Добавил:
Upload Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Aircraft_design.pdf
Скачиваний:
692
Добавлен:
03.06.2015
Размер:
15.01 Mб
Скачать

130

Aircraft Classification, Statistics, and Choices for Configuration

Forward H-tail

Shifted H-tail

End H-tail

Mid H-tail

 

Shifted V-tail

Shifted H-tail

High H-tail

 

Figure 4.26. Positioning of the horizontal tail

gusts. Chapter 6 discusses the H-tail position relative to the wing; that is, at a high angle of attack, the wing wake should avoid the H-tail in the near-stall condition so that the pitch control remains adequate.

Care must be taken so that the H-tail is not within the entrainment effects of the jet exhaust situated at the aft end, which is typical for aft-mounted or withinfuselage jet engines. A military aircraft engine is inside the fuselage, which may require a pen–nib-type extension to shield the jet-efflux effect on the H-tail. In that case, the H-tail is moved up to either the midlevel or the T-tail.

4.10 Nacelle Group

In a civil aircraft design with more than one engine (i.e., turboprop or turbofan), the engines are invariably pod-mounted on the wing or the aft fuselage. The predominant options in civil aircraft design are shown in Figures 4.25 and 4.27. Here, some military designs are shown because they can be applied to civil aircraft design as well.

Larger aircraft have nacelle pods mounted under the wing (Figure 4.24a), but low-wing small aircraft have fuselage-mounted (Figure 4.24b) nacelle pods because there is insufficient ground clearance. An overwing nacelle pod (Figure 4.24c) on a smaller low-wing aircraft is gaining credence. Four-engine underwing nacelles are shown in Figures 4.27a and 4.27b (i.e., high and low wings, respectively). Introductory coursework may use any combination of these configurations.

Other options for engine positions are shown in Figures 4.28 and 4.29. The first commercial jet transport aircraft, the de Havilland Comet, had engines buried in the wing root (Figure 4.28c). These were not efficiently designed and are not pursued any longer in civil aircraft designs. For an odd number of engines, the odd one is placed in the centerline (e.g., Douglas DC10); if it is buried in the fuse- lage, then its intake may require an S-duct–type intake (e.g., Boeing 727) (see Figure 4.27d). In the 1970s, the proposed Heinkel 211 (not shown) had two S-ducted engines with the two surfaces of its V-tail. The overwing slipper-nacelle design

4.10 Nacelle Group

131

(a) Four engines on high wing

(b) Four engines on low wing

(c) Eight engines on low wing

(d) Center S-duct

(e) Center straight-duct

(f) Over-wing three engine

Figure 4.27. Options for conventional civil aircraft nacelle positions

(a) Two engines separately

(b) Twin-engine on twin boom

(c) Buried engine

(d) Shrouded propeller pusher

(e) Two engines over fuselage

Figure 4.28. Older design options for the nacelle positions

132

Aircraft Classification, Statistics, and Choices for Configuration

(a) Futuristic rear-engine mount

(b) BWB rear-engine mount

(c) Wing-tip–mounted engines

(d) Twin on fuselage

Figure 4.29. Futuristic options for the nacelle positions

has been flown by both Boeing (see Figure 4.27f) and Douglas for STOL performance. The engines on single-engine aircraft are at the centerline (except on specialpurpose aircraft), mostly buried into the fuselage. The Boeing B52 bomber has eight engines in four pods slung under the wing. If propeller-driven, an engine can either be a tractor (i.e., most designs) or a pusher-propeller mounted at the rear.

Some unconventional singleand twin-engine positions are shown in Figure 4.28; futuristic nacelle design options are shown in Figure 4.29 and have yet to be built. Figure 4.29a shows a Boeing Super Cruiser and Figure 4.29b is the Silent aircraft BWB proposed by MIT and Cambridge University.

Some helicopter designs have rotor-tip–mounted thruster engines and some VTOL aircraft have wing-tip–mounted tilt engines; all are special-purpose designs. Virginia Polytechnic Institute (VPI) conducted studies on interesting aircraft configurations with potential. Through their MDO studies of high-subsonic aircraft with engines at the tip of a strutted wing (Figure 4.29c), they found better weight and drag characteristics than in conventional cantilevered designs [7]. Although the studies have merit and they have considered the critical issues, more detailed analysis is required using better resolution. The structural weight gain due to a trusssupported wing and the aerodynamic gain due to induced-drag reduction of the wing-tip engines are not coupled even when the former offers structural support for the latter. A major concern will be to satisfy the mandatory requirement of a one-engine inoperative case. This will result in a considerably larger tail, possibly divided in half, depleting some weight benefits. Cost is another factor that the studies did not consider. The proposed aircraft will be more expensive, which may erode the DOC gains. The new aircraft certification will further add to the cost. Until more details are available, the author does not recommend the wing-tip– mounted engine installation, especially during an introductory course. Engines should be kept close to the aircraft centerline but away from any wake effects. The nose-wheel spray may require the nacelle to be at least 30 deg, away from the nose wheel (see Chapter 10). Detailed sensitivity studies are required for comparative

4.11 Summary of Civil Aircraft Design Choices

133

analyses of this novel configuration when a simple winglet provides induced-drag reduction. However, VPI’s study of twin side-by-side engines between the V-tail (Figure 4.29d) concluded that it would be better with a winglet.

4.11 Summary of Civil Aircraft Design Choices

This section summarizes some of the information discussed in Sections 4.5 through 4.10. Readers will have a better appreciation after completing the sizing exercise in Chapter 11. The seven graphs shown in Figures 4.5 through 4.11 capture all the actual aircraft data from the Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft Manual and other sources (acknowledged in the preface of this book). These statistical data (with some dispersion) prove informative at the conceptual design stage for an idea of the options that can be incorporated in a new design to stay ahead of the competition with a superior product. It is amazing that with these seven graphs, the reader can determine what to expect from a basic customer (i.e., operator) specification for the payload range. Readers may have to wait until their project is completed to compare how close it is to the statistical data, but it will not be surprising if the coursework result falls within the statistical envelope. Civil aircraft layout methodology is summarized as follows:

1.Size the fuselage for the passenger capacity and the amenities required from the customer’s specification. Next, “guesstimate” the MTOM from Figure 4.6 (i.e., statistics) for the payload range.

2.Select the wing planform area from Figure 4.9 for the MTOM. Establish the wing sweep, taper ratio, and t/c for the high-speed Mach-number capability.

3.Decide whether the aircraft will be high wing, midwing, or low wing using the customer’s requirements. Decide the wing dihedral or anhedral angle based on wing position relative to the fuselage. Decide the twist.

4.Guesstimate the engine size for the MTOM from Figure 4.10. Decide the number of engines required. For smaller aircraft (i.e., baseline aircraft for fewer than 70 passengers), configure the engines aft-mounted; otherwise, use a wingmounted podded nacelle.

5.Estimate H-tail and V-tail sizes for the wing area from Section 4.5.6.

The industry expends enormous effort to make reality align with predictions – it has achieved performance predictions within ±3% and within ±1.5% for the big aircraft. The generic methods adopted in this book are in line with the industry – the difference is that the industry makes use of more detailed and investigative analyses to improve accuracy in order to remain competitive. Industry could take 10 to 20 man-years (very experienced) to perform a conceptual study of midsized commercial aircraft using conventional technology. In a classroom, a team effort could take at most 1 man-year (very inexperienced) to conduct a concise conceptual study. There may be a lower level of accuracy in coursework, yet learning to design aircraft this way is close to industrial practices.

It is interesting that no two aircraft or two engines of the same design behave identically in operation. This is primarily due to production variances within the

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]