SkyBy OceanAire

Poorvi Kalaria Roman MaireAndy Grimes Motohide HoTara Palmer Greg FreemanVicki Huff Nick GurtowskiJack Yang Sanjeev Ramaiah

Team 1 2

System Definition Review

• Mission Objectives• Design Requirements• Aircraft Concept Selection• Advanced Technologies and Concepts• Initial Cabin Layout• Constraint Analysis and Diagrams• Sizing Studies• Summary of Aircraft Concept

Team 1 3

System Definition Review

• Mission Objectives• Design Requirements• Aircraft Concept Selection• Advanced Technologies and Concepts• Initial Cabin Layout• Constraint Analysis and Diagrams• Sizing Studies• Summary of Aircraft Concept

Team 1 4

Mission Objectives• Design an aircraft with supersonic capabilities that is

able to link major business city pairs.• Compete with other existing aircraft on the market.

Lockheed Martin QSST Sukhoi S-21

Aerion Corporation SBJ Dassault Aviation HISAC

Team 1 5

• First and Business class seating• Prime design focuses are cruise Mach number and cruise efficiency• Will fly only overseas due to FAR36 and to avoid the ill effects of sonic boom overland• Around 203 units will be sold in order to operate profitably between 19 city pairs• Still air range is 5450 nmi. • Design cruise altitude is 50,000 ft.• Design maximum cruise Mach number is 1.8

System Requirements Review

Team 1 6

System Definition Review

• Mission Objectives• Design Requirements• Aircraft Concept Selection• Advanced Technologies and Concepts• Initial Cabin Layout• Constraint Analysis and Diagrams• Sizing Studies• Summary of Aircraft Concept

Team 1 7

Major Design Requirements

• Takeoff field length• Landing field length• Door height above ground• Airframe life• Range• Number of passengers• Cruise Mach number• Cabin volume per passenger

• Operating cost• Cruise altitude• Cruise efficiency• Cumulative certification noise• Stall speed• Wing span• NOx emissions

Team 1 8

System Definition Review

• Mission Objectives• Design Requirements• Aircraft Concept Selection• Advanced Technologies and Concepts• Initial Cabin Layout• Constraint Analysis and Diagrams• Sizing Studies• Summary of Aircraft Concept

Aircraft Concept Selection• Pugh’s Method

– Evaluation of designs

• Process Overview1. Choose criteria2. Form matrix3. Choose datum4. Run matrix and evaluate

results5. Choose new datum6. Iterate until “winning

concept” is found9Team 1

Aircraft Concept Selection

• Initial Concept Selection– Each group member

designed his or her own design

– Based on agreed-on categories

• Initial Datum– Concorde

• Two Iterations Completed– Thirteen concepts evaluated

Concept Description Categories– Nose Type– Canards (Yes or No)– Fuselage Design– Wing Type– Engine Placement– Engine Inlet Geometry– Nozzle Geometry– Tail Configuration– Gear Type and Placement– Door Placement

10Team 1

Initial Concept Designs

11Team 1

Team 1 12

Initial Concept Designs

Aircraft Arrangement

13Team 1

Team 1 14

System Definition Review

• Mission Objectives• Design Requirements• Aircraft Concept Selection• Advanced Technologies and Concepts• Initial Cabin Layout• Constraint Analysis and Diagrams• Sizing Studies• Summary of Aircraft Concept

Advanced Technologies/Concepts

• Components– Engine selection– Inlets– Combustors– Nozzles– Wing tips

• Other Technologies– Skin and structural

materials– Compression lift

15Team 1

Engine Selection

• Supersonic Regime Considerations– Operation power– Limit on pressure ratio– Engine noise– Combustion emissions

16Team 1

Engine Selection• Medium Bypass Turbofans

– Variable cycle technology• Superior efficiencies

– Higher TSFC– Reduced turbine

temperatures

Image: "Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach" - Daniel Raymer 17Team 1

Image: "Engine Design and Challenges for the High Mach Transport" ~ Koff

Combustor Technology• Nox Emissions

– Direct functions of Gas temperature

• Cannot remain above 3300° F for too long

• Unacceptable levels of Nox

• Efficient Mixing– Increase full vaporization

prior to injection

Inlet Design• Ramp Inlet• Variable Inlet Geometry

– Mass flow requirements– Shock creation and

control

Image: "Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach" - Daniel Raymer 19Team 1

Inlet Design Analysis

• Drag Trends– 2-D Ramp vs. Axisymmetric– Increase in drag

Image: "Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach" - Daniel Raymer

Nozzle Design• Variable Nozzle Geometry

– Better match between different operating conditions

• Ejector Nozzle– Used with variable geometry

Image: "Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach" - Daniel Raymer 21Team 1

Wing Tip Inclusion• Advantages

– Reduction of the AR during cruise– More stability surfaces– Reflection of the oblique shock (extra compression)

• Disadvantages– Extra complexity– Extra weight– May interfere with landing constraints in case of

failure

22Team 1

Team 1 23

Advanced Concepts: Materials• Factors:

– Performance at high temperatures• Skin temperature increases more rapidly at higher

speeds• Raymer: 350° average skin temperature at Mach 1.6-1.8

– Affordability– Efficiency

• Corrosion• Service Life

– Availability

Team 1 24

Advanced Concepts: Materials• Aluminum Alloys

– Most widely used– Abundant– Moderate cost– Excellent strength-to-weight ratio– High strength: 7075– Aluminum Lithium Alloy comparable to composites– 250°F maximum operating temperature– Weak in fracture toughness and creep resistance

Team 1 25

Advanced Concepts: Materials• Titanium Alloys

– High stiffness– Resistant to high temperatures– Corrosion resistant – High strength to weight ratio– Difficult to form– Excessive weight– Expensive (5X aluminum)– Primary use on wing and tail leading edge– Also, engine components and landing gear

Team 1 26

Advanced Concepts: Materials• Composites

– Weight reduction– Filament-reinforced: high strength to weight ratio

and weight savings– Graphite Epoxy (Carbon-fiber composite): high

strength-to-weight ratio but very expensive (20X aluminum)

– Max temp: 350°

Team 1 27

Advanced Concepts: Materials• Composites:

– Cannot accept concentrated loads– Strength affected by many factors– Susceptible to damage– Internal damage difficult to find– Difficult to repair– Complex material properties

Team 1 28

Advanced Concepts: Materials• Aerion:

– Wing: Carbon Epoxy • Leading edge: Coated with metal for erosion resistance

– Fuselage: Aluminum & Composites• QSST:

– No new “breakthrough” materials• XB-70

– Stainless steel– Sandwiched honeycomb– Titanium

Team 1 29

Advanced Concepts: Materials• Next Steps:

– 2020: vast advances in composites– Two main focus points:

• Weight & temperature

– Different materials in different locations– Work with sizing

• Determine maximum loads

– Look into joints & sealants

Team 1 30

System Definition Review

• Mission Objectives• Design Requirements• Aircraft Concept Selection• Advanced Technologies and Concepts• Initial Cabin Layout• Constraint Analysis and Diagrams• Sizing Studies• Summary of Aircraft Concept

Initial Cabin Layout

31Team 1

Initial Cabin Layout

32Team 1

Initial Cabin Layout

33Team 1

Boarding Door

Emergency Exit

Emergency Exit

Emergency Exit

Initial Cabin Layout•First Class Seat Pitch = 46”•Business Class Seat Pitch = 42”•1 Boarding Door (1R)•3 Emergency Exits•2 Lavatories

34Team 1

Initial Fuselage Dimensions

• Length = 196’• Width at Max = 9’• Width at Tail = 4’

35Team 1

Team 1 36

System Definition Review

• Mission Objectives• Design Requirements• Aircraft Concept Selection• Advanced Technologies and Concepts• Initial Cabin Layout• Constraint Analysis and Diagrams• Sizing Studies• Summary of Aircraft Concept

• Major Performance Constraints:-Cruise

• 1g Steady Level Flight, M = 1.8 at h=50,000 ft • Assuming Standard Atmosphere Conditions

-Subsonic Maneuver• 2g turn at 250 knots at h = 10,000 ft• Assuming 92% of the take off weight

-Takeoff Ground Roll • 6000 ft at h = 0 ft• +15° Hot Day

-Landing Ground Roll • 4000 ft at h = 0 ft • +15° Hot Day

-Second Segment Climb Gradient • above h = 0 ft• +15° Hot Day

Constraint Analysis / Constraint Diagram

37Team 1

Basic assumptions made for each constraint

CruiseSubsonic

Maneuver Take Off 2nd segment climb Landing

Engine Lapse Rate (α) 42 % 82% 99 % 99 % 99 %25 % Reverse T

Weight fraction (Wi/Wo) 91 % 92 % 100 % 100 % 100 %

AR 1.9 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6

Oswald Efficiency 82 %

LE angle 60o

CLmax 1.2 1.2 1.2

Cdo 0.018 0.018

CDW 0.022

Number of engines 3

Climb Gradient 2.7 %

Distance Constraint 6000ft 4000ft

38Team 1

80 90 100 110 120 130 1400

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Compression Lift, 3 engines,folding winglets configuration

Design:Wing Loading ~ 104 psf

Thrust to Weight Ratio ~ 0.455

1g steady, level flight, M = 1.8 @ h=50K (Sky)

subsonic 2g manuever, 250kts @ h =10K (Sky)

takeoff ground roll 6000 ft @ h = 0K, +15° hot day (Sky)

landing ground roll 4000 ft @ h = 0K, +15° hot day (Sky)

second segment climb gradient above h = 0K, +15° hot day (Sky)

Wing Loading [psf]

Thr

ust

to W

eigh

t R

atio

39Team 1

80 90 100 110 120 130 1400

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Cruise Subsonic Maneuver

Take Off Landing

2nd Segment Climb Linear (2nd Segment Climb)

Wing Loading [psf]

Thru

st to

Wei

ght R

atio

Compression Lift, 3 engines,Non-folding winglets configuration

Design:Wing Loading ~ 104 psf

Thrust to Weight Ratio ~ 0.515

40Team 1

Team 1 41

System Definition Review

• Mission Objectives• Design Requirements• Aircraft Concept Selection• Advanced Technologies and Concepts• Initial Cabin Layout• Constraint Analysis and Diagrams• Sizing Studies• Summary of Aircraft Concept

Current Sizing Approach

• Writing MATLAB code– Advances the Initial Sizing Spreadsheet

• More detailed breakdown of each segment of design mission to get more accurate segment weights, fuel weights

• More detailed geometry• Inclusion of Lift, Drag, SFC as functions of geometry,

engine specs, altitude, Mach number, etc.

42Team 1

InputsTSL/W0, W0/S, W0,guess, SFCSL

… etc

Determine Other VariablesTSL = (TSL/W0)W0

S = W0/(W0/S)*b AR S

We = f(W0, S, TSL, etc)

Wfuel = f(W0, S, TSL, etc)

W0,new = Wpay + Wcrew + We + Wfuel

W0,new ≈ W0,guess

W0,guess = W0,new

False

TrueW0

Main Code

43Team 1

InputsVcruise, Rcruise, Wcurrent

Di = f(geometry, Wi, M, h)SFC = f(h,M,D)

Li = Wi

CalculationsWi+1/Wi = exp[-(Rseg*C)/(V(Li/Di))

Wi+1 = Wi*Wi+1/Wi

Wcurrent = W1

i = 1:n

Wn+1

Example of segment function: Cruise

44Team 1

Component Weight Prediction

• Used component weight prediction equations from Raymer 15.3

• Used Concorde as “standard”– Obtained values for variables

• Calculated correction factor from Concorde– Published We / Predicted We

– Factor = 2.04• Will be used once more of our variables are

found/calculated45Team 1

Current Values

• Based on Initial Sizing Spreadsheet– ARcruise = 1.9

– T/W0 = 0.45

– W0/S = 107– SFC = 0.78 1/hr

• Gross T.O. Weight: 299,100 lbs• Fuel Weight: 169,300 lbs• Total Empty Weight: 118,200 lbs

46Team 1

Next Steps

• Include Engine Specs• Find reasonable prediction for wave drag• Employ advanced flight control equations for

better prediction of aerodynamic coefficients• Develop Lift, Drag, SFC, etc. functions • Finish Advanced Sizing Code

47Team 1

Team 1 48

System Definition Review

• Mission Objectives• Design Requirements• Aircraft Concept Selection• Advanced Technologies and Concepts• Initial Cabin Layout• Constraint Analysis and Diagrams• Sizing Studies• Summary of Aircraft Concept

Team 1 49

Summary

Team 1 50

SummaryRequirements Compliance Matrix

Requirement Unit Condition Target Threshold Design (to Date)

Takeoff Field Length [ft] < 10,000 11,800 11000

Range [nmi] > 5410 4000 5410

Payload [pax] > 49 35 49

Cruise Mach # [N/A] > 1.8 1.6 1.8

Cruise Efficiency [lb fuel/pax-nmi] < 0.25 0.33 0.36

Certification Noise [PldB] < 50 70 69

Cabin Volume per Pax [ft^3/pax] > 10 8 8.55

Cruise Altitude [ft] 50000 60000 50000

Aircraft Life [years] > 30 20 28

Aspect Ratio [N/A] < 2.6 1.9 1.9

Thrust to Weight Ratio [N/A] > 0.37 0.3 0.45

Wing Loading [N/A] > 125 95 104

Crew [crew] < 3 5 4

Table #. Requirements Compliance Matrix to Date

Team 1 51

Summary• Pugh’s method was used to evaluate design concepts• Engine concept evaluation led to the positive utilization

for variable cycle technology• Variable geometry for engine inlets and nozzles will

allow for most efficiency in supersonic regime• Material focuses are weight and temperature; different

materials will be used in different locations• Constraint diagrams show that limiting factor is subsonic

2g maneuver and landing• From trade studies, it was found that 3 engines were

preferred as well as folding winglets configuration• Excel sizing code updated and advanced sizing code in

progress

Team 1 52

Next Steps

• Third phase of sizing– Utilization of sizing code– Find more accurate weights

• Further investigation of advanced technologies• Create more accurate CATIA model• Structural and Dynamic Analysis

– Vertical tail sizing – Canard sizing

• Create Carpet Plots

References• Kauser, Fazal B., California State Polytechnic Univ., Pomona

AIAA-1994-2828 . ASME, SAE, and ASEE, Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, 30th, Indianapolis, IN, June 27-29, 1994

• Bernard Koff, TurboVIsion, Inc., Miami, FL; Steven Koff, TurboVIsion, Inc., Miami, FL AIAA-2007-5344 . 43rd AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, Cincinnati, OH, July 8-11, 2007

• EVELYN, G. B., Boeing Commercial Airplane Co., Seattle, Wash.; JOHNSON, P. E., Boeing Commercial Airplane Co., Seattle, Wash.; SIGALLA, A., Boeing Commercial Airplane Co., Seattle, Wash. AIAA-1978-1051. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Society of Automotive Engineers, Joint Propulsion Conference, 14th, Las Vegas, Nev., July 25-27, 1978, AIAA 14 p.

• Martin Sippel, DLR, German Aerospace Research Center, Cologne AIAA-2006-7976. 14th AIAA/AHI Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, Canberra, Australia, Nov. 6-9, 2006

• Timothy Conners, Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, Savannah, GA; Donald Howe, Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, Savannah, GA AIAA-2006-30. 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, Jan. 9-12, 2006

• Raymer, D. P., Aircraft Design – A Conceptual Approach, Third Edition, AIAA, Washington, DC, 1999, p. 1-14.

53Team 1

Team 1 54

• Seating Charts (Pitch and Width for Business and First on all airlines)http://www.seatguru.com/charts/business_class.php

• Airport database (runway lengths, codes, locations...)http://www.world-airport-codes.com/

• Market Sizehttp://travel.nytimes.com/2007/07/24/business/24premium.html

• Seat Pitchhttp://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/seating/seat-pitch.jpg

• NASA Dryden fact sheet for Tu-144http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-062-DFRC.html

• Aerion Corp-Aerion datahttp://www.aerioncorp.com/technology

• USAF XB-70 Factsheet• F-14D data http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-14-specs.htm

M.A.T.Shttp://www.anft.net/f-14/f14-specification.htm

References

Back Up Slide

1g steady, level flight, M = 1.8 @ h=50K (Sky)

subsonic 2g manuever, 250kts @ h =10K (Sky)

takeoff ground roll 6000 ft @ h = 0K, +15° hot day (Sky)

landing ground roll 4000 ft @ h = 0K, +15° hot day (Sky)

second segment climb gradient above h = 0K, +15°

hot day (Sky)r 0.000362sl/ft^3 r 0.001756sl/ft^3 rho 0.00226sl/ft^3 rho 0.00226sl/ft^3 rho 0.00226sl/ft^3a 0.42 0.1523a 0.85 alpha 0.99 alpha 0.99 alpha 0.99b 0.91 b 0.92 beta 1 alpha_rev 0.25 beta 1

M 1.8 V 422ft/sCL max TO 1.2 beta 1

CL max TO 1.2

V 1742.4ft/s CD0 0.018 g 32.17ft/s^2CL max land 1.2 g 32.17ft/s^2

CD0 0.018 e 0.82 s_to 6000ft g 32.17ft/s^2 N 3AR 1.9 AR 2.6 mu 0.3 CGR 2.7%K 0.40996 q 156.3578lb/ft^2 s_l 4000ft CD0 0.018E_WD 1.8 n 2 AR 2.6LLE 40deg dh/dt 0ft/s e_TO 0.65d_max 9ft g 32.17ft/s^2 D CD0 0.0033l 180ft dV/dt 0ft/s^2CDW 0.002004 W0/Sq 549.5084lb/ft^2 79.1637414n 1dh/dt 1.666667ft/sg 32.17ft/s^2dV/dt 0ft/s^2

55Team 1