER 11: Weight Estimation
Material Aluminium 2020-t3: Density = 2.78g/cc

The mass distribution is obtained by calculating volume of idealized section at each station. The integration of Mass
Distribution gives the value of total mass of the wing

Mass distribution
20

18

16
Mass distribution(lbs)

14

12

10

4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
span(feet)
Weight of half wing
= 621.88 lbs

Weight of whole wing = 1243.8 lbs

Weight of wing obtained from empirical equation:

W_wing = 1343.01 lbs


CHAPTER 12: Hardware Model

Objective: To construct a wing box structure that can withstand a given loading condition while minimizing
structural weight.

Loading : The beam is loaded span-wise with 40, 20 and 4 kg at 25, 50 and 75 cm from root respectively.

Design:

A 3-D structure was chosen with two 2-D trusses combined with transverse elements as shown in the figure
below. Extra 20 cm is spared at other end of root for clamping purpose.

Load Calculation: Assuming the load is distributed in both trusses equally the following figure shows
the load on each element in kg force. Positive values represent tension and negative compression.
In the worst case scenario is given in the next figure with load coming on entirely one truss.
Construction : Aluminium was used as working material for its light weight and workability. C and L sections
beam were used in the construction. 3.5 mm nuts and bolts were used to lock the joints.

Testing: In the first trial the structure failed due to failure in the lower member near the root. After reinforcing
the above mentioned element the beam box successfully took the given loading. The final weight of the beam box
structure was 700g
References

[1] Viken J.K., Pfenninger W., Morgan H.L.: Design of the Low Speed NLF-0414F and the high
speed HSNLF-0213 airfoils with high lift systems.

[2]Airfoil Tools: http://airfoiltools.com/polar/details?polar=xf-nlf414f-il-1000000

[3]Schrenk, O.: A Simple Approximate Method for obtaining the spanwise lift distribution,
Luftwissen. Vol. 7, no. 4, April 1940

[4]Diedrich, F.:A Simple Approximate Method for obtaining Spanwise Lift Distribution over
swept wings, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Washington 1948

[5]Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, Raymer