System Definition Review AAE 451
-
Upload
hadassah-duke -
Category
Documents
-
view
18 -
download
2
description
Transcript of System Definition Review AAE 451
System Definition ReviewSystem Definition ReviewAAE 451AAE 451
Andrew MizenerDiane Barney Jon Coughlin
Jared Scheid Mark GloverMichael Coffey Donald Barrett
Eric Smith Kevin Lincoln
Team GoldJet
Mission StatementMission Statement
To design a profitable, supersonic aircraft capable of Trans-Pacific travel to meet the needs of airlines and their passengers around the world.
Major Design RequirementsMajor Design Requirements
• Trans-Pacific Range:− Longer range increases available routes
• High Cruise Speed :− Makes shorter trip times and allows for more legs per
day
• Good Cruise Efficiency:– Lowers the cost of fuel and the max gross weight
Design MissionDesign Mission
• Los Angeles (LAX) – Shanghai (PDG)– Range: 5,650 nautical miles
Morphological MatrixMorphological Matrix
• To assist Pugh’s Method and Concept Selection• Listed design categories and all options
First ConceptsFirst Concepts
• Four Concepts Chosen, along with Datum• Showed immediate narrowing of possible ideas
in some categories– Two wing planforms– Two fuselage types– One landing gear style
Pugh’s MethodPugh’s Method
• Two rounds– First against the Datum– Second against one of our first designs (Concept 2)
• Second round shown– Some narrowing of categories as process went along
Condensed ConceptsCondensed Concepts
• Taking results of Pugh’s Method, two concepts emerged for further study– One based around a Double-Delta wing
• Result of min/maxing DD concepts• Three Design Choices to make
– Engine Location, Canards, and Tail Configuration
– One based around a Joined Wing
1x1 Seating Layout1x1 Seating Layout
• 1x1 Seating Configuration• Design allows for long slender body, reducing
drag• Carry-on baggage stowed next to passenger
– Allows for easier in flight access– Up to two carry-on bags can be carried due to
increased space
1x1 Top View1x1 Top View
• Length 90 feet• Lavatories positioned at the front and rear of
the cabin• Galley located forward
Lav Lav
Galley
Entry Door
1x1 Cross-Section1x1 Cross-Section
• Diameter: 10 ft• Aisle Width: 26 inches• Aisle Height: 76 inches• Seat Pitch: 40 inches
Carry On Storage
2x2 Seating Layout2x2 Seating Layout
• 2x2 Seating Configuration• Shorter fuselage length, enabling more radical
Sears-Haack shaping• Carry-on baggage stored overhead
2x2 Top View2x2 Top View
• Length 54 feet• Lavatories located aft• Galley located aft
Lav
LavGalley
Entry Door
2x2 Cross-Section2x2 Cross-Section
• Diameter: 11 feet 8 inches• Aisle Width: 26 inches• Aisle Height: 76 inches• Seat Pitch: 40 inches
Performance ConstraintsPerformance Constraints
• 5 main performance constraints identified:– Steady, Level Flight
• M = 1.8, h = 45,000 ft– Subsonic 2g Manuever,
• 250kts , h = 10,000 ft– Takeoff Ground Roll
• 5400 ft, h = 1,000 ft, +15° Hot Day – Landing Ground Roll
• 5400 ft, h = 1,000 ft, +15° Hot Day – 3% Second Segment Climb Gradient (4 engines)
• Above h = 1,000 ft, +15° Hot Day
Constraint AssumptionsConstraint Assumptions
• Cruise– Lapse Rate = 0.678 (ρ ratio)
– CD0 = 0.018
– AR = 2
– ΛLE = 45°
– dmax = 11.75 ft
– l = 180 ft
– CDw = 0.00644
• Subsonic Maneuver– CD0 & AR
– e = 0.7
• Takeoff– β = 1
– CL,max,TO = 1.2
– Field Length = 10000 ft
– sTO = 6000 ft
• Landing– αrev = 0.2
– β = 1
– CL,max,Land= 1.5
– μ = 0.2 (wet concrete/asphalt)
– Field Length = 10000 ft
– sLand = 6000 ft
• 2nd Segment Climb– CD0, AR, ΛLE– Four Engines (3% CGR)
– CL,max,TO = 1.2
– eTO = 0.525
Constraint DiagramConstraint Diagram
Current Sizing Method
• Based upon calculating the fuel fraction as described in Raymer
• Empty weight fraction based upon historical aircraft data
• Technical Factor of 0.95 for advanced materials
Results
• Design Variables– Mission Range: 5650 nmi– Aspect Ratio: 2– Wing Loading: 125 lb/ft2
– Thrust to Weight: 0.375– Maximum Mach Number:
2– Cruise Mach Number: 1.8– SFC: 0.8 /hr
• Resulting Weights– W0=341,000 lbs
– We=126,000 lbs
– Wf =206,000 lbs
• Wing Area– S=2,700 ft2
Sonic Boom Prediction
• Based upon Carlson– “Simplified Sonic-
Boom Prediction”
• Uses a series of non-linear factors based on altitude and shape
• Determines– Overpressure– Duration
Baseline Overpressure
• Cruise Condition– M=1.8– Alt = 45,000 ft
• Results– Overpressure: 1.66
lb/ft2
– Duration: 0.155 seconds
Double Delta ConfigurationDouble Delta Configuration
• Double Delta Wing Planform• Raked Wingtips• Low wing• Blended Wing/
Circular Fuselage• Tricycle Landing
Gear• 2x2 Cabin• Canard, Tail,
Engine Locationto be optimized
DD with no canards and Conventional Tail
Rough DD with Canards and No Tail
Joined Wing ConfigurationJoined Wing Configuration
• Joined Wing Planform• Canards• Engines podded and aft
on fuselage• Circular Fuselage• Tricycle Landing Gear• 1x1 Cabin
Next StepsNext Steps
• Preliminary analysis• Main concept selection• Detailed analysis• Final layout/configuration selection
Concept Analysis
• Double Delta– Engine placement
• Drag effects• Ground clearance
– Maintenance cost– Landing gear
size/weight• Noise shielding
– Canards vs. horizontal tail• Drag varying with
surface size• Canard issues at take-
off• Airport compatibility
– Fuselage/wing blending
• Joined Wing– Wing structure
• Complexity• Fuel storage• Weight savings• Aerodynamic
performance
Analysis TopicsAnalysis Topics
• Aerodynamics– Cross-sectional area
plot– Wave drag– Induced drag– Boom forming
• Structures– Strength analysis– Weight and weight
distribution
• Propulsion– Engine model– Engine choice
• Cost Model• Systems
– Airport gate compatibility
– Ground clearance
• Control– Stability– Static Margin– CG travel
• Optimization– Detailed sizing– Carpet plots
Questions?