NOTE

 Change the numerical values according to your calculations

 Include the proper table and graph

LISTOF SYMBOLS

R -Range
V -Velocity
C -specific fuel consumption
E -Loitering time
L/D -lift to drag ratio
𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑡 -Velocity at altitude
𝜌𝑎𝑙𝑡 -Density at altitude
S - wing surface area
b - wing span
µ 𝑎𝑙𝑡 -coefficient of viscosity at altitude
𝐶𝐻𝑇 -Horizontal tail volume coefficient
𝐿𝐻𝑇 - Horizontal tail arm length
𝑆𝐻𝑇 - Horizontal tail area
𝑆𝑊 -Wing area
𝐶𝑊 -Wing mean chord
LVT -Vertical tail arm length
SVT –Vertical tail area
CVT -Vertical tail volume coefficient
bW -Wing span
SW -Wing area
VTO - Vertical take-off distance
STO - Take-off distance
FTO - Take-off thrust
VA - Approach Velocity
Sπ – Wetted area
Λ-Sweep angle

Page 1 of 64
λ- Taper ratio

Page 2 of 64
INTRODUCTION
BASIC DESIGN PROCESS:-

An airplane design is both an art and a science. Airplane design is an intellectual

engineering process of creating on paper a flying machine to

 Meet specifications established by users

 Pioneer innovative, new ideas and technology.

The design process is an intellectual activity developed via experience, by attention paid to
successful airplane designs that have been used in the past and by design procedures and
databases that are a part of every airplane manufacturer.

PHASES OF AIRPLANE DESIGN:-

From the time when an airplane materializes as a new thought to the time the finished
product is ready, the complete design undergoes three distinct phases in perfect sequences which
are

 Conceptual design
 Preliminary design
 Detail design

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN:-

`The design process starts with a set of specifications or much less frequently to desire to
implement pioneering. There is a concrete goal where we designers are aiming at. The first step
towards it is conceptual design. Within a fuzzy latitude, overall shape, size, weight are
determined for the potential user.

The product of the conceptual design phase is layout of airplane configuration on paper.
This drawing has flexible lines, which can be slightly changed. However we get a detailed
account of the layout configuration at the end of this phase. The major drivers during the
conceptual design process are aerodynamics, propulsion and flight performance.

Structural and control system considerations are not dealt in detail but however they are
not dealt in detail but however they are not totally absent. The designer is influenced by
qualitative aspects. No part of the design process is carried out in total vacuum unrelated to other
parts.

Page 3 of 64
PRELIMINARY DESIGN:-

This phase includes only minor changes to be made in the configuration layout. There is
serious control and structural system analysis and design takes place. During this phase
substantial wind tunnel testing will be carried out and major computational fluid dynamics
(CFD) calculations. At the end of the phase, the airplane configuration is frozen and defined. The
drawing process is called lofting. This process makes precise shape of outside skin of airplane
making certain all sections fit together.

The end of the phase is the decision if the airplane is to be manufactured or not. It is no
longer a critical condition where “you – bet your company” on full scale development of a new
airplane.

DETAIL DESIGN:-

This phase is literally the ‘nuts and bolts’ phase of airplane design. The aerodynamic,
propulsion, structures, performance, flight control analysis are over in the preliminary phase. The
airplane is to be fabricated and machined. The size, number and location of rivets, fasteners are
determined now. Flight simulators are developed. At the end of this phase, the aircraft is ready to
be fabricated.

THE SEVEN INTELLECTUAL PIVOT POINTS FOR CONCEPTUAL DESIGN:-

The overall conceptual design is anchored b seven intellectual “pivot points” – seven
factors that anchor the conceptual design thought process. They allow different, detailed thinking
to reach out in all directions from each point.

REQUIREMENTS:-

The requirements are given by the people who are going to buy – the customers. For
other aircrafts, these requirements are usually set by the manufacturer in full appreciation of
needs of owner. Requirements of one airplane are different from the other. There can be no
stipulated specific standard. There must be established requirements that serve as impinge off
point for design process. The requirements that are frequently stipulated are:

 Range
 Takeoff distance
 Stalling velocity
 Endurance
 Maximum velocity
 Rate of climb

For dog fighting combat, maximum turn rate and minimum turn radius

 Maximum load factor

 Service ceiling

Page 4 of 64
  Cost
 Reliability and maintainability
 Maximum size.
SEVEN INTELEECTUAL PIVOT POINTS FOR DESIGN

REQUIREMENTS

WEIGHT OF AIRPLANE –FIRST ESTIMATE

CRITICAL PERFORMANCE PARAMETER

 LIFT COEFFICENT (CLMAX)

 LIFT-TO-DRAG RATIO (L/DMAX)
 WING LOADING (W/S)
 THRUST TO WEIGHT RATIO(T/W)

CONFIGURATION LAYOUT – SHAPE

ANDSIZE OF AIRPLANE ON DRAWING

BETTER WEIGHT ESTIMATE

NO
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS-DOES DESIGN
MEET REQUIREMENTS

YES S

OPTIMIZATION

Page 5 of 64
AIRCRAFT CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PROCESS

BETTER NEW CONCEPT

REQUIREMENTS IDEAS

REVISED LAYOUT

TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE
AERO

WEIGHT
INITIAL LAYOUT S
CONCEPT SKETCH
PROPULSION

AERO COST

STRUCTURE
WEIGHTS S

FIRST GUESS SIZING LANDING GEAR

PROPULSION

ETC

REFORMED SIZE PERFORMANCE

OPTIMIZATION
SIZING AND
PERFORMANCES
OPTIMIZATION
PRELIMNARY DESIGN

Page 6 of 64
CRITICAL PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS:-

Requirements stipulate the performance of the new aircraft. The critical parameters are:

 Maximum lift coefficient

 Lift to drag ratio (L/D)
 Thrust to weight ratio (T/W)

Therefore the next step is to make first estimates of W/S and T/W to achieve the performance as
stipulated by requirements.

CONFIGURATION LAYOUT:-

The configuration layout is a drawing of the shape and size of the airplane as evolved till
stage. The critical performance parameters along with first weight estimate helps to draw the
configuration and approximate the size of the aircraft.

Page 7 of 64
BETTER WEIGHT ESTIMATE:-

The overall size and shape of the airplane are better known now. There is now an
improved estimate of weight based on performance parameters. A more detailed estimate of fuel
is required now.

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS:-

This is the point where the configuration is judged if it can meet all original
specifications. An interactive process is initiated where the configuration is modified. The
critical performance parameters are adjusted for improving performance. In this stage, some
mature decisions should be made as the specifications or cost or unavailable technology.

Hence some specifications might be relaxed so that others might get higher priority.

OPTIMIZATION:-

When iterative process is over, it has produced a viable airplane. This leads to
optimization. The optimization analysis is carried out may be carried out by a systematic
variation of different parameters T/W, W/S and plotting the performance o graphs which can be
found using a sizing matrix or a carpet plot from which optimum design can be found.

WEIGHT OF AIRPLANCE – FIRST ESTIMATE:-

No airplane can take off the ground unless it produces a lift greater than its weight. There
should be a first estimate of gross takeoff weight. The weight estimate is the next pivot point
after the requirements. Lilienthal, Langley and Wright brothers knew more weight means more
drag. This needed an engine with greater power and hence more weight

CONSTRAINT DIAGRAM:-

A constraint diagram is constructed which identifies allowable solution space for airplane
design. A constraint diagram consists of plots o the sea – level thrust to take off weight ratio
versus wing loading at takeoff weight ratioTO /WO versus wing loading at takeoff WO /S
determined by intellectual pivot point.

Page 8 of 64
THE DESIGN WHEEL

SIZING
AND
TRADE
STUDIES

REQUIREMEN DESIGN
T ANALYSIS

DESIGN
CONCEPT

Page 9 of 64
Page 10 of 64
CLASSIFICATION OF AIRPLANES

1. FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS
a. Civil Airplanes
b. Military Airplanes

Civil Airplanes Military Airplanes

Cargo transport Strategic fighters
Passenger travel Interceptors
Mail distribution Escort fighters
Agricultural Tactical bombers
Ambulance Strategic bombers
Executive transport Ground attack airplanes
Training Photo-reconnaissance airplanes
Sports Multipurpose airplanes
Air taxi & charter
Forestry
Fish and wildlife sanctuary
Construction
Aerial photography
Off- shore drilling

2. CLASSIFICATION BY POWER PLANT

a. Types of engine
i. Piston Engines
ii. Turbo-Prop Engines
iii. Turbo-jet Engines
iv. Ram-jet Engines
v. Rockets
b. Number of engines
i. Single Engine
ii. Twin Engine
iii. Multi-Engine
c. Location of power plant
i. Engine (with propeller) located in fuselage nose
ii. Pusher Engine located in the rear fuselage
iii. Engines (jet) submerged in the wing
1. At the root
2. Along the span
iv. Engines (jet) in nacelles suspended under the wing(pod mountings)
v. Engines (jet) located on the rear fuselage
vi. Engines (jet) located within the rear fuselage
3. CLASSIFICATION BY CONFIGURATION

Page 11 of 64
a. Shape and position of wing
b. Type of fuselage
c. Location of horizontal tail surfaces
d. Types of Landing gear

Page 12 of 64
Ex. No.1 Date:

LITERATURE SURVEY (Comparative Study)

It is very easy to design an aircraft if we have data’s about already existing aircrafts of
similar type. It provides more satisfaction and avoids confusion while choosing some design
parameters for our aircraft. In this detailed survey some many important design drivers like
aspect ratio, wing loading, overall dimensions and engine specifications are determined for our
reference. It assists in proposing a new design and modification in our design which will improve
the performance of the proposed aircraft. This assures the performance of the aircraft as per the
design calculations and easy way of designing an aircraft within particular period of time. So in
this literature survey we have collected some ten already existing 20 seated jet transport aircraft
for our reference of design parameters. Mostly these aircrafts have similar characteristics in
many designs aspects which are shown in the table.

Page 13 of 64
GEOMETRIC SPECIFICATIONS

Sl. Name of the Aircraft Aspect Wing Length Wing Wing

No. Ratio Span (m) Area Loading
(m) (m2) (Kg/m2)
1. ATLAS CHEETAH 1.93 8.22 15.55 35 250

2. CHENGDU J10 2.44 9.75 15.49 39 381

3. CONVAIR F102 DELTA DAGGER 2.19 11.61 20.83 61.52 172

4. CONVAIR F2Y SEA DART 3.79 12 17.3 38 142

5. DASSUALT MIRAGE 2.44 10.6 16.4 46 224.2

6. F35 LIGHTNING II 2.68 10 7 15.67 42.7 410

7. GENERAL DYNAMICS F16XL 1.82 10.44 16.51 60 431

8. HAL TEJAS 1.75 8.2 13.2 38.4 247

9. KAI T-50 GOLDEN EAGLE 3.76 9.45 13.41 23.69 276.4

10. LOCKHEED MARTIN F22 RAPTOR 2.36 13.56 18.92 78.04 377

11. MCDONNELL DOUGLAW F-15E STRIKE 3.01 13.025 19.43 56.5 358
EAGLE
12. MIKOYAN MIG 29 3.42 11.4 17.37 38 403

13. MITSUBISHI F2 3.56 11.13 15.52 34.84 430

14. NORTHROP F- 20 TIGERSHARK 3.86 8.53 14.4 18.6 395

15. NORTHROP YF23 2.1 13.3 20.6 88 265

16. SHENYANG J-11 3.48 14.7 29.9 62.04 317

17. SUKHOI SU- 30 3.49 14.7 21.935 62 401

18. SUKHOI SU-47 3.71 15.16 22.6 61.87 360

19. XIAN JH-7 2.77 12.8 22.32 35.45 289.9

20. YAKOLEV YAK-141 3.22 10.105 18.36 31.7 308.8

21.

Page 14 of 64
 Empty Gross Maximum Take-off
Name of the
Sl. No. Weight Weight Weight
Aircraft
(Kg) (Kg) (Kg)

1. ATLAS 6600 9050 13700

CHEETAH
2. CHENGDU J10 9750 14250 24500

3. CONVAIR F102 8777 11100 14300

DELTA
DAGGER
4. CONVAIR F2Y 5730 7840 9750
SEA DART
5. DASSUALT 9500 16000 20000
MIRAGE
6. F35 13154 22426 31800
LIGHTNING II
7. GENERAL 9980 13180 21800
DYNAMICS
F16XL
8. HAL TEJAS 6560 9018 13500

9. KAI T-50 6470 8650 12300

GOLDEN

Page 15 of 64
 EAGLE
WEIGHT
10. LOCKHEED 19700 27900 36700 SPECIFICATIONS
MARTIN F22
RAPTOR
11. MCDONNELL 14300 20403 35000
DOUGLAW F-
15E STRIKE
EAGLE
12. MIKOYAN 11000 14500 20000
MIG 29
13. MITSUBISHI 9527 14970 22100
F2
14. NORTHROP F- 5964 7021 12474
20
TIGERSHARK
15. NORTHROP 13100 23327 29000
YF23
16. SHENYANG J- 16380 25780 33000
11
17. SUKHOI SU- 30 17700 27100 34500

18. SUKHOI SU-47 16375 25000 35000

19. XIAN JH-7 14500 23500 28475

20. YAKOLEV 11650 24250 19500

YAK-141
21.

Page 16 of 64
POWERPLANT SPECIFICATIONS

Sl. No. Name of the Aircraft Type of Engine Number of Engines Power or Thrust per Engine
1. ATLAS CHEETAH Afterburning 1 71
turbojet
2. CHENGDU J10 Turbofan 1 155.6
3. CONVAIR F102 Afterburning 1 76.5
DELTA DAGGER turbojet
4. CONVAIR F2Y SEA Turbojet 2 88.3
DART
5. DASSUALT Afterburning 1 125
MIRAGE turbofan
6. F35 LIGHTNING II
7. GENERAL
DYNAMICS F16XL
8. HAL TEJAS
9. KAI T-50 GOLDEN
EAGLE

10. LOCKHEED
MARTIN F22
RAPTOR
11. MCDONNELL
DOUGLAW F-15E
STRIKE EAGLE
12. MIKOYAN MIG 29
13. MITSUBISHI F2
14. NORTHROP F-20
TIGERSHARK
15. NORTHROP YF23
16. SHENYANG J-11
17. SUKHOI SU- 30
18. SUKHOI SU-47
19. XIAN JH-7
20. YAKOLEV YAK-141
21.

Page 17 of 64
PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS:

Maximum speed Service ceiling Range

Sl. No. Name of the Aircraft Cruising speed (m/s)
(m/s) (Km) (Km)

1 ATLAS CHEETAH
2 CHENGDU J10
3 CONVAIR F102 DELTA DAGGER
4 CONVAIR F2Y SEA DART
CONVAIR F2Y SEA DART
6 F35 LIGHTNING II
7 GENERAL DYNAMICS FL

8 HAL TEJAS
9 KAI T-50 GOLDEN EAGLE
10 LOCKHEED MARTIN F22 RAPTOR
11 MCDONNELL DOUGHLAS F-15E STRIKE EAGLE
12 MIKOYAN MIG 29
13
14
15
16 SHENYANG J-11

17 SUKHOI SU -30

18 SUKHOI SU-47

19 XIAN JH-7

20

Page 18 of 64
Ex. No.2 Date:

COMPARATIVE GRAPHS
 Speed Vs aspect ratio
 Speed Vs rate of climb
 Speed Vs range
 Speed Vs altitude
Page 19 of 64
 Speed Vs wing loading
 Speed Vs b/l

Page 20 of 64
RESULT:
From the above comparative graphs and calculation,

1. Velocity Vs Aspect ratio

Velocity=

Aspect ratio=

2. Velocity Vs Rate of climb

Velocity=

Average velocity=

3. Velocity Vs Range

Velocity=

Range=

4. Velocity Vs altitude

Velocity=

Altitude=

5. Velocity Vs Wing loading

Velocity=0.47 mach

Wing loading =

6. Velocity Vs b/l

Velocity=

b/l=

Page 21 of 64
Ex. No.3 Date:

PRIMARY WEIGHT ESTIMATION:

The purpose of this section is to introduce a technique to obtain the first estimate of the
maximum take-off weight for an aircraft before it is designed and built. The word estimation is
intentionally selected to indicate the degree of the accuracy and reliability of the output. Hence,
the value for the maximum take-off weight is not final and must be revised in the later design
phases. The result of this step may have up to about 20% inaccuracies, since it is not based on its
own aircraft data. But the calculation relies on the other aircraft data with similar configuration
and mission. Thus, we are adopting the past history as the major source of the information for the
calculation in this step. At the end of the preliminary design phase, the take-off weight
estimation is repeated by using another more accurate technique.

An aircraft has a range of weights from minimum to maximum depending upon the number
of pilots and crew, fuel, and payloads (passengers, loads, luggage, and cargo). As the aircraft flies,
the fuel is burning and the aircraft weight is decreasing. The most important weight in the design
of an aircraft is the maximum allowable weight of the aircraft during take-off operation. It is also
referred to as all up weight. The design maximum take-off weight (MTOW or WTO) is the total
weight of an aircraft when it begins the mission for which it is designed. The maximum design
take-off weight is not necessarily the same as the maximum nominal take-off weight, since some
aircraft can be overloaded beyond design weight in an emergency situation, but will suffer a
reduced performance and reduced stability. Unless specifically stated, maximum take-off weight
is the design weight. It means every aircraft component (e.g. wing, tail) is designed to support
this weight.

The major factor that determines the whole design of aircraft especially the selection of
overall weight, airfoil and power plant of the aircraft.

Total weight of an airplane is given by,

WTO =WC+WPL+WF+WE

Where,

WTO = Design takeoff weight of the aircraft

WC = crew weight

WPL = weight of the payload

WF = weight of the fuel

Page 22 of 64
 WE = empty weight

To simplify the calculation, both fuel and empty weights can be expressed as fractions of the
total takeoff weight, i.e., Wf/WO. Equation

WO = WC+WPL+ ( WW )W +( WW )W
F
TO
E
TO
TO TO

This can be solved for WTO as follows:

WTO ─ ( WW ) W
F
TO ─ ( WW ) W
E
TO = WC+WPL
TO TO

WTO = ( 1   W / WW  ─W W
C PL

/ WTO 
)
F TO E

Now WTO can be determined if (WF/WTO) and (WE/WTO) can be estimated.

These are described below.

According to our design, aircraft’s capacity is 10 to 20 passengers. So,

WPL=WPASSENGERS+WBAGGAGE

Assuming that each passenger weight is 80 kg with 15 kg baggage, then the payload weight is,

W Pay Load = 95×2= 190 kg.

Assuming that each crew weight is 80 kg with 15 kg baggage, then,
W Crew = (2 ×80) + (2 ×15)
= 190 kg

So,

WTO = 380
1-(W f/WTO) – (WE / WTO )

Page 23 of 64
MISSION PROFILE:-

From the figure the various stages of aircraft during mission is as follows,
1 Start & Warm up
2 Taxiing in the runway
3 Takeoff
4 Climb
5 Cruising
6 Loiter
7 Descent and
8 Landing.

For subsonic jet transport aircraft weight fuel fraction is,

(W8/W0) = ( W1/W0) ×( W2/W1) × ( W3/W2) × ( W4/W3) × ( W5/W4) × ( W6/W5) × ( W7/W6)
× (W8/W7)

APPROXIMATE WEIGHT ESTIMATION:

Weight fraction for each profile in mission segment,

For Warm up,
(W1/W0) =0.995.

Page 24 of 64
For Taxy,
(W2/W1) =0.997.
For Takeoff,
(W3/W2) =0.998.
For Climb,
(W4/W3) =0.992.
For Cruising,

(W5/W4) =exp ( V LRC/ D )

Where,

SYMBOLS DESIGN PARAMETERS DESIGN VALUES

R range 645.23km(348nm)
V velocity 0.49mach(90.17knots)
L/D lift to drag ratio 8
C specific fuel consumption 0.8

So, (W5/W4) =exp [ -348 ×0.8 ]

90.17×8

= 0.680
For loiter,

Assume 10 minutes for loitering,

(W6/W5) =exp (  LEC

/ D
)
Where,
SYMBOLS DESIGN PARAMETERS DESIGN VALUES
E Loitering time 0.166 hr
L/D lift to drag ratio 10
C specific fuel consumption 0.7

Page 25 of 64
 So, (W6/W5) =exp [ -0.166×0.7 ]
10
=0.988
For descent,
(W7/W6) =0.993
For landing,
(W8/W7) =0.993
Then,
(WF/WTO) = (1.06× (1-W8/W0))
=0.370
Assume Empty Weight fraction,

(WE/WTO) = 0.56

So, overall weight,

W TO = 380
1-(W f/WTO) – (WE / WTO )

Approximate Overall weight = 4750 kg

RESULT:

Thus the final Takeoff weight of the proposed aircraft was estimated using fuel fraction
method were as follows,

WTO (APPROXIMATE) = ----------- kg.

Page 26 of 64
Ex. No.4 Date:

ENGINE SELECTION
1. Thrust to weight ratio
2. Thrust matching
3. Engine rating
4. Rubber sizing of the engine
5. Number of the engines

Thrust to weight ratio:

T/W directly affects the performance of the aircraft. An aircraft with a higher T/W will
accelerate more quickly, climb more rapidly, reach a higher maximum speed, and sustain higher
turn rates. On the other hand, the larger engines will consume more fuel throughout the mission,
which will drive up the aircraft up the aircraft’s takeoff gross weight to perform the design
mission.

T/W is not a constant. The weight of the aircraft varies during the flight as fuel is burned.
Also, the engine’s thrust varies with altitude and velocity (as does the horsepower and propeller
efficiency, (ηp).When the designers speak of an aircraft’s thrust-to-weight ratio they generally
refer to the T/W during sea-level static (zero velocity), standard-day conditions.

Power to Weight ratio:

The term thrust to weight ratio is associated with jet engine aircraft. For propeller
powered aircraft, the equivalent term has classically been the “ power loading” expressed as the
weight of the aircraft divided by its power (W/P).

T/WTO Ratio for General Aviation- single engine is 1.53

Overall weight of aircraft WTO =4550 kg.

Then,

T=1.53×4550

=6961.5 kg.

=68292 N

Page 27 of 64
So, the thrust needed=68.29 KN

From the literature survey the nearest value of the thrust corresponding aircraft is Walter Vega

The Walter Vega has the following characteristics,

 Thrust per engine = 68.2 k N

 Number of engine = 1
 Type of engine = Walter Vega
 Total thrust =68.2 k N

RESULT:

 Name of engine selected = Walter Vega

 Number of engine =1
 Total thrust = 68.2 K

Page 28 of 64
Ex. No.5 Date:

AIRFOIL SELECTION

Wing design:

This chapter focuses on the detail design of the wing. The wing may be considered as the most
important component of an aircraft, since a fixed-wing aircraft is not able to fly without it. Since
the wing geometry and its features are influencing all other aircraft components, we begin the
detail design process by wing design. The primary function of the wing is to generate sufficient
lift force or simply lift (L). However, the wing has two other productions, namely drag force or
drag (D) and nose-down pitching moment (M). While a wing designer is looking to maximize
the lift, the other two (drag and pitching moment) must be minimized. In fact, wing is assumed
ad a lifting surface that lift is produced due to the pressure difference between lower and upper
surfaces.

During the wing design process, eighteen parameters must be determined. They are as follows:
1. Wing reference (or planform) area (SW or Sref or S)
2. Number of the wings
3. Vertical position relative to the fuselage (high, mid, or low wing)
4. Horizontal position relative to the fuselage
5. Cross section (or airfoil)
6. Aspect ratio (AR)
7. Taper ratio
8. Tip chord (Ct)
9. Root chord (Cr)
10. Mean Aerodynamic Chord (MAC or C)
11. Span (b)
12. Twist angle
13. Sweep angle
14. Dihedral angle
15. Incidence (iw)
16. High lifting devices such as flap
17. Aileron
18. Other wing accessories

The airfoil, in many respects, is the heart of the airplane. The airfoil affects the cruise speed,
take-off and landing distances, stall speed, handling qualities, and overall aerodynamic efficiency
during all phases of flight. The design of the airfoil is a complex and time consuming process.

Much of the Wright brothers success can be traced to their development of airfoils using a wind
tunnel of their own design, and the in-flight validation of those airfoils in their glider
experiments if 1901-1902. More recently, the low speed airfoils develop by peter Lissaman

Page 29 of 64
contributed much to the success of the man-powered Gosssmer Condor, and the airfoils designed
by John Rontz were instrumental to the success of Burt Rutan’s radical designs.

Page 30 of 64
Cruising Reynolds number (Re) as follows,
𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑡 × 𝜌𝑎𝑙𝑡 ×𝐶
Re = µ
𝑎𝑙𝑡

𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑡 =Velocity at altitude

𝜌𝑎𝑙𝑡 = Density at altitude

𝐶 =(s/b)

S = wing surface area

b = wing span

µ
𝑎𝑙𝑡

And, from standard air table at altitude 4200 m,

𝑇𝑎𝑙𝑡 =262.2 k.

𝜌𝑎𝑙𝑡 =0.819 kg/m2

𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑡 =M×√(𝛶𝑅𝑇𝑎𝑙𝑡 )

=0.136×√(1.4 × 287 × 262.2

=2.45 m/s

Aspect ratio of our aircraft=5.7

From the literature survey for that aspect ratio,

Area=29.3 m2

Span=12.92 m

And, c =s/b =2.26 m-1

𝑇𝑎𝑙𝑡 0.75
And µ =µ ×( )
𝑎𝑙𝑡 0 𝑇0

262.2 0.75
= 17.5 × 10−5 × ( )
288.16

=1.6310× 10−4
324.5 × 0.819×2.26
So, Re = 1.413×10−4

Page 31 of 64
 =4.2× 106

For the Reynolds’s number approximately3 × 106 , from the THEORY OF WING SECTION by
ABBOT following data can be obtained.

Airfoil type Maximum lift coefficient Minimum drag coefficient

NACA 0010-34 0.95 0.004
NACA 0012-4 1.5 0.006
NACA 0012-64 1.4 0.005
NACA 1408 1.5 0.0045
NACA 1410 1.5 0.0055
NACA 2408 1.5 0.005
NACA 4412 1.5 0.0070

RESULT:

From the above analysis __________ series type airfoil was selected for our aircraft design.

Page 32 of 64
Ex. No.6 Date:

DIMENSIONAL PARAMETERS (wing, horizontal tail, vertical tail)

Fuselage:

Once the takeoff gross weight has been estimated, the fuselage, the wing. And tail can be sized.
Many methods exist to initially estimate the required fuselage size. For certain types of aircraft,
the fuselage size is determined strictly by “real world constraints”. For example, a large
passenger aircraft devotes most of its length to the passenger compartment. Once the number of
passengers is known and the number of seats across is selected, the fuselage length and diameter
are essentially determined.

Wing:

Actual wing size can now be determined simply as the takeoff weight divided by takeoff wing
loading. Remember that this reference area of the theoretical, trapezoidal wing, and includes the
area extending into the aircraft center line.

Tail Volume Co-efficient:

For the initial layout, the historical approach is used for the estimation of the tail size. The
effectiveness of a tail in generating a moment about the centre of gravity is proportional to the
force produced by the tail and to the tail moment arm. The primary purpose of the tail is to
counter the moments produced by the wing.

1. Length of fuselage:

LFU = a woc

= 1.6× 45500.23

= 11.21 m.

2. Surface area:

Aspect ratio of our aircraft=5.7

From the literature survey for that aspect ratio,

Area=29.3 m2

Span=12.92 m.

Page 33 of 64
3. Taper ratio

Taper ratio is defined as the ratio between the tip chord (Ct) to the root chord (Cr). This
definition is applied to the wing, as well as the horizontal tail, and the vertical tail. General, the
taper ratio varies between zero and one. 0 ≤ λ ≤ 1

The taper ratio can be defined as,

tip chord
λ=root chord

And the value for the taper ratio in general from design book is 0.4

2s
So, C root chord =b(1+𝛌)

2×2.93
=12.92(1+0.4) =0.32 m.

And, C tip chord = λ× C root chord

=0.128 m.

Page 34 of 64
4. Aerodynamic mean chord:

2 1+λ+λ2
𝐶𝑊 = 3 × C root chord×( )
(1+λ)

2 1+0.4+0.42
= 3 ×0.32× (1+0.4)

𝐶𝑊 =0.2377 m.

Location of mean chord is, x =

b (1+2λ)
And, y = 6 (1+λ)
12.92 (1+0.8)
= 6 (1+0.4)

=2.768 m.
wing ADC diagram

5. Vertical and horizontal volume coefficient:

𝐿 × 𝑆𝐻𝑇
CHT = 𝐶𝐻𝑇
𝑊 × 𝑆𝑊

Where,
𝐶𝐻𝑇 -Horizontal tail volume coefficient
𝐿𝐻𝑇 - Horizontal tail arm length
𝑆𝐻𝑇 - Horizontal tail area
𝑆𝑊 -Wing area
𝐶𝑊 -Wing mean chord

Since, 𝐿𝐻𝑇 is 25% of the fuselage length,

𝐿𝐻𝑇 = 0.25× 𝐿𝐹𝑈
= 0.25×9.27
= 2.3175 m.

Page 35 of 64
For our design,
𝑆𝑊 =29.3 m2
𝐶𝑊 =0.2377 m.

From “Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach” by Daniel.P.Raymer 3rd Ed,

𝐶𝐻𝑇 =0.70So,

𝐶𝑊 × 𝑆𝑊 × 𝐶𝐻𝑇
SHT = 𝐿𝐻𝑇

0.2377×29.3×0.70
SHT = = 2.097 m2
2.3175

And,

𝐿𝑉𝑇 × 𝑆𝑉𝑇
𝐶𝑉𝑇 = 𝑏𝑊 × 𝑆𝑊

Where,

LVT -Vertical tail arm length

SVT –Vertical tail area

CVT -Vertical tail volume coefficient

bW -Wing span

SW -Wing area

Since, 𝐿𝑉𝑇 is 50% of the fuselage length,

𝐿𝑉𝑇 = 0.5× 𝐿𝐹𝑈
= 0.5×9.27
=4.635 m.
For our design,
𝑆𝑊 = 29.3 m2.
𝑏𝑊 = 12.92m.

From “Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach” by Daniel.P.Raymer 3rd Ed,

Page 36 of 64
 𝐶𝑉𝑇 =0.04 m.

So,

𝑏𝑊 × 𝑆𝑊 × 𝐶𝑉𝑇
𝑆𝑉𝑇 = 𝐿𝑉𝑇

12.92×29.3×0.04
= 4.635

= 3.266 m2

RESULT:
The dimensional parameters are,

Page 37 of 64
Ex. No.7 Date:

WETTED AREA DETERMINATION

Aircraft wetted area (Swet), the total exposed surface area, can be visualized as the area of the
external parts of the aircraft that would get wet if it were dipped into water. The wetted area must
be calculated for drag estimation, as it the major contributor to friction drag.

The wing and tail wetted areas can be approximated from their platforms. The wetted area is
estimated by multiplying the true view exposed plan form area is estimated by multiplying the
true view exposed planform area (S exposed) times a factor based upon the wing or tail thickness
ratio.

If a wing or tail were paper –thin, the wetted area would be exactly twice the true plan form area.
The effect of finite thickness id to increase the wetted area, as approximated by the following
equations.

Note that the true exposed plan form area is the projected area divided by the cosine of the
dihedral angle.

If t/c ˂ 0.05,

S wet =2.003 S exposed

If t/c ˃0.05,

S wet= S exposed [1.977 + 0.52(t/c)]

The exposed area can be measured from the drawing in several ways. A professional designer
will have access to a “planimeter” a mechanical device for measuring areas. Use of the
planimeter is a dying art as the computer replaces the drafting board. Alternatively the area can
be measured by tracing onto graph paper and “counting squares”.

The wetted area of the fuselage can be initially estimated using just the side and top views of the
aircraft. The side and top view projected areas of the fuselage are measured from the drawing,
and the values are averaged.

For a long, thin body circular in cross section, this average projected area times Π will yield the
surface wetted area. If the body is rectangular in cross section, the wetted area will be four times
the average projected area. For typical aircraft the following equation provides a reasonable
approximation.

S wet=3.4 [(A top + A side) / 2) ]

Page 38 of 64
A more accurate estimation of wetted area can be obtained by graphical integration using a
number of fuselage cross sections. If the perimeters of the cross sections are measured and
plotted Vs longitudinal locations, using the same units on the graph, then the integrated area
under the resulting curve gives the wetted area.

Perimeters can be measured using a professional’s “map-measure,” or approximated using a

piece of scrap paper. Simply follow around the perimeter measurements should not include the
portions where components join, such as at the wing –fuselage intersection. These areas are not
“wetted”.

1) For fuselage
πd2f
𝑠𝜋𝑓 =
4

Π denotes its wetted calculation

lf
From Airplane Design Part II by Dr.John roskam, for Single Engine Aircraft is 6.5,
df

From wing design calculation Lf =9.7 m,

9.7
Now, df = =1.49 m,
6.5
πd2f π×1.492
𝑠𝜋𝑓 = = =1.74 m2
4 4

2) For wing
sπw = 𝑡𝑤 × 𝑏𝑤
tw
A known relation, = 0.1(from aerofoil t/c max)
croot

From wing design calculation,croot is 3.24 m,

𝑡w =0.1×3.24 = 0.324 m.
𝑠𝜋𝑤 = 0.324×12.92 =4.186 m2

3) For horizontal tail

sπht = 𝑡ht ×𝑏ht =7.64×0.0324 =0.2479 m2
𝑡ht = 𝑡vt = 10 percent 𝑡w =0.1×0.324 =0.0324

Page 39 of 64
From “Aircraft design: A Conceptual approach” by Daniel P.Raymer,
2
bht
(AR) ht = =4
sht
Now,

b2ht = 4×14.63 = 7.64 m

4) For vertical tail
2
bvt
(AR) vt = =
svt

𝑠𝜋𝑣𝑡 = 𝑏vt ×t vt = 3.82×0.0324 =0.123 m2.

5) Engine area
2
𝑠𝜋𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑒 = 𝜋𝑑
4
e

2 df
𝜋 ×0.745
=
4 Since de = = 1.49/2 =0.745 m
2
=0.436 m2.

6) 1/4 flap deflection

𝜃 =15˚
For Single Engine range, (0.05 to 0.1)
The below is average of above range,

sπ = 0.075 m2

7) 3/4 flap deflection

𝜃 =45˚
For Single Engine range, (0.15 to 0.2)
The below is average of above range,

sπ = 0.175 m2

8) Undercarriage
sπu =1.1×sπengine
=1.1×0.436
=0.479 m2

Page 40 of 64
 S.No Component sπ (m2)
1 Fuselage 1.74
2 Wing 4.186
3 Horizontal tail 0.2479
4 Vertical tail 0.123
5 Engine 0.436
6 1/4 flap 0.075
7 3/4 flap 0.175
8 Undercarriage 0.479

RESULT:
The wetted area details are,

Page 41 of 64
Ex. No.8 Date:

DRAG ESTIMATION

Aerodynamic forces that split into two forces: Lift force or lift, and Drag force or drag. A pre-
requisite to aircraft performance analysis is the ability to calculate the aircraft drag at various
flight conditions. Drag force is the summation of all forces that resist against aircraft motion.

The drag coefficient is non-dimensional parameter, but it takes into account every aerodynamic
configuration of the aircraft including, wing, tail, fuselage and landing gear. This coefficient has two
main parts. The first part is referred to as lift-related drag coefficient or induced drag coefficient
(CDi) and the second part is called zero-lift drag coefficient (CDo).

Calculation of CDo

The CDo of an aircraft is simply the summation of CDo of all contributing components.

CDof, CDow, CDoht, CDovt, CDoLG, CDoN, CDoS, CDoHLD, are respectively representing
fuselage, wing, horizontal tail, vertical tail, landing gear, nacelle, strut, high lift device (such as
flap).
CDo OTHERS is components such as antenna, pitot tube, wire, and wiper

Page 42 of 64
Fuselage
The zero-lift drag coefficient of fuselage is given by the following equation:

where, Cf is skin friction coefficient and is non-dimensional number. It is determined based on

the Prandtl relationship as follows:

(for turbulent and laminar flow)

Where ρ is the air density, V is aircraft true airspeed, µ is air viscosity, and L is the length of the
component in the direction of flight. For the fuselage, L it the fuselage length. The second
parameter (fLD) is a function of length to diameter ratio

The third parameter (fM) is a function of Mach number (M).

The last two parameters Swetf and S, where are respectively the wetted area of the fuselage and
the wing reference area.

Page 43 of 64
Wing, Horizontal Tail, and Vertical Tail

In these equations, Cfw, Cfht, Cfvt are similar to what we defined for fuselage. The only
difference is that the equivalent value of L in Reynolds number) for wing, horizontal tail, and
vertical tail are their mean aerodynamic chord (MAC).

High lift devices

The δf is the flap deflection in degrees (usually less than 50 degrees).

Landing gear

Page 44 of 64
Engine (cooling drag)

where P is the engine power (hp), T is the air temperature (K), σ is the relative density of the air,
V is the aircraft velocity (m/sec), and S is the wing reference area (m2). Th parameter Ke is a
coefficient that depends on the type of engine. It varies between 1 and 3.

Overall CDo

where Kc is a correction factor and depends on several factors such as the type, year of
fabrication and configuration of the aircraft.

Sl.No. Aircraft type Kc

1 Passenger 1.1
2 Agriculture 1.5
3 Cargo 1.2
4 Single engine piston 1.3
5 General Aviation 1.2
6 Fighter 1.1

No. Aircraft type CDo e

1 Subsonic jet 0.014-0.02 0.75-0.85
2 Large turboprop 0.018-0.024 0.8-0.85
3 Twin-engine piton prop 0.022-0.028 0.75-0.8
4 Small GA with 0.02-0.03 0.75-0.8
retractable landing gear
5 Small GA with fixed 0.025-0.04 0.65-0.8
landing gear
6 Agricultural aircraft 0.06-0.065 0.65-0.75
7 glider
without crop duster 0.01-0.015 0.8-0.9
8 Supersonic jet 0.02-0.04 0.6-0.8

Typical values of CDo and e for several aircraft

Page 45 of 64
 No. Component CDo of component Percent from
total CDo (%)
1 Wing 32
2 Fuselage 28
4 Nacelle 7
5 Engine strut 1
6 Horizontal tail 7
7 Vertical tail 5
8 Other components 20
9 Total CDO 100

1
For our wing, k= 𝛱𝑒𝐴𝑅
=0.055

At SEA LEVEL, (h=0)

Where,

T=288.16 K,

ρ =1.225 kg/m3

a = (γ×R×T) ^0.5 = (1.4×287×288.16) ^0.5 =340.268 m/s.

2×𝑊 2×4550×9.81
CL = =
𝜌×𝑆×𝑉^2 1.225×29.3×𝑉^2

S.No V CL M=v/a CDo CDT =(𝐶𝐷𝑂 + (𝑘CL)2 D=(( CDT

(m/s) ×W)/ CL)
(N)

Page 46 of 64
GRAPH BETWEEN VELOCITY & DRAG:

20000

18000

16000

14000

12000
drag(N)

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Velocity Vs Drag @ sea level velocity m/s

Page 47 of 64
RESULT:

From the above tables and graphs, drag and velocity at different altitudes are obtained.

Ex. No.9 Date:

LANDING GEAR SELECTION

INTRODUCTION:
Another aircraft major component that is needed to be designed is landing gear (undercarriage).
The landing gear is the structure that supports an aircraft on the ground and allows it to taxi,
take-off, and land. In fact, landing gear design tends to have several interferences with the
aircraft structural design. In this lab, the structural design aspects of landing gear are not
addressed; but, those design parameters which strongly impact the aircraft configuration design
and aircraft aerodynamics will be discussed. In addition, some aspects of landing gear such as
shock absorber, retraction mechanism and brakes are assumed as non-aeronautical issues and
may be determined by a mechanical engineer. Thus, those pure mechanical parameters will not
be considered in this chapter either. In general, the followings are the landing gear parameters
which are to be determined in this chapter:
1. Type (e.g. nose gear (tricycle), tail gear, bicycle)
2. Fixed (faired, or un-faired), or retractable, partially retractable
3. Height
4. Wheel base
5. Wheel track
6. The distance between main gear and aircraft cg
7. Strut diameter
8. Tire sizing (diameter, width)
9. Landing gear compartment if retracted
10. Load on each strut

Landing gear usually includes wheels, but some aircraft are equipped with skis for snow or float
for water. In the case of a vertical take-off and landing aircraft such as a helicopter, wheels may
be replaced with skids. The descriptions of primary parameters are as follows. Landing gear
height is the distance between the lowest point of the landing gear (i.e. bottom of the tire) and the
attachment point to the aircraft. Since, landing gear may be attached to the fuselage or to the

Page 48 of 64
wing; the term height has different meaning. Furthermore, the landing gear height is a function
of shock absorber and the landing gear deflection. The height is usually measured when the aircraft is
on the ground; it has maximum take-off weight; and landing gear has the maximum deflection (i.e. lowest
height).

The common options for landing-gear are shows in figure. The single main gear is used for many
sailplanes because of its simplicity. The wheel can be forward of the center of gravity (c.g), as
shown here, or can be aft of the c.g. with a skid under the cockpit is also of significant
importance and will be employed during calculations. Wheel base is the distance between main
gear and other gear (from side view). The landing gear is divided into two sections: 1. Main gear
or main wheel1, 2. Secondary gear or secondary wheel. Main gear is the gear which is the closest
to the aircraft center of gravity (cg). During the landing operation, the main wheel touches first
with the point of contact to the ground. Furthermore, during the take-off operation, the main
wheel leaves the ground last. On the other hand, main gear is carrying great portion of the
aircraft load on the ground.

Page 49 of 64
Landing Gear Configuration

The first job of an aircraft designer in the landing gear design process is to select the landing gear
configuration. Landing gear functions may be performed through the application of various
landing gear types and configurations. Landing gear design requirements are parts of the aircraft
general design requirements including cost, aircraft performance, aircraft stability, aircraft
control, maintainability, producibility and operational considerations. In general, there are ten
configurations for a landing gear as follows:
1. Single main
2. Bicycle
3. Tail-gear
4. Tricycle or nose-gear

Page 50 of 64
5. Quadricycle
6. Multi-bogey
7. Releasable rail
8. Skid
9. Seaplane landing device
10. Human leg

“Bicycle” gear has two main wheels, fore and aft of the c.g., with small “outrigger” wheels on
the wings to prevent the aircraft from tipping sideways. The bicycle landing gear has the aft
wheel so far behind the c.g., that the aircraft must take-off and land in a flat altitude, which limits
this of gear to aircraft with high lift at low angles of attack (i.e.., high-aspect ratio wings with
large camber and/or flaps). Bicycle gear has been used mainly on aircraft with narrow fuselage
and wide wing span such as the B-47 .

The “tail dragger” landing gear has two main wheels forward of the c.g. and an auxiliary wheel
at the tail. Tail dragger gear is also called conventional landing gear, because it was the most
widely used arrangement during the first 40 years of aviation. Tail dragger gear provides more
propeller clearance,, has less drag and weight, and allows the wing to generate more lift for
rough-field operation than does tricycle gear.

However, tail dragger landing gear is inherently unstable. If the aircraft starts to turn, the location
of c.g. behind the main gear causes the turn to get tighter until a “ground loop” is encountered,
and the aircraft either drags wingtip, collapses the landing gear, or runs of the side of the runway.
To prevent this, the pilot of a tail dragger aircraft must align the aircraft almost perfectly with the
runway at touchdown, and “dance” on the rudder pedals until the aircraft stops.

The most commonly used arrangement today is the “tricycle” gear, with two main wheels aft of
the c.g. and an auxiliary wheel forward of the c.f., with a tricycle landing gear, the c.g. is ahead
of the main wheels so the aircraft is stable on the ground and can be landed at a fairly large
“crab” angle (i.e., nose not aligned with the runway). Also, tricycle landing gear improves
forward visibility on the ground and permits a flat cabin floor for passenger and cargo loading.

Quadricycle gear is much like bicycle gear but with wheels at the sides of the fuselage.
Quadricycle gear also requires a flat takeoff and landing attitude. It is used on the B-52 and
several cargo planes where it has the advantage of permitting a cargo floor very low to the
ground.

The gear arrangements described above are also seen with two, four, or more wheels in place of
the single wheels shown in figure. As the aircraft weights become larger, the requires wheel size
for a single wheel capable of holding the aircraft’s weight too large. Then multiple wheels are
used to share the load between reasonably sized tires.

Page 51 of 64
Also, it is very common to use twin nose-wheels to retain some control in the event of a nose-
wheel flat tire. Similarly, multiple main wheels (i.e. total of four or more) are desirable for
safety. When multiple wheels are used in tandem, they are attached to a structural element called
a “bogey,” or “truck,” or “axle beam” that is attached to the end of shock-absorber strut.

Typically an aircraft weighing under about 50,000 lb(22,680 kg) will use a single main wheel per
strut, although for safety in the event of a flat tire it is always better to use two wheels per strut.
Between 50,000 lb (22,680-68,040 kg), two wheels per strut are typical. Two wheels per strut are
sometimes used for the aircraft weighing up to about 250,000 lb(113,400 kg).

Between aircraft weights of about 200,000 and 400,000 lb(90,720-181,440 kg) the four-wheel
bogey is usually employed; for aircraft over 400,000 lb (181,440 kg) four bogeys, each with four
or six wheels, spread the total aircraft load across the runway pavement.

Except for light aircraft and a few fighters, most aircraft use twin nose-wheels to retain control in
the event of a flat nose tire. Carrier-based aircraft must use twin nose-wheels at least 19in. (483
cm) in diameter to straddle the catapult-launching mechanism. The massive C-5 employs four
nose-wheels to spread to spread the tire load, permitting operation off of relatively soft fields.

Page 52 of 64
 Landing gear arrangements

Guidelines for layout of a bicycle landing gear are shown in figure. The c.g. should be aft of the
midpoint between the two wheels.The requirements for tail dragger gear are shown in figure. Te
tail-down angle should be about 10-15 deg with the gear in the static position( i.e., tires and
shock absorbers compressed the amount seen when the aircraft seen when the aircraft is
stationary on the ground at takeoff gross weight).The c.g. (most forward and most aft) should fall
between 16-25 deg back from vertical measured from the main wheel location. If the c.g. is too
far forward the aircraft will tend will tend to nose over, and if it is too far back it will tend to
ground loop.To prevent the aircraft from overturning the main wheels should be laterally
separated beyond a 25 deg angle off the c.g., as measured from the rear in a tail-down attitude.

Page 53 of 64
GEAR RETRACTION GEOMETRY
Another design aspect of the landing gear is to decide what to do with it after take-off operation.
In general, there are four alternatives as follows:
1. Landing gear is released after take-off.
2. Landing gear hangs underneath the aircraft.
3. Landing gear is fully retracted inside aircraft (e.g. wing, or fuselage).
4. Landing gear is partially retracted inside aircraft.

No Item Fixed (unretractable) Landing Gear Retractable Landing

Gear
1 Cost Cheaper Expensive
2 Weight Lighter Heavier
3 Design Easier to design Harder to design
4 Manufacturing Easier to manufacture Harder to
manufacture
5 Maintenance Easier to maintain Harder to maintain
6 Drag More drag Less drag
7 Aircraft Lower aircraft performance (e.g. maximum Higher aircraft
performance speed ) performance (e.g.
maximum speed)
8 Longitudinal More stable (stabilizing) less stable
stability (destabilizing)
9 Storing bay Does not require a bay Bay must be provided
10 Retraction system Does not require a retraction system Requires a retraction
system
11 Fuel volume More available internal fuel volume Less available
internal fuel volume
12 Aircraft structure Structure in un-interrupted Structural elements
need reinforcement
due to cutout

Fixed and retractable landing gear comparison

Page 54 of 64
RESULT:

Page 55 of 64
Ex. No.10 Date:

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS

The Drag Polar is the relationship between the lift on an aircraft and its drag, expressed in terms of the
dependence of the lift coefficient on the drag coefficient. It may be described by an equation or displayed
in a diagram called a polar plot.

CDt =CDO +K(CL )2

Where,
1
K=𝛱∗𝑒∗𝐴𝑅
1
=𝛱×1×5.7

=0.055

S.No

GRAPH

RESULT:

Page 56 of 64
THRUST REQUIRED CALCULATION:
Thrust available, from the engine selection calculation,

F = 68.2 KN

Freq = F ×σ1.15

For sea level,

Freq = F [(20 – h) / (20+h)] 1.15

= 68.2 [(20-0) / (20+0)] 1.15

= 68.2 KN

For h = 1.05 km,

Freq = 68.2 [(20- 1.05) / (20+1.05)] 1.15

=60.34 KN

For h=2.1km,

Freq = 68.2 [20-2.1) / / (20+2.1)] 1.15

=53.51 KN

For h=3.15km,

Freq = 68.2 [(20 – 3.15) / (20+3.15)] 1.15

= 47.33 KN.

For h=4.2km,

Freq = 68.2 [(20-4.2) / (20+ 4.2) ] 1.15

= 41.76 KN.

S.NO ALTITUDE(Km) THRUST or POWER

Page 57 of 64
RATE OF CLIMB CALCULATION
Rate of climb is defined as the aircraft speed in the vertical axis or the vertical component of the
aircraft airspeed. Hence rate of climb is about how fast an aircraft gains height.

Jet aircraft:
In general, the Rate of Climb (ROC) is defined as the ratio between excess power and the aircraft
weight

Prop-driven Aircraft:
The available power is the engine power times the propulsive efficiency.

1. At SEA LEVEL (h=0)

S.No V(m/s) T D RATE OF
(N) (N) CLIMB (m/s)
1
2
3
4
5

Page 58 of 64
 Velocity Vs Rate of climb @h=0 km
16000

14000

12000

10000

8000 Velocity Vs Rate of climb

@h=0
6000

4000

2000

0
0 50 100 150 200

RESULT:

From the above analysis, two graphs – rate of climb Vs velocity for different altitudes and rate of
climb Vs altitude drawn and the trend in rate of climb was observed.

Page 59 of 64
Ex. No.11 Date:

V-n DIAGRAM (flight envelope)

The V-n diagram plays an important role in Aircraft design. The V-n diagram is a plot
between the load factor and the velocity. Load factor is defined as the ratio of the aerodynamic
load to the weight of the aircraft. Aircraft has to perform different loading conditions at different
speeds, controls and high loads due to stormy weather. But at the same time, it is impossible to
investigate all possible loading conditions.

There are structural limitations on the maximum load factor allowed for a given airplane. There
are two categories of structural limitations in airplane design:

Limit Load Factor: This is the boundary associated with permanent structural deformation of
one or more parts of the airplane. If n is less than the limit load factor, the structure may deflect
during maneuver, but it will return to its original state when n = 1. If n is greater than the limit
load factor, then the airplane structure will experience a permanent deformation, i.e., it will incur
Structural damage.

Ultimate Load Factor: This is the boundary associated with outright structural failure. If n is
greater than the ultimate load factor, parts of the airplane will break.

There are four main critical conditions:

 High Angle of Attack (+)
 Low Angle of Attack (+)
 Low Angle of Attack (-)
 High Angle of Attack (-)

For airplane design, the limit load factor depends on the type of the aircraft.Some typical values
for limit load factors are given below:

Aircraft type npositive nnegative

Normal general aviation 2.5 to 3.8 -1 to -1.5
Aerobatic aviation 3 to 4 -1.2 to -2
Civil transport 6 -3
Fighter 6.5 to 9 -3 to -6

Page 60 of 64
 A typical V – n diagram

Load Factor:

n =L/W = ½ ρV2SCL
W
Maximum load factor:

n max = ½ ρV2 CL max [ W/S]

Maneuvering velocity:

V* =√[2nmax W] / [ρ CL max S].

Diving velocity:

VD ≥ 1.4VCr

Page 61 of 64
calculation

S.No. n positive n negative

V-n diagram-graph

Gust V-n diagram:

The atmosphere is a dynamic system that encompasses variety of phenomena. Some of these
phenomena include turbulence, gust, wind shear, jet stream, mountain wave and thermal flow.

V- n Diagram (Gust Envelope)

1. Calculation for gust effect.

2. Table
3. Graph.

RESULT:

Page 62 of 64
Ex.No:12 Date:

TOP VIEW, SIDE VIEW, FRONT VIEW (CAD DRAWING)

Page 63 of 64
REFERENCES
TEXTS:

1. Theory of wing section by IRA H.ABBOT and ALBERT E.VON DOENHOFF.

2. Aircraft performance and design by JOHN D.ANDERSON JR

3. Aircraft design: A conceptual Approach by DANIEL P.RAYMER

4. Aircraft design by THOMAS CORK

5. Aircraft design by MOHAMMAD SADRAEY

6. Aircraft design by JOHN ROSKAM.

7. JANES All the World Aircrafts

Page 64 of 64