Final Report PDF

Aircraft DESIGN PROJECT REPORT
“350 SEATER LONG RANGE PASSENGER

AIRCRAFT”
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of
BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING
IN
AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING
BY
ABILASHINI. R 2014501001
SHAIFAL ALI. S 2014501050
KARTHIK.G 2014501027
SURESH KUMAR. D 2014501059
PRAKASH. B 2014501042
SENTHIL. S 2014501048
DEEPAN GABRIEL 2014501014
DEPARTMENT OF AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING

MADRAS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CAMPUS
ANNA UNIVERSITY
CHENNAI –– 600 044
1
BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE
Certified that this is a bonafide record of project on
“350 SEATER PASSENGER AIRCRAFT” done by
BY
ABILASHINI. R (2014501001)
KARTHIK. G (2014501027)
PRAKASH. B (2014501042)
SHAIFAL ALI. S (2014501050)
SURESH KUMAR. D (2014501059)
DEEPAN GABRIEL (2014501014)
SENTHIL. S (2014501048)
in the period of JANUARY 2017 to MARCH 2017.
DR. C. SENTHIL KUMAR DR. V. ARUMUGAM

Assistant Professor (SG) Associate professor
Department of Aerospace Engineering Department of Aerospace Engineering
Madras Institute of Technology Madras Institute of Technology
Anna University Chennai Anna University Chennai
DR. K. JAYARAMAN
2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We are very grateful to Dr.C. SENTHIL KUMAR for giving us

continuous guidance during the various stages of our project’s
structural design.
We also express our heartfelt thanks to Dr.K.Jeyaraman for his

guidance and help in the structural design of the project.
We also express our heartfelt thanks to Dr. V. Arumugam for his

guidance and help in the performance and stability of the project.
We are thankful to our Head of the Department

Dr.B.T.N.Sridhar for sharing a part of his immense academic acumen
and encouraging us in the right direction.
We would also like to thank all our faculty members who have
helped us during the course of the design project.
3
INDEX
AERODYNAMIC DESIGN
1. Collection of data of Existing aircraft 4
2. Weight estimation 15
3. Airfoil Selection 18
4. Empennage Selection 23
5. Landing gear and Tyre Selection 26
6. Balance Diagram 28
7. Drag Polar 30
8. Performance Analysis 33
9 Analysis of Stability and control of the aircraft 43
10 Vn Diagram 64
3
1.COLLECTION OF DATA OF
EXISTING AIRCRAFT
The first step in the design of aircraft is to collect data of existing

aircraft of similar payload and similar range. This step is vital in aircraft design as it
gives the designer an insight into the conventional trend in aircraft design. The
designer may, with the help of the data thus acquired, get an idea of the basic factors
that affect the aircraft’s performance viz. Weight, Cruise velocity, Range, Wing area,
Wingspan & Engine thrust. This database will also serve, during the design process, as
a guide for validation of the design parameters that will be calculated, so that the
designer does not deviate unduly from the conventional design.
The performance data of various aircraft with passenger payload

capacity between 300 and 400 passengers was collected from the following resources :
• www.airliners.net – a civil aviation info website
• www.bh.com – Butterworth-Heinemann Civil jet aircraft design website
• Jane’s ‘All the World’s aircraft’ – a comprehensive reference book for all
aircraft & engines.
4
Table 1.1:
COLLECTION OF COMPARATIVE DATA

DIMENSIONS
AIRCRAFT PASSENGER LENGTH HEIGHT WINGSPAN NO OF
ENGINE
S.NO NAME CAPACITY m M M S
AIRBUS
1 A 340-600 380 74.96 17.75 63.45 4

2 A-350-1000 387 73.78 17.08 64.75 2
BOEING
3 B 747-200B 366 70.66 19.33 59.6 4
4 B 747-300 400 70.66 19.33 59.6 4
5 B 777-200ER 313 63.73 18.51 60.59 2
6 B 777-300 368 73.86 18.5 60.93 2
7 B 777-300ER 396 73.86 18.6 64.8 2
8 B 767-400ER 375 61.37 16.8 51.92 2
9 B 767-300ER 290 54.94 15.8 47.57 2
10 B 787-8 359 56.72 17.02 60.12 2
11 B 787-10 330 68.28 17.02 60.12 2
12 B 747SP 400 56.31 20.06 59.64 4
13 B 777-200LR 317 63.73 18.6 64.8 2
ILYUSHIN
14 IL-96 M 340 64.7 15.7 60.11 4
15 IL-96-400 386 64 15.7 60.11 4
16 IL-96-300 300 55.3 15.7 55.57 4
DOUGLAS
17 DC MD-11 323 61.62 17.6 51.66 3
18 DC-10-30 380 51.97 17.7 50.4 3
5
Table 1.2:

DESIGN PARAMETERS
AIRCRAFT W/S Aspect Fineness
S.NO NAME T/W N/m2 Ratio RATIO.

AIRBUS
1 A 340-600 0.2783 835.2 9.3 13.29
2 A-350-1000 0.129 1476.09 9.49
BOEING
3 B 747-200B 0.2547 739.4 7 10.56
4 B 747-300 0.273 739.73 7
5 B 777-200ER 0.275 739.41 8.67 10.29
6 B 777-300 0.2881 700 8.67 11.93
7 B 777-300ER 0.297 821.72 9.61 11.93
8 B 767-400ER 0.268 702.15 9.27 12.22
9 B 767-300ER 0.3074 640.44 7.98 10.92
10 B 787-8 0.25 632.26 10.03 10.33
11 B 787-10 0.273 704.61 10.03 12.44
12 B 747SP 0.295 617.16 6.96
13 B 777-200LR 0.301 9.61 10.27
ILYUSHIN
14 IL-96 M 0.249 689.48 10.32 9.95
15 IL-96-400 0.262 757.14 10.32 10.53
16 IL-96-300 0.296 551.58 7.89 8.41
DOUGLAs
17 DC MD-11 0.295 837.18 7.87 9.74
18 DC-10-30 0.274 717 6.91 8.63
6
Table 1.3:

DIMENSIONS
AIRCRAFT CRUISE VELOCITY EMPTY WEIGHT Wing sweep WINGAREA Planform
Taper
0
S.NO NAME km/hr kgf m2 ratio
AIRBUS
1 A 340-600 590 177700 31.1 437 0.35

2 A-350-1000 611 341700 31.9 460
BOEING
3 B 747-200B 907 177000 37.5 511 0.284
4 B 747-300 898 174000 37.5 511 0.3
5 B 777-200ER 892 138100 37.5 427.8 0.284
6 B 777-300 892 160530 31.6 427.8 0.189
7 B 777-300ER 892 167829 427.8
8 B 767-400ER 850 103879 290.7
9 B 767-300ER 850 90011 31.5 283.3 0.207
10 B 787-8 903 118000 32.2 360.5
11 B 787-10 903 32.2 360.5
12 B 747SP 1004 152780 511
13 B 777-200LR 945 145150 31.6 436.8
ILYUSHIN
14 IL-96 M 860 132400 30 350 0.279
15 IL-96-400 860 122300 30 350
16 IL-96-300 860 120400 30 391.6 0.279
DOUGLAS
17 DC MD-11 876 128809 35 338.9 0.239
18 DC-10-30 908 120742 35 367.7 0.22
7
GRAPHS
x 10000
19
17 8 7
11
10
15 17
Empty Weight (kgf)
9
13 1 3
4
5 146
11
12
9 13
1
800 820 840 860 Cruise880
Velocity 900
( km/hr) 920 940 960 980
Fig 1.1 Empty weight Vs Cruise Velocity
11
1
4
10 14
11
12
9
10
9
8
Aspect ratio
13 5 3
7 8 76 17
4
600 650 700 Cruise Velocity
750 ( km/hr)
800 850 900 950
Fig 1.2 Aspect Ratio Vs Cruise Velocity
8
80
75
11
10
70 8 7
65 1
4 9
12 3
60
LENGTH (m)
14 17
55 13 5
6
50
45
40
700 750 800 850 900 950
Cruise Velocity ( km/hr)
Fig 1.3 Length Vs cruise velocity
1100
1050
Max. Cruise Velocity (km/hr)
29
1000 17
6
10
950 8
11
3 9 14
7
13 5
900 12 4
1
850
800
650 700 750 800 850 900 950
Cruise Velocity (km/hr)
Fig 1.4 Maximum Cruise velocity Vs Cruise Velocity
9
Thousands
18
16 18
16
14 15
Range (km)
11 14
1 9
3
12 4 7
5 8
13 10
12 6 17
10
6
700 750 800 850 900 950
Cruise Velocity
Fig 1.5 Range Vs Cruise Velocity
Fig 1.6 Wing Area Vs Cruise Velocity
10
Fig 1.7 Wing Span Vs Cruise Velocity
40
9 8 7
Wing Sweep angle (degrees)
35 3 6
14
13 10
30 1
5
4
25
20
750 770 790 810 830 850 870 880 890 910 930
Fig 1.8Wing Sweep Vs Cruise Velocity
11
501
Thousands
451
401
8 7
Take off weight (kgf)
351 11
301 17
10
1 3 9
251 4 6
5
14
201 12
13
151
101
51
1
700 750 800 Velocity (km/hr)
Cruise 850 880 900 950
Fig 1.9 Take off weight Vs Cruise Velocity
0.3
1
5 9 7
0.25
3
Planform Taper ratio
6
0.2 13
0.15 10
0.1
0.05
650 700 750 Cruise Velocity
800 ( km/hr) 850 880 900 950
Fig 1.10 Taper ratio Vs Cruise Velocity
12
0.32
0.31
13
0.3
5 3 11 17
0.29 10
0.28
9 8 6
0.27 12
Thrust Loading
0.26 4
7
0.25 1 14
0.24
0.23
0.22
750 770 790 810 Cruise830 ( km/hr) 870 880 890
Velocity850 910 930
Fig 1.11Thrust Loading Vs Cruise Velocity
900
Wing Loading (kgf/m2)
3
11
800
4
98 7
6
700 12 1 10
13 14
17
600
5
500
400
300
880
700 750 Cruise Velocity
800 ( km/hr) 850 900 950
Fig 1.12 Wing loading Vs Cruise Velocity
13
1.3
1.2 10
12 3 8 7
13 11
1.1
1
4
1.04 9 6
1 5
L/b ratio
14 17
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
600 650 700 750 800 850 880 900 950
Cruise Velocity (km/hr)
Fig 1.13 L/b ratio Vs Cruise Velocity
16
14
12 12 11
10
10.4 13
Fineness ratio
4 7
14
10 1 3 9
5 6
8
0
600 650 700 750 800 850 880900 950 1000
Fig 1.14 Fineness ratio Vs Cruise velocity
14
DESIGN PARAMTERS
Data collected from comparative data
a) Vcruise = 244.44m/s
b) Vcruise max = 266.66m/s
c) Wing Area = 340 m2
d) Aspect Ratio = 8.3
e) Wing Loading = 6668.488N/m2
f) Wing Span = 55 m
g) Thrust Loading = 0.28
h) Maximum Takeoff Weight = 2755654 N
i) Fineness Ratio = 10.4
j) Empty Weight = 1274858N
k) Cruise Altitude = 13000 m
l) We/Wo = 0.5
m) Wing sweep angle = 33.5o
n) Planform Taper ratio = 0.23
2. PRELIMINARY WEIGHT
ESTIMATION
No.of crew = 7+2=9

Weight per crew member = 100 kgf
Wc = 9 x 100 x 9.81 = 8.829 kN
Wpl = 60 x 103 x 9.81 = 5.886 x 105 N
From the comparative data,
𝑊𝑒
= 0.5
𝑊𝑜
Assuming a fuel fraction, we have
𝑊𝑓
= 0.3
𝑊𝑜
We get the equation,
𝑊𝑐+𝑊𝑝𝑙
𝑊𝑜 = 𝑊𝑒 𝑊𝑓 --------(2.1)
1−( )−( )
𝑊𝑜 𝑊𝑜
Using equation (2.1), we get,

[8.826 + (414.23)]
𝑊𝑜 =
1 − 0.3 − 0.5
Wo = 2115.28 kN
15
Iteration 1
𝑇
The thrust loading is, = 0.28
𝑊𝑜
Factor of safety = 1.2

Thrust required = 0.28 x Wo x 1.2
T =592.278 KN
Single Engine Thrust = 177.683 kN
Tcruise = T x σ1.2
0.26572 1.2
=Tx( )
1.225
Tcruise = 28.338 kN
Engine: GE CF6-60 SFC = 0.354 Kg-N/hr.
(𝑁𝑜.𝑜𝑓 𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑒)(𝑇𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒)(𝑅𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒)(𝑆𝐹𝐶)
𝑊𝑓 = --------(2.2)
𝑉𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒
Wf = 657.6799 kN
Wpp = 140.54 kN (x 4)
Wo = 2157.8191 kN
𝑊𝑒
{𝑊𝑜}without pp = 0.4336
We = 1041.69 kN
Iteration 2 Iteration 3
Thrust=604.1894kN Thrust=603.0025kN
Engine: GE CF6-6E Engine: GE CF6-6E
SFC =0.346/hr SFC =0.346/hr
Wpp=145.468(x 4)kN Wpp=145.468(x 4)kN
Wf=653.4485kN Wf=653.4485kN
Wo=2153.5805kN Wo=2153.077kN
𝑊𝑒 𝑊𝑒
{𝑊𝑜}without pp=0.4326 {𝑊𝑜}without pp =0.4325
Iteration 4 Iteration 5
Thrust=602.8616kN Thrust=602.8448kN
Engine: GE CF6-6E Engine: GE CF6-6E
SFC =0.346/hr SFC =0.346/hr
Wpp=145.468(x 4)kN Wpp=145.468(x 4)kN
Wf=653.4485kN Wf=653.4485kN
Wo=2153.0171kN Wo=2153.0099kN
𝑊𝑒 𝑊𝑒
{𝑊𝑜}without pp = 0.4324 {𝑊𝑜}without pp = 0.4324
16
Iteration 6
Thrust=602.8428kN
Engine: GE CF6-6E
SFC =0.346/hr
Wpp=145.468(x 4)kN
Wf=653.4485kN
Wo=2153.0091kN
𝑊𝑒
{𝑊𝑜}without pp = 0.4324
2.1 Estimated weights and Selection of Engine

Payload weight (Wpl) = 588600 N
Crew weight (9) (Wc) = 8826 N
Powerplant weight (Wpp) = 145468 N
ENGINE:GE CF6-6E No.of engines – 4

SFC – 0.03528 Kg/N-hr
Length – 4.7752 m
D-2.67m
Fuel Weight (Wf) = 653448.5 N
Structural weight (WS) = 682503.9 N
Gross take-off weight (Wo) = 2153009.1 N
Empty weight (We) = 1076504.61 N
Wucn/Wo = 0.01
Under Carriage nose (Wucn) = 0.01*2153009.1
Wucn = 21.530 kN
Under Carriage main (Wucm) = 0.04*2153.0091
Wucm = 86.1204 kN
Furnishings and Equipments,
Wfe = 140.882kN
Wo = We + Wf + Wc + Wpl
We = Wpp + Ws + Wuc + Wfe
17
3.AIRFOIL SELECTION
3.1 Airfoil:
Gross Weight, 𝑊𝑜 = 2153009.1 N

Total Fuel Weight, 𝑇𝑊𝑓 = 653448.5 𝑁
Fuel in wing (70% of TWf), 𝑊𝑓 = 457413.95 𝑁
Cruise Velocity, 𝑣𝑐 = 244.44 𝑚⁄𝑠
𝑘𝑔⁄
Density at cruise altitude, 𝜌 = 0.2657 𝑚3
Wing Loading form the comparative data, 𝑊⁄𝑠 = 6668.488 N⁄m2
2153009.1
Hence Wing area, 𝑠 =
6668.488
𝑠 = 322.863m2
2
From the comparative data, Aspect Ratio, 𝐴𝑅 = 8.3 = 𝑏 ⁄𝑠
Hence Wing span, 𝑏 = √8.3×322.863

= 51.766𝑚
From the comparative data, 𝑙⁄𝑏 = 1.04
Hence Length of the aircraft, 𝑙 = 1.04×51.766

= 53.837𝑚
From the comparative data, Fineness ratio, 𝑙⁄𝑑 = 10.4

53.837
Hence Fuselage diameter, 𝑑 = 10.4
= 5.177𝑚
Average chord length of the wing, 𝑐𝑚 = 𝑏⁄𝐴𝑅

51.766
= 8.3
= 6.237𝑚
Assuming Oswald’s Efficiency Factor, 𝑒 ≅ 0.7
Constant, 𝐾 = 1⁄𝜋𝑒𝐴𝑅
1
= 𝜋×0.7×8.3
= 0.0548
𝑐𝑡
From the comparative data, Planform Taper ratio, 𝜆 = 0.23 = ⁄𝑐𝑟
18
2𝑐𝑚
Root chord, 𝑐𝑟 = ⁄(𝜆 + 1)
2×6.237
= 0.23+1
= 10.14𝑚
Hence Tip Chord, 𝑐𝑡 = 10.14×0.23
= 2.332𝑚
Landing Weight, 𝑊𝑙 = 𝑊𝑜 − 0.8𝑇𝑊𝑓
= 2153009.1 − (0.8×653448.5)
= 1630250.3𝑁
(𝑊𝑜 + 𝑊𝑙)⁄
Average Cruise Weight, 𝑊 = 2
2153009.1+1630250.3
= 2
= 1891629.7𝑁
Coefficient of lift at cruise altitude, 𝐶𝐿𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒 = 2𝑊⁄𝜌𝑣 2 𝑠 ---------(3.1)

𝑐
2×1891629.7
= 0.2657×244.442 ×322.863
= 0.7381
Fuel selected: Jet A fuel
𝑘𝑔⁄
Density of the fuel, 𝜌𝑓 = 840 𝑚3
𝑊𝑓
Volume occupied by the fuel, 𝑉𝑓 = ⁄𝜌𝑓 𝑔
457413.95
= 840×9.8066
= 55.528 𝑚3
𝑉𝑓 = {0.49𝑐𝑚 ×(𝑡⁄𝑐)𝑐𝑚 ×0.5(𝑏⁄2)} 0.75×2 --------(3.2)

55.528
Thickness to chord ratio, 𝑡⁄𝑐 = 51.766
0.75×2×0.49×6.237×6.237×0.5( )
2
= 0.15
Based on CLcruise = 0.7381 and t/c = 0.15 airfoil is selected for minimum drag as:
NACA 4415
Maximum camber = 0.04c
Location of maximum camber = 0.402 c
Location of maximum thickness = 0.309c
19
CLmax = 1.65
From the CL vs α graph, we find the incidence angle corresponding to the design CL.
Wing incidence angle iw = 3o
3.2 Flap Deflection Landing:
From the comparative data,
Take off distance=2900m
Landing distance required for the aircraft by the use of only flaps,
Sl = 0.6*2900
Sl = 1740m
20
Landing velocity,Vl = √2𝑎𝑆𝑙
For reverse thrust,a = 0.25g
Vl = √(2 ∗ 0.25𝑔 ∗ 1500)
Vl = 92.3674 m/s
Stall velocity,Vstall = Vl/1.2
Vstall = 76.9729 m/s

2
Max coefficient of lift,Clmax= 2W/ 𝜌𝑆𝑣𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙
= 2*1630250.3/(1.22*322.863*7146752)
Clmax = 1.3914
∆CL = CLmax - CLcruise

∆CL = 0.6533
25%of ∆CL = 0.1633
Fuselage dia, d = 5.177m
Fuselage span, b = 51.766m
Wing exposed = b-d
= 46.589m
Flap location length spanwise = 0.7*46.589
= 32.6123m
Flap surface area, Sf = 32.6123*0.3*𝑐̅

Sf = 68.9848m2
Wing surface area, Sw = 322.863m2
Sw/Sf = 4.6802
𝐿 𝑆𝑤
∆CL =
0.5𝜌𝑉 2 𝑆𝑤 𝑆𝑓
𝑆𝑤
∆CLcorrected = ∆CL
𝑆𝑓
= 0.1633*4.6802
= 0.7644
From the graph
Deflection Angle, δ = 300
21
3.3 Flap Deflection (Take off):
Stall velocity,Vstall = 76.9729m/s
Take off velocity = 1.3Vstall
= 100.0648 m/s
2𝑊𝑜
Coefficient of lift,Cltakeoff = 𝜌𝑆𝑉 2
𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑜𝑓𝑓
2∗2153009.1
=
1.225∗322.863∗100.06482
Cltakeoff = 1.0873
∆CL = CLtakeoff - CLcruise = 1.087- 0.7381 = 0.3492
25% by flap,∆CL = 0.0873
∆CLcorrected = 0.4086
Flap deflection, δ = 130
3.4 WING SWEEP ANGLE:

𝑉𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒
Cruise Mach Number, Mcruise = 𝑎
244.44
= 295.04
Mcruise = 0.8285
6 0.5
Critical Mach Number, 𝑀𝑐𝑟 = 𝑀𝑐 (5+𝑀 2 )
𝑐
= 0.851
--------------(3.3)
Λc/4 = 33.513o
22
3.5 MAC of wing:
All dimensions are in m

From the fig, MAC of wing is found as 7.051m.
4.EMPENNAGE SELECTION
4.1 Horizontal Tail:
Tail arm, lht = 28.09m
S ∗l
Vh t = S ht∗Cht --------------(4.1)
w m
Horizontal tail volume VHT = 0.6 (assumed)

Thus SHT = 48.62m2
bht = √𝑆ℎ𝑡 ∗ 𝐴𝑅ℎ𝑡 =15.56m
Taper Ratio; λtail = 0.3(Assumed)

Airfoil Selected:NACA 0012
Root chord of horizontal tail;
2∗SHT
Crht = [(λ+1)b -------------(4.2)
ht ]
= 4.807m
Tip chord of Horizontal Tail:
Ct HT = λt*Cr HT -------------(4.3)
23
= 1.44m
Location of Mac of Horizontal Tail;
bht 1+2λ
Yht = ( ) ( 1+λ t) -------------(4.4)
6 t
Yht =3.1918m
Mean Aerodynamic Chord of Horizontal tail;
2 1+λt +λ2σ
MAC ht = (3) ∗ Cr ht ∗ ( ) -------------(4.5)
1+λt
MAC ht= 3.1901m

4.2 Vertical tail:
Location of Aerodynamic Center of Vertical Tail = Lvt N = 0.95* L
Lvt N =26.69m
Assume, Vvt = 0.04
Vvt ∗b∗Sw
Svt = -------------(4.6)
Lvt
= 25.05m2
Assume Aspect Ratio at Vertical Tail as 1.65
AR vt =1.65
hvt = √AR vt ∗ Svt -------------(4.7)
hvt =6.43m
λt=0.36
Root Chord of the Vertical Tail;
2∗SVT
Crvt = [(λ+1)h =5.73m
vt ]
Vertical Tail tip Chord:

CtVT = 2.063m
2∗hvt 1+2λ
Location of Mac at Vertical Tail = Zmac =( ) ( 1+λ )
6
Zmac = 2.71m
Mean Aerodynamic Chordof Vertical Tail;
2 1 + λ + λ2
MACvt = ( ) ∗ Cr vt ∗ ( )
3 1+λ
MACvt = 4.1838m
24
WHT = 0.03 Wo
WHT = 64.59kN
WVT = 0.02 Wo
WVT = 43.0602kN
4.3 Seating arrangement

Business class:
Number of seats: 12
Aisle seating=2+2+2
Total rows = 2
Seat width = 56cm
Seat pitch = 200cm
Back height = 90cm
Aisle width = 94cm
Number of lavatories = 1
Lavatory size = 1.3m
Economic class:
Number of seats: 338
Seat arrangement = 3+4+3
Total rows = 34
Seat width = 43cm
Seat pitch = 80cm
Back height = 81cm
Head room = 222.19cm
Aisle width = 44cm
Aisle height = 240cm
1
Lavatories per passenger = 38
Total number of lavatories = 9
25
5. LANDING GEAR AND TYRE
SELECTION
The arrangement is selected as TRICYCLE arrangement.
Wo = 2153009.1N
5.1 NOSE WHEEL:
(only 10% of the weight will act in the nose wheel)
Therefore;
(0.1*wo)/no. of tyres = 107650.455N = 24200.9 lbf
Wheel diameter = 1.51(24200.9)0.349 = 51.61 in
Wheel Width = 0.75(24200.9)0.312 = 16.68 in
No.of tyres=2
TYRE SELECTED: 42x15 – 17 inches
Where
Outer Diameter :42.2 in
Inner diameter : 17 in
Width : 15 in
Inflation pressure : 65 psi
Radius at Maximum deflection,Rr : 11.95 in
Maximum width : 15.6 in
a = [(d/2)2- Rr2]1/2
a = √21.52 − 11.952 = 17.39 inches

b = (max.width)/2 = 7.8 inches
Area of contact surface, Ap2 (Nose) = πab -------------(5.1)
Ap1 (Nose) = 426.1287 in2
26
Allowable weight, W = Ap*P
= 27698.36 lbf
It can withstand more weight than the calculated (0.1*wo)/no.of.tyre.
Radius at maximum deflection =11.95 inches
Allowable weight (W) =Ap xP
(W)= 27698.36 lbf
5.2 MAIN WHEEL:-
(90% of the weight will act on the main wheel)
(0.9*wo)/no.of tyre = 36301.3602lb = 161475.6852 N
Where no.of tyre = 12
Wheel diameter = 1.51(36301.36)0.349 = 58.94 in
Wheel Width = 0.75(36301.36)0.312 = 18.92 in
TYRE SELECTED: 53 x 16.5 (23 inches)
Where
Outer Diameter : 52.9 in
Inner diameter : 23 in
Width :16.6 in
Inflation pressure : 70 psi
Radius at Maximum deflection,Rr : 15.95 in
Maximum width : 17.25 in
a = [(d/2)2- Rf2]1/2
a = √272 − 15.92 = 21.0998 inches

b = (max.width)/2 = 8.625 inches
Area of contact surface, Ap2 (Main) = πab
27
Ap1 (Main)= 571.724 in2
Allowable weight, W = Ap*P

= 40020.68 lbf
It can withstand more weight than the calculate (0.9*wo)/no.of.tyres
TOTAL AREA OF CONTACT = [ 2*(Area of contact of nose wheel) + 12*(Area of contact
of Main wheel)]
TOTAL CONTACT AREA = TxAp = (2x426.1287) + (12x591.724)
TOTAL CONTACT AREA= 49760.8385 cm2
Runway Loading = (Wo)/(Total Area Of Contact)
Runway loading = (215300.91)/(49760.8385)
Runway loading ≈ 43.27 N/cm2
Black top =73.9 N/cm2
Therefore, from the data obtained the Aircraft can be landed either on ASPHALT, TAR or
CONCRETE.
NOSE WHEEL 2-wheel Bogie Tyre 42 x 15
MAIN WHEEL 6-wheel Bogie Tyre 53x 16.5
5.3 BOGIE ARRANGEMENT
6.BALANCE DIAGRAM
The balance diagram is used to estimate the weight distribution in the
aircraft and to approximately locate the center of gravity of the aircraft. The weights of the
individual components in the fuselage and their centers of gravity are tabulated below.
TABLE 6.1: WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION - FUSELAGE
Sl. Components Weight (W) Distance from W*x
No. nose(x)
Units N M Nm
1 Instruments 96885.4095 3.3 319721.851
2 Cockpit crew 1961.32 5.4 10591.128

3 Undercarriage (nose) 21530.091 9 193770.819
4 Crew members in the front 2941.98 14.847 43679.5771
28
5 Passenger business class 9414.336 10.347 97410.1346
seat Economy class 133369.76 22.047 2940403.1
1
Economy class 131800.704 38.547 5080521.74
2
6 Cargo Forward 85564 16.773 1435164.97
compartment
Aft 54081 44.65 2414716.65
compartment 2
7 Structural weight of fuselage 322951.365 26.9185 8693366.32
8 Crew members in the rear 3922.64 31.347 122962.996
9 Lavatory Front 1 8612.0364 13 111956.473
Rear 1 17224.0728 29.497 508058.475
Rear 2 17224.0728 45.997 792255.677
10 Gallery Front 268 7.697 2062.796
Middle 334 29.497 9851.998
Rear 334 45.997 15362.998
11 Horizontal tail 71050.2293 50 3552511.47
12 Vertical tail 51672.2184 51 2635283.14
13 Fuel in fuselage 65344.85 28 1829655.8
14 Reserve fuel 130689.7 37 4835518.9
∑Wf = 1096486.09 ∑(W*x) = 35644827
ΣWi (Xcg )
i
XFuselage = --------------(6.1)
ΣWi
35644827
= = 32.51 m
1096486
TABLE 6.2 : WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION – WING
Sl. No. Components Weight (W) Distance from W*x

leading edge
of root chord
(x)
Units N M Nm
1 Structural weight of wing 118415.501 10.296 1219205.99
2 Fuel 228706.975 10.5 2401423.24

3 Undercarriage (Main) 43060.182 11.5 495192.093
4 Power plant 1 36367 6.627 241004.109
2 36367 11.956 434803.852
∑Ww = 462916.658 ∑(W*x) = 4791629.28
ΣWi (Xcg )
X WING = ΣWi
i
--------------(6.2)
4791629
= 462916.658 = 10.351 m
29
-------------(6.3)
Centre of gravity location from wing root chord leading edge, X3 = 9.59m
Using equation (6.3),
Loaction of wing root chord leading edge from the nose of the aircraft, X = 20.03m
Centre of gravity of aircraft from nose of the aircraft, A/F cg= 29.62m
TABLE 6.3 : Xcg SHIFT UNDER VARIOUS OPERATING CONDITIONS
Sl. No. Various conditions Centre of gravity from CG shift(%)

the nose (CG) m
1 Full fuel, full payload 29.62 0.00
2 No payload, full fuel 29.79 -2.46
3 Full payload, reserve fuel 29.43 2.70
4 Half payload, full fuel 29.70 -1.10
5 Half payload, reserve fuel 29.51 1.59
6 No payload, reserve fuel 29.61 0.10
7 Full payload, half fuel 29.54 1.16
8 Half payload, half fuel 29.62 0.04
From the above table we observe that the Centre of gravity shift is less than 5% for various
operating conditions.
30
7.DRAG POLAR
The drag coefficients at zero-lift condition of the different components of the aircraft are
estimated using different formulae characteristic of them.
An example of the calculation involved is furnished below:
WING:
Using the formulae
--------------------(7.1)
and the values
cr = 0.2657 kg/m3
Vcr = 244.44 m/s
ĉ= 7.051 m
μcr = 1.4216* 10-5Kg/ms
t/c = 0.15
we obtain the following values –
Re =3.22 x 107
Cf = 2.46 * 10-4
The various formulae used for calculating drag coefficients are the following:
FUSELAGE:
where
l/d = 10.4
Re = 2.46* 108
Cf = 1.82*10-4
HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL TAIL: same as wing but t/C = 0.12
The values of the individual component drag coefficients are tabulated as follows:
31
TABLE 7.1: For cruise,
Sl.No. Component S CD (S*CD)/Sw

Units m2
1 Fuselage 21.05 0.0060 0.00039
2 Canopy 21.05 0.0200 0.00130
3 Wing 322.863 0.0044 0.00436
4 Horizontal tail 48.62 0.0058 0.00088
5 Vertical tail 25 0.0056 0.00043
6 Power Plant 22.24 0.0004 0.00003
X= 0.007387994
TABLE 7.2 : For landing and take-off, additional components considered are,
6 Under Carriage
a. Mani Wheel 6.7788 0.63 0.0132
b.Nose Wheel 0.817 0.6 0.0015
7 Flap
c.Take Off 68.98 0.0188 0.0040
d.Landing 68.98 0.0435 0.0093
Accounting for the additional component for drag contributed by interference, using the
formulae
-------------------(7.2)
CDo net = CDo * 1.05

we have,
Take-off : CDo = 0.02396
Cruise : CDo = 0.0139
Landing : CDo = 0.03004

Using these values we obtain the drag polar equation.
--------------------(7.3)
For various phases in flight the drag polar equation reduces to the following:
Cruise CD = 0.0139 + 0.0548*CL2

Take off CD = 0.02396 + 0.0548*CL2
Landing CD = 0.03004 + 0.0548*CL2
32
Using these equations, the drag polar is plotted for various flight phases.
1.2
0.8
CD takeoff
CL
0.6
CD landing
CD CRUISE
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12
CD
Fig 7.1 : Drag Polar
8.PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
Performance analysis of the aircraft is carried out by plotting the various
performance curves for the aircraft at various altitudes for different phases of flight, i.e.
cruise flight, take-off, landing etc.
8.1 STEADY FLIGHT AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCE:
In this analysis, the aircraft velocity is constant, i.e. this analysis deals with unaccelerated
flight of the airplane. The various phases analyzed are climb and level cruise flight.
STEADY CLIMB PERFORMANCE:
In the analysis of steady climb, curves are obtained showing the variation of performance
parameters like thrust and power required against velocity and Mach number at different
altitudes.
The various formulae used in the analysis are the following:

V=M∗a
2∗𝑊
CLcruise= 𝜌∗𝑆∗𝑉 2
33
CLcomp = CLincomp/(1 − M2)1/2
CDtot = CDo + kCL2 --------------------(8.1)
W * CD
D=
CL
Treqd = D
Preqd = Treqd∗ V
(Pav)alt/(Pav)sea = σm
σ = ρalt/ρsea
𝑃𝑎𝑣−𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑞
Rate of climb R/C = --------------------(8.2)
𝑊
Using the above formulae, the climb performance parameters are determined for Mach
numbers 0.1 to 0.95 at sea level, as well as altitudes 1000m to 13000m. The variation of the
parameters with Mach number and altitude are plotted as Climb Performance Curves.
80
60
40
20
sea Level
R/C (m/s)
0
4km
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
-20 8km
-40 10km
12km
-60
-80
-100
V (m/s)
Fig 8.1 : R/C Vs Velocity at different Altitudes
34
10 sea Level Pav
x 10000000
9 Sea Level Preq
8 4km Pav
7 4km Preq
7km Pav
Power (W)
6
5 7km Preq
4 9km Pav
3 9km Preq
2 11km Pav
1 11km Preq
0 12km Pav
0 100 200 300 400
12km Preq
velocity (m/s)
Fig 8.2: Pav and Preq variation with velocity
10
x 100000
9
8 sea Level Tav
7 Sea Level Treq
6
Thrust (N)
4km Tav
5 4km Treq
4
8 km Tav
3
8km Treq
2
12km Tav
1
12km Treq
0
0 100 200 300 400
Velocity (m/s)
Fig 8.3 :Tavand Treqvariation with Velocity
35
16
14
12
10
Altitude km
0
-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Rate of climb (m/s)
Fig 8.4: Rate of climb vs Altitude
We get the values for service ceiling g and absolute ceiling.

From fig. 8.4,
Service ceiling = 13800 m
Absolute ceiling = 14100 m
CRUISE FLIGHT PERFORMANCE:
Cruise flight performance of the aircraft includes determining the critical speeds of the
airplane at minimum power and drag speeds, as well as the maximum range and endurance
of the airplane.
14
12
10
8
Cl/Cd
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Cl
Fig 8.5 : CL /C D Vs CL
36
From the graph we get the minimum value of (CD/CL),
(CD/CL)min = 1/11.5
(L/D)max= 11.5
CLmin drag = 0.4 CDmin drag = 0.0347
MINIMUM POWER
9.00
8.00
7.00
6.00
Cl^(3/2)/Cd
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Cl
Fig 8.6 :CL3/2/CD vs CL
For minimum power (CL3/2/CD) should be maximum.
From the graph we get the maximum value of (CL3/2/CD) = 7.75
Corresponding value for CL,
CLmin power = 0.6

Using the above formulae,
CDmin power= 0.0607
37
MAXIMUM RANGE
25
20
Cl^(1/2)/cd
15
10
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Cl
Fig 8.7 : CL1/2/CD vs CL
For max range (CL1/2/CD) should be maximum.
From the graph we get the maximum value of (CL1/2/CD),
CLmax range= 0.2

CDmax range = 0.0191
MAXIMUM ENDURANCE
14
12
10
8
Cl/Cd
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Cl
Fig 8.8 : CL /C D Vs CL
38
For maximum endurance, (CL/CD) should be maximum.
From the graph we get the maximum value of (CL/CD),
CLmax endurance = 0.4

CDmax endurance= 0.0347
8.2 ACCELERATED FLIGHT AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCE:

This analysis deals with the accelerated phases of aircraft flight. The various phases
analysed are take-off, landing and turn.
TAKE-OFF AND LANDING PERFORMANCE:
This analysis mainly focuses on determining the distance required for takeoff and landing.
The flap deflection is 130

𝐂𝐋𝐦𝐚𝐱= 2.0586
Here, CLmax is evaluated with flaps deployed. In this condition,
Using the above formula and data,
Vstall = 72.7235m/s
--------------------(8.3)
Using the above formulae and data,
VT.O = 79.996m/s
𝐂𝐋𝐓.𝐎 = 1.7
𝐂𝐃𝐓.𝐎 = 0.1978
39
DT.O = 250364.3 N
From the data on the engine used,
TT.O = (180588 x 4)
TT.O =722352 N
The angle of climb is given by
Using the above formula,

𝛄 = 12.66°
Vavg = 0.7 ∗ VT.O
------(8.4)
Vavg = 55.997m/s
Lavg = 1054974 N
Davg = 122678.5 N
Assuming μr = 0.2,
Sground-roll = 857.13 m
--------------------(8.5)
40
Rtransition = 3261.64 m
Stransition = 715 m
htransition = 17.39 m
Assuming screen height, Hobst=15 m,
Sclimb = 0 m
-----------------(8.6)
Using the above formula, we obtain
STake-Off = 1572.16m
LANDING PERFORMANCE:
The flap deflection is 300
Using the values,
=2.4144
We obtain,
= 67.15m/s
Vavg = 0.7 ∗ Vapproach
-----------------(8.7)
41
Vapproach = 87.3m/s
=0.3834
𝐂𝐃𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠
=61.11
Vavg
Lavg = 1782907 N
Davg = 283155.5 N
Treversal = 288940.8 N
Rflare = 3884.186 m
Using the above formulae and data, and assuming
𝛄approach = 3°
𝝁brakes = 0.5
We obtain
hflare = 5.33
Sapproach= 184.5m
Sflare = 203.36m
Sground roll = 1104.5m

Slanding = Sapproach + Sflare + Sground roll
Slanding = 1492.35 m
42
8.3 TURNING PERFORMANCE
Turning performance of the aircraft is analyzed by observing the variation of
parameters like velocity, turn rate, turn radius, etc.
Load Factor,
The values of the turn parameters are analyzed in the three most critical turn maneuvers
explained below.
Maximum Sustained Turn Rate: It is the turn executed with maximum angular velocity,
with the additional constraint that the airplane does not lose any altitude. In other words, it is
the turn executed in a horizontal plane with maximum angular velocity.
Sharpest Sustained Turn: It is the turn executed with minimum turning radius. Here, there
is no restriction on the altitude of the aircraft.
Maximum Load Factor Turn: It is the turn executed while simultaneously sustaining the
maximum load factor permissible on the airplane. Turn performance is analysed with the
help of certain non-dimensional parameters, defined below:
Z = nmax
V
u=
Vreference
Here, we use
Vreference = Vminimum drag
At cruise altitude,
Vreference = 273.4 m/s

Em = (L/D)max=11
Z = 3.08
The various values of velocity, turn radius and rate, and load factor are calculated using the
formulae described below:
43
TABLE 8.1 Turning Performance Formulae:
CASE u n (rad/s) R (m)

g √ (2Z – 2) V2reference
MSTR 1 √(2Z-1)
Vref g √2Z – 2
1 g Z −1
2
V2reference
2
SST (2𝑍 − 1)^0.5
√Z 𝑍 Vreference √ Z g √Z2 – 1
g Z −1
2
Z ∗ V2reference
Z
√Z
nmax Vreference √ Z g √Z2 – 1
TABLE 8.2 Turning Performance at cruise altitude (13km)
CASE u n (rad/s) R (m)
MSTR 1 2.27 0.07 3735.84
SST 0.5678 1.376 0.06 2615.6
nmax
1.755 3.08 0.06 8056
9.ANALYSIS OF STABILITY AND

CONTROL OF THE AIRCRAFT
STATIC STABILITY:
It is the ability of the aircraft to return to its equilibrium position after a disturbance on its
own.
9.1 LONGITUDINAL STABILITY
dCm/dCl< 0
LONGITUDINAL STICK-FIXED STABILITY:
For the aircraft configuration adopted,
xC.G = 1.3602 ĉ
44
ĉ = 7.051 m
0.063
0.0376
H.T = 0.6
t = 0.9
For the wing Airfoil selected,
= 4.903 rad-1
xa.c = 1.31 ĉ
For the tail Airfoil,
= 6.2857 rad-1
For the longitudinal stick-fixed static stability of the aircraft, we have the expression
---------(9.1)
=-0.3192
The negative value of indicates that the airplane has

longitudinal stick-fixed static stability.
DETERMINATION OF STICK-FIXED NEUTRAL POINT:
When the value of reduces to zero, the location of the

C.G is called the Neutral Point. From the above formula,
45
---------(9.2)
Using the above formula and data, we obtain

No = 1.6795ĉ
(xC.G) neutral = 31.8721 m
Static margin = 0.319197Ĉ
TABLE 9.1: STATIC MARGIN AT DIFFERENT OPERATING CONDITIONS
Sl. No. Various conditions Centre of gravity from the nose (CG) m Static Margin
1 Full fuel, full payload 29.62 0.319433
2 No payload, full fuel 29.79 0.295319
3 Full payload, reserve fuel 29.43 0.346383
4 Half payload, full fuel 29.7 0.308085
5 Half payload, reserve fuel 29.51 0.335035
6 No payload, reserve fuel 29.61 0.320851
7 Full payload, half fuel 29.54 0.33078
8 Half payload, half fuel 29.62 0.319433
DETERMINATION OF THE ZERO-LIFT PITCHING MOMENT:
The variation of Cm with CL is a linear variation, given by the relation
---------(9.3)
For cruise fight conditions,
(CL) cruise = 0.738
= -0.3192
At trim condition, Cm=0
= 0.2356
DETERMINATION OF TAIL SETTING ANGLE:
46
---------(9.4)
For the aircraft,

at =6.2857142rad-1
H.T = 0.7
H.T = 0.9
iw = 3o
it = 0.9753o
LONGITUDINAL STICK-FIXED CONTROL:
For the aircraft, we assume the following values-
τe = 0.4
H.T = 0.6
H.T = 0.9
The rate at which the pitching moment coefficient of the aircraft changes with change in
elevator deflection is called the ELEVATOR CONTROL POWER.
---------(9.5)
= -1.3577 rad-1
DETERMINATION OF THE EXTREME ELEVATOR DEFLECTIONS:

Cmo
δo = V͞∗ at∗ηt∗τ ---------(9.6)
Elevator deflection has a linear variation, given by
---------(9.7)
CLmax= 1.72
47
= -13.220
Maximum Up-Elevator = 20 0
DETERMINATION OF STICK-FIXED STABILITY CHARACTERISTICS:
TABLE 9.2 : Variation of Cm/Cl with

elevator deflection:
Location of c.g
Design Most forward
δe Cm/Cl Cmo Cm/Cl Cmo
-20 -0.3192 0.4951 -0.3462 0.4951
-17.5 -0.3192 0.4457 -0.3462 0.4457
-15 -0.3192 0.3963 -0.3462 0.3963
-12.5 -0.3192 0.3469 -0.3462 0.3469
-10 -0.3192 0.2975 -0.3462 0.2975
-7.5 -0.3192 0.2482 -0.3462 0.2482
-5 -0.3192 0.1988 -0.3462 0.1988
-2.5 -0.3192 0.1494 -0.3462 0.1494
0 -0.3192 0.1000 -0.3462 0.1000
2.5 -0.3192 0.0506 -0.3462 0.0506
5 -0.3192 0.0012 -0.3462 0.0012
7.5 -0.3192 -0.0482 -0.3462 -0.0482
10 -0.3192 -0.0976 -0.3462 -0.0976
12.5 -0.3192 -0.1469 -0.3462 -0.1469
15 -0.3192 -0.1963 -0.3462 -0.1963
17.5 -0.3192 -0.2457 -0.3462 -0.2457
20 -0.3192 -0.2951 -0.3462 -0.2951
TABLE 9.3: Cm with CL for various

elevator deflections
Cm
δe Cl -0.25 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75
-20 0.5749 0.4951 0.4153 0.3355 0.2557 0.1759 0.0961 0.0163 -0.0635
-17.5 0.5255 0.4457 0.3659 0.2861 0.2063 0.1265 0.0467 -0.0331 -0.1129
-15 0.4761 0.3963 0.3165 0.2367 0.1569 0.0771 -0.0027 -0.0825 -0.1623
-12.5 0.4267 0.3469 0.2671 0.1873 0.1075 0.0277 -0.0521 -0.1319 -0.2117
-10 0.3773 0.2975 0.2177 0.1379 0.0581 -0.0217 -0.1015 -0.1813 -0.2611
-7.5 0.3280 0.2482 0.1684 0.0886 0.0088 -0.0710 -0.1508 -0.2306 -0.3104
-5 0.2786 0.1988 0.1190 0.0392 -0.0406 -0.1204 -0.2002 -0.2800 -0.3598
48
-2.5 0.2292 0.1494 0.0696 -0.0102 -0.0900 -0.1698 -0.2496 -0.3294 -0.4092
0 0.1798 0.1000 0.0202 -0.0596 -0.1394 -0.2192 -0.2990 -0.3788 -0.4586
2.5 0.1304 0.0506 -0.0292 -0.1090 -0.1888 -0.2686 -0.3484 -0.4282 -0.5080
5 0.0810 0.0012 -0.0786 -0.1584 -0.2382 -0.3180 -0.3978 -0.4776 -0.5574
7.5 0.0316 -0.0482 -0.1280 -0.2078 -0.2876 -0.3674 -0.4472 -0.5270 -0.6068
10 -0.0178 -0.0976 -0.1774 -0.2572 -0.3370 -0.4168 -0.4966 -0.5764 -0.6562
12.5 -0.0671 -0.1469 -0.2267 -0.3065 -0.3863 -0.4661 -0.5459 -0.6257 -0.7055
15 -0.1165 -0.1963 -0.2761 -0.3559 -0.4357 -0.5155 -0.5953 -0.6751 -0.7549
17.5 -0.1659 -0.2457 -0.3255 -0.4053 -0.4851 -0.5649 -0.6447 -0.7245 -0.8043
20 -0.2153 -0.2951 -0.3749 -0.4547 -0.5345 -0.6143 -0.6941 -0.7739 -0.8537
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2 -20
0 -10
Cm-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
-0.2 0
10
-0.4
20
-0.6
-0.8
-1
CL
Fig 9.1 : Cm vs CL
On varying the C.G location for design conditions, the value of Cmo remains
constant but the slope of the ∂Cm curve changes. The variation of Cm with ∂CL
TABLE 9.4 : CL for different C.G locations
CG 1.384397 1.360284 1.333333
CL Cm
-0.25 0.30937 0.3154 0.322138
0 0.2356 0.2356 0.2356
0.25 0.16183 0.1558 0.149063
0.5 0.08806 0.076 0.062525
0.75 0.01429 -0.0038 -0.02401
1 -0.05948 -0.0836 -0.11055
1.25 -0.13325 -0.1634 -0.19709
1.5 -0.20702 -0.2432 -0.28363
1.75 -0.28079 -0.323 -0.37016
49
Fig. : 9.2 Cm vs Cl
In order to find the variation of elevator deflection with the trim value of lift coefficient, we
first evaluate the elevator deflection required at zero trim lift coefficient.
----------------(9.8)
= 0.1735 rad
----------------(9.9)
TABLE 9.5: The variation of elevator deflection with the trim value of lift coefficient.
CG 1.384397 1.360284 1.333333
CL Del e
-0.25 0.224532 0.228973438 0.233936
0 0.170198 0.170198 0.170198
0.25 0.115864 0.111422562 0.10646
0.5 0.06153 0.052647124 0.042722
0.75 0.007196 -0.00612831 -0.02102
1 -0.04714 -0.06490375 -0.08475
1.25 -0.10147 -0.12367919 -0.14849
1.5 -0.15581 -0.18245463 -0.21223
1.75 -0.21014 -0.24123007 -0.27597
50
Fig 9.3 Variation of elevator deflection angle with trim C L
DETERMINATION OF STICK-FIXED MANEUVER POINT:
The stick-fixed maneuver point is of vital importance in accelerated maneuvers of the

aircraft. Here, the load factor plays a major role.
ELEVATOR ANGLE REQUIRED PER G:
The elevator angle required per unit load factor is used in determining the stick-fixed
maneuver point.
----------------(9.10)
For the aircraft,

lt = 24.22 m
Using the above formula and data, the variation of elevator deflection required per g with
the location of the C.G is plotted below.
51
1.5
0.5
d δe/dn
100
0
4.5 5 5.5 6 200
300
-0.5
-1
-1.5
C.G
Fig 9.4 Determination of stick fixed manuever point
The location of the C.G at which elevator deflection per g is zero is called the Stick-Fixed
Maneuver Point. From the graph,
Nm = 5.24Ĉ
(XC.G)maneuver = 36.94724 m
LONGITUDINAL STICK-FREE STABILITY:
In this section, the control column of the aircraft is free. Hence, the effect of elevator hinge
moments in different situations is to be considered.
The additional factor that comes into picture when the stick is free is the Free Elevator
Factor.
----------------(9.11)
For the aircraft, we assume
0.002 deg-1
0.005 deg-1
F = 0.84
For the stick free case, the stability criterion is the following equation.
52
----------------(9.12)
Using equation (9.12),
= -0.25009
The negative value of indicates that the airplane has

stick-free longitudinal static stability.
DETERMINATION OF STICK-FREE NEUTRAL POINT:
When the value of reduces to zero, the location of the

C.G is called the Neutral Point. From the above formula,
--------(9.13)

No’ = 1.610371ĉ
No – No’ = 0.06911ĉ
LONGITUDINAL STICK-FREE CONTROL:

TABLE 9.6: Stickfree Stability Characteristics
53
location of c.g
del e design most forward
cm/cl Cmo cm/cl Cmo
-20 -0.25009 0.495095579 -0.27704 0.495096
-17.5 -0.25009 0.445707826 -0.27704 0.445708
-15 -0.25009 0.396320073 -0.27704 0.39632
-12.5 -0.25009 0.34693232 -0.27704 0.346932
-10 -0.25009 0.297544567 -0.27704 0.297545
-7.5 -0.25009 0.248156814 -0.27704 0.248157
-5 -0.25009 0.198769062 -0.27704 0.198769
-2.5 -0.25009 0.149381309 -0.27704 0.149381
0 -0.25009 0.099993556 -0.27704 0.099994
2.5 -0.25009 0.050605803 -0.27704 0.050606
5 -0.25009 0.00121805 -0.27704 0.001218
7.5 -0.25009 -0.0481697 -0.27704 -0.04817
10 -0.25009 -0.09755746 -0.27704 -0.09756
12.5 -0.25009 -0.14694521 -0.27704 -0.14695
15 -0.25009 -0.19633296 -0.27704 -0.19633
17.5 -0.25009 -0.24572071 -0.27704 -0.24572
20 -0.25009 -0.29510847 -0.27704 -0.29511
TABLE 9.7: Cm with CL for various elevator deflections
Cm
del e/ CL -0.25 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75
-20 0.557618 0.495095579 0.432573 0.370051 0.307528 0.245006 0.182483 0.119961 0.057438
-17.5 0.50823 0.445707826 0.383185 0.320663 0.25814 0.195618 0.133095 0.070573 0.00805
-15 0.458843 0.396320073 0.333798 0.271275 0.208753 0.14623 0.083708 0.021185 -0.04134
-12.5 0.409455 0.34693232 0.28441 0.221887 0.159365 0.096842 0.03432 -0.0282 -0.09073
-10 0.360067 0.297544567 0.235022 0.1725 0.109977 0.047455 -0.01507 -0.07759 -0.14011
-7.5 0.310679 0.248156814 0.185634 0.123112 0.060589 -0.00193 -0.06446 -0.12698 -0.1895
-5 0.261292 0.198769062 0.136247 0.073724 0.011202 -0.05132 -0.11384 -0.17637 -0.23889
-2.5 0.211904 0.149381309 0.086859 0.024336 -0.03819 -0.10071 -0.16323 -0.22575 -0.28828
0 0.162516 0.099993556 0.037471 -0.02505 -0.08757 -0.1501 -0.21262 -0.27514 -0.33766
2.5 0.113128 0.050605803 -0.01192 -0.07444 -0.13696 -0.19948 -0.26201 -0.32453 -0.38705
5 0.063741 0.00121805 -0.0613 -0.12383 -0.18635 -0.24887 -0.31139 -0.37392 -0.43644
7.5 0.014353 -0.0481697 -0.11069 -0.17321 -0.23574 -0.29826 -0.36078 -0.4233 -0.48583
10 -0.03503 -0.09755746 -0.16008 -0.2226 -0.28512 -0.34765 -0.41017 -0.47269 -0.53521
12.5 -0.08442 -0.14694521 -0.20947 -0.27199 -0.33451 -0.39704 -0.45956 -0.52208 -0.5846
15 -0.13381 -0.19633296 -0.25886 -0.32138 -0.3839 -0.44642 -0.50895 -0.57147 -0.63399
17.5 -0.1832 -0.24572071 -0.30824 -0.37077 -0.43329 -0.49581 -0.55833 -0.62086 -0.68338
20 -0.23259 -0.29510847 -0.35763 -0.42015 -0.48268 -0.5452 -0.60772 -0.67024 -0.73277
54
0.8
0.6
0.4
-20
0.2
-10
Cm
0
-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0
-0.2 10
-0.4 20
-0.6
-0.8
CL
Fig 9.5 Stick free stability characteristics at design conditions
STICK FORCE GRADIENTS:
In this section, an analysis is done to determine the stick force gradients in non-accelerated
flight.
For non-accelerated flight,
----------------(9.14)
For the aircraft, we assume
=0
=-0.012deg-1
A = -0.02875
K = -0.04362 m2
55
----------------(9.15)
Assuming that the airplane needs to be trimmed out at cruise velocity,
=-0.00587
Using the above data,
( t)trim = 0.489313
=0.098085Ns/m
15
10
5
Stick force N
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
-5
-10
-15
Velocity m/s
Fig 9.6 the variation of stick force with velocity at cruise condition
DETERMINATION OF STICK-FREE MANEUVER POINT:
Stick Force Required per g:
The stick force required per unit load factor is used in determining the stick-free maneuver
point.
----------------(9.16)
56
For the aircraft, G = 0.005
40
30
20
10
dFs/dn
0
3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5
-10
-20
-30
C.G
Fig 9.7 :The variation of stick force required per g with the location of the C.G
The location of the C.G at which stick force required per g is zero is called the Stick-
Free Maneuver Point. From the graph,
Nm’ = 4.453Ĉ
9.2 DIRECTIONAL STABILITY:

Directional stability of the airplane is a measure of its tendency to produce
restoring moments when disturbed from an equilibrium angle of sideslip – usually
taken as zero. It is measured quantitatively by the variation of yawing moment
coefficient with sideslip angle.
---------------(9.17)
In general, should be negative for the airplane to have static directional
stability. All the components of the aircraft contribute to the stability coefficient .
CONTRIBUTION FROM WING:
The wing contribution to directional stability is quite small, as the cross wind effects
on the wing are very small. The critical factor is the sweepback of the wing.
wing ---------------(9.18)
57
For the aircraft,
Λ = 33.2130
= -0.0003458 deg-1
CONTRIBUTION FROM FUSELAGE AND NACELLE:
The contribution from the fuselage and nacelle is estimated using an empirical formula
developed North American Aviation Company.
---------------(9.19)
where k𝛃 : Empirical constant (from graph)
Sf : Projected area of fuselage in m2
h1, w1 : Height and width of fuselage at Lf/4 in m
h2, w2 : Height and width of fuselage at 3Lf/4 in m
From the graph of k𝛃 vs (d/Lf) for varying fuselage fineness ratio,

k𝛃 =0.113
For the aircraft,
Sf = 278.71m2
h1=h2 =5.177
w1=w2 = 5.177
= 0.0017deg-1
Since the wing configuration is low-wing,
Hence the contribution fuselage to directional stability is destabilizing.
CONTRIBUTION OF VERTICAL TAIL:
The vertical tail is the stabilizing component in the aircraft as far as directional stability is
concerned.
58
--------------(9.20)
For the vertical tail,

av = 0.1087 deg-1
⊽v = 0.04
𝛈v = 0.9
= -0.003913deg-1
= -0.0003 (from graph)
---------------(9.21)
-0.002559deg-1
DIRECTIONAL CONTROL:
DETERMINATION OF DIRECTIONAL STABILITY CHARACTERISTICS:
Cno = −av ∗⊽v∗ ηv ∗ τr ∗ δr
τr = 0.6
TABLE 9.8 :The variation of Cno with rudder deflection
59
𝛿r 𝐂𝐧𝐨
-30 0.0704
-20 0.0470
-10 0.0235
0 0
10 -0.0235
20 -0.0470
30 -0.0704
RUDDER CONTROL POWER
The rate at which the yawing moment coefficient of the aircraft changes with change
in rudder deflection is called the RUDDER CONTROL POWER.
---------------(9.22)
-0.00235 deg-1
DETERMINATION OF ASYMMETRIC POWER CONDITION CONTROL CHARACTERISTICS:
The basic configuration of the aircraft is four engine. When two engine is inoperative
(TEI), we obtain a case of asymmetric thrust or power. The control of the aircraft under
this condition with the help of the rudder is investigated in this section.
The equation of moment equilibrium in yaw in case of TEI is as follows-
---------------(9.23)
The value of in this expression is called the asymmetric-thrust yaw coefficient

CnT.
From equation (9.23),
60
For the aircraft,
ye = 20 m
For take-off conditions,
VT.O = 79.966 m/s

TT.O = 361176 N
(𝐂𝐧𝐓)take-off = 0.05518
𝛿r = -19.47 deg-1
For cruise conditions,
Vcruise = 244.44 m/s

Tcruise = 361176 N
𝛒cruise = 0.2657 kg/m3
(𝐂𝐧𝐓) cruise = 0.02723

𝛿r = -11.6 deg-1
For full rudder deflection (𝐂𝐧𝐓)full rudder =0.0705
TABLE 9.9 : The variation of asymmetric-thrust yawing moment coefficient with
velocity at sea level
Velocity m/s (Cn)T (Cn)Full Rudder
40 0.220536391 0.0705
65 0.08351674 0.0705
80 0.055134098 0.0705
120 0.024504043 0.0705
160 0.013783524 0.0705
200 0.008821456 0.0705
240 0.006126011 0.0705
280 0.004500743 0.0705
61
0.25
0.2 (Cn)T
0.15
Cn
0.1
(Cn)Full
0.05 Rudder
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Velocity m/s
Fig 9.8 : The variation of asymmetric-thrust yawing moment coefficient with velocity at sea level
The velocity at which the yaw coefficient due to full rudder deflection equals the yaw
coefficient due to asymmetric thrust is called the critical velocity for the rudder control or
unstuck speed. From graph, velocity is 70 m/s.
DETERMINATION OF CROSS WIND CONDITION CONTROL CHARACTERISTICS:
When the airplane is in take-off phase, a cross wind can induce a yawing moment. The
control of the aircraft under this condition with the help of the rudder is investigated in this
section. According to FAR standards, for design we assume
Cross-wind = 7.62 m/s
The sideslip due to cross wind is given by
---------------(9.24)

𝛃 =5.468 deg
To maintain sideslip, we have,
---------------(9.25)

𝛿r = 5.96 0
62
11.3 LATERAL STABILITY:
When a small vertical disturbance causes the aircraft to roll to one side, as such, the
airplane will continue to roll at the same constant velocity. As such, the airplane is neutrally
stable in roll. However, due to the development of sideslip, the lift distribution over the
wings is altered, tending to produce restoring moments which restore the aircraft to its
original state. This effect is generally called the Dihedral Effect. Lateral stability of the
airplane is a measure of this tendency to produce restoring moments when disturbed in roll.
It is measured quantitatively by the variation of rolling moment coefficient with sideslip
angle.
In general, should be positive for the airplane to have static lateral stability. All the
components of the aircraft contribute to the stability
coefficient .
CONTRIBUTION FROM WING:
The wing dihedral angle has a linear variation with the stability coefficient. There is also an
additional component due to the tip shape. The stability coefficient is given by the following
equation.
---------------(9.26)
where : Dihedral angle in degrees

For the aircraft,
= 4.030
For tip shape,
63
= 0.0007 deg-1
deg-1

CONTRIBUTION OF VERTICAL TAIL:
The vertical tail is stabilizing as far as directional stability is concerned.
---------------(9.27)
For the vertical tail,

av =0.1087deg-1
v= 0.04
v = 0.9
ZV =2.71m
lV =18.967m
= 0.000559deg-1
--------(9.28)
= 0.002265deg-1

Effective dihedral =4.50
64
LATERAL CONTROL:
The angular velocity, with which the airplane rolls under the combined effect of
aileron deployment and dihedral effect, is obtained using the strip integration
technique.
---------------(9.29)
The span wise variation for the wing chord is given by
---------------(9.30)
where cr: root chord in m

: wing taper ratio cr/ct
y: span wise location of strip
Using equation (9.29) and (9.30) , the aileron rolling power is given by the relation
For the airplane,
τa = 0.2
k1 = 0.5
k2 = 0.9
= 0.15
= 0.4533
65
TABLE 9.10 :The variation of rolling angular velocity with velocity for different
aileron deflections.
Aileron deflection degree

5 7.5 10
cruise velocity(m/s) rolling angular velocity rad/s
100 8.692964 13.03945 17.38593
110 9.562261 14.34339 19.12452
120 10.43156 15.64734 20.86311
130 11.30085 16.95128 22.60171
140 12.17015 18.25523 24.3403
150 13.03945 19.55917 26.07889
160 13.90874 20.86311 27.81749
170 14.77804 22.16706 29.55608
180 15.64734 23.471 31.29467
190 16.51663 24.77495 33.03327
200 17.38593 26.07889 34.77186
210 18.25523 27.38284 36.51045
220 19.12452 28.68678 38.24904
230 19.99382 29.99073 39.98764
240 20.86311 31.29467 41.72623
250 21.73241 32.59862 43.46482
260 22.60171 33.90256 45.20342
270 23.471 35.20651 46.94201
280 24.3403 36.51045 48.6806
290 25.2096 37.8144 50.41919
300 26.07889 39.11834 52.15779
140
120
rolling angular velocity rad/s
Aileron
deflection
100
degree 10
80
60 Aileron
deflection
40 degree 7.5
20
Aileron
0 deflection
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 degree 5
velocity m/s
Fig 9.9: The variation of Rolling rate with velocity
66
10. V-n DIAGRAM
In accelerated flight, the lift becomes much more compared to the weight of the
aircraft. This implies a net force contributing to the acceleration. This force causes stresses on
the aircraft structure. The ratio of the lift experienced to the weight at any instant is defined as
the Load Factor.
n= ρ ∗ V2 ∗ CL /( 2 W /S) ---------------(10.1)
In this section, we estimate the aerodynamic limits on load factor, and attempt to draw the
variation of load factor with velocity, commonly known as the V-n Diagram. The V-n
diagram is drawn for Sea Level Standard conditions.
Using the above formula, we infer that load factor has a quadratic variation with velocity.
However, this is true only up to a certain velocity. This velocity is determined by
simultaneously imposing limiting conditions aerodynamically ((C L)max) as well as
structurally (nmax). This velocity is called the Corner Velocity, and is determined using the
following formula.
---------------(10.2)
(CL)max is a property of the airfoil selected. For the NACA 4415,
𝐂𝐋𝐦𝐚𝐱= 1.65
Using the above

formula,
Vcorner =142.56 m/s
nmax = 3.08
In the V-n diagram, a horizontal line is drawn at this velocity. This load factor is a limit load
factor, beyond which structural damage occurs to aircraft components if load factor is
exceeded. The plot is extended through the maximum cruise velocity possible for the thrust
and wing loadings of the aircraft, and up to a never-exceed speed or dive speed, defined as
1.5 times the maximum possible cruise velocity. Both these speeds are greater than the
design cruise speed of the aircraft.
Vmaximumcruise = 0.9 * Vat T available=D
Vmaximum, cruise = 314.01 m/s

Vdive = 439.6 m/s
The V-n diagram is also extended for negative load factors, i.e. when the aircraft is in dives.
For this case,
67
ĉ = 7.051 m
-nmax = -1.232
2
g = 9.81N/m
=118.824 m/s
Vcorner
a = 5.4409
In order to calculate the gust load factors, the following
FAR standards are used.
μ =28.94
For velocities up to Vmaximum, cruise, a gust velocity of 50 ft/s
=0.7438 at sea level is assumed. For Vdive, a gust velocity of 66 ft/s
Kg
is assumed.
ngust = 1 + Kg Vge a ρ S/(2 W)
Gust Alleviation Factor Kg= 0.88 μg/(5.3 + μg )
Airplane Mass Ratio μg = 2 W/(ρĈaSg) ---------------(10.3)
Where,
Vge : equivalent gust velocity (m/s)
: Density of air (kg/m3)
W/S : wing loading (N/m2)
ĉ : mean geometric chord (m)
g : acceleration due to gravity (m/s2)
VE : airplane equivalent speed (m/s)
a : wing lift curve slope (rad-1)
= 1.225 kg/m3
W/S =680 Kgf/m2
Normal gust equivalent velocity is 7.62m/s at sea level. The rough gust velocity is 15.24m/s
from sea level.
Using the above obtained values, the V-n diagram for the aircraft at sea level is drawn. Gust
lines are drawn in the V-n diagram, indicating the load factor envelopes for normal gusts
encountered.
68
Fig 10.1 Vn diagram at sea level
REFERENCES:
[1] Janes all the world’s aircraft –Paul Jackson
[2] www.airliners.net
[3] www.wikipedia.org
[4] Aircraft design a conceptual approach –Daniel P.Raymer
[5] http://www.jet-engine.net/civtfspec.html
[6] Theory of wing sections –IRA H.Abbott &
Albert E.Von Doenhoff
[7] Dunlop Airplane Tyre Manuals
[8] Airplane performance stability & control –
Courtland D.Perkins
Robert E.Hage
[9] www.bh.com – Butterworth-Heinemann civil jet aircraft design website
[10] Design of the Airplane by Darrol Stinton
69

Final Report PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Final Report PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Aircraft DESIGN PROJECT REPORT

“350 SEATER LONG RANGE PASSENGER

DEPARTMENT OF AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING

DR. C. SENTHIL KUMAR DR. V. ARUMUGAM

We are very grateful to Dr.C. SENTHIL KUMAR for giving us

We also express our heartfelt thanks to Dr.K.Jeyaraman for his

We also express our heartfelt thanks to Dr. V. Arumugam for his

We are thankful to our Head of the Department

1. Collection of data of Existing aircraft 4

5. Landing gear and Tyre Selection 26

9 Analysis of Stability and control of the aircraft 43

The first step in the design of aircraft is to collect data of existing

The performance data of various aircraft with passenger payload

COLLECTION OF COMPARATIVE DATA

1 A 340-600 380 74.96 17.75 63.45 4

COLLECTION OF COMPARATIVE DATA

S.NO NAME T/W N/m2 Ratio RATIO.

COLLECTION OF COMPARATIVE DATA

1 A 340-600 590 177700 31.1 437 0.35

Fig 1.1 Empty weight Vs Cruise Velocity

Fig 1.2 Aspect Ratio Vs Cruise Velocity

Fig 1.3 Length Vs cruise velocity

Fig 1.4 Maximum Cruise velocity Vs Cruise Velocity

Fig 1.5 Range Vs Cruise Velocity

Fig 1.6 Wing Area Vs Cruise Velocity

Fig 1.8Wing Sweep Vs Cruise Velocity

Fig 1.9 Take off weight Vs Cruise Velocity

Fig 1.10 Taper ratio Vs Cruise Velocity

Fig 1.11Thrust Loading Vs Cruise Velocity

Fig 1.12 Wing loading Vs Cruise Velocity

Fig 1.13 L/b ratio Vs Cruise Velocity

Fig 1.14 Fineness ratio Vs Cruise velocity

No.of crew = 7+2=9

Using equation (2.1), we get,

Factor of safety = 1.2

2.1 Estimated weights and Selection of Engine

Crew weight (9) (Wc) = 8826 N

Powerplant weight (Wpp) = 145468 N

ENGINE:GE CF6-6E No.of engines – 4

Structural weight (WS) = 682503.9 N

Gross take-off weight (Wo) = 2153009.1 N

Empty weight (We) = 1076504.61 N

Gross Weight, 𝑊𝑜 = 2153009.1 N

Hence Wing span, 𝑏 = √8.3×322.863

From the comparative data, 𝑙⁄𝑏 = 1.04

Hence Length of the aircraft, 𝑙 = 1.04×51.766

From the comparative data, Fineness ratio, 𝑙⁄𝑑 = 10.4

Average chord length of the wing, 𝑐𝑚 = 𝑏⁄𝐴𝑅

Coefficient of lift at cruise altitude, 𝐶𝐿𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑖𝑠𝑒 = 2𝑊⁄𝜌𝑣 2 𝑠 ---------(3.1)

𝑉𝑓 = {0.49𝑐𝑚 ×(𝑡⁄𝑐)𝑐𝑚 ×0.5(𝑏⁄2)} 0.75×2 --------(3.2)

3.2 Flap Deflection Landing:

From the comparative data,

Take off distance=2900m

For reverse thrust,a = 0.25g

Vl = √(2 ∗ 0.25𝑔 ∗ 1500)

Vstall = 76.9729 m/s

∆CL = CLmax - CLcruise

Flap surface area, Sf = 32.6123*0.3*𝑐̅

Stall velocity,Vstall = 76.9729m/s

Take off velocity = 1.3Vstall

∆CL = CLtakeoff - CLcruise = 1.087- 0.7381 = 0.3492

25% by flap,∆CL = 0.0873

Flap deflection, δ = 130

Flap surface area, Sf = 32.61230.3𝑐̅