James Bearman
AJ Brinker
Dean Bryson
Brian Gershkoff
Kuo Guo
Joseph Henrich
Aaron Smith








Review of Aircraft Requirements
Concept Generation
Advanced Technology
Fuselage Layout
Constraint Analysis
Current Sizing Analysis
Summary
Next Steps
2



Provide a versatile aircraft with medium
range and capacity to meet the needs of a
commercial aircraft market still expanding in
the year 2058
Incorporate the latest in technology to
provide reliability, efficiency, while fulfilling
the need for an environmentally friendly
transportation system
Possess the ability to operate at nearly any
airfield
3
Mission Profiles
•Mission One
•Schaumburg to
North Las Vegas
•1300 nmi
•Mission Two
•South Bend to
Burbank
•1580 nmi
•Mission Three
•West Lafayette to
Urbana-Champaign
to Cancun
•1200 nmi
•Mission Four
•Minneapolis to LAX
•1330 nmi
4
Engineering
Requirement
Condition
Target
Threshold
Takeoff Distance
≤
2,500 ft
3,500 ft
Landing Distance
≤
2,500 ft
3,500 ft
Takeoff Weight
≤
80,000 lb
100,000 lb
Range
≥
1800 nm
1500 nm
Maximum Cruise
Speed
≥
0.85 M
0.75 M
Maximum Passenger
Capacity
≥
110
90
5

Pugh’s Method
 Choose Criterion
 Generate Concepts
 Evaluate
 Improve
 Iterate



Select “Finalists”
Analysis
Current Configuration
Tube and
Bird of
Tandem
Wing
Prey
Wing
o
o
Maintenance Cost
o
o
o
Low Wt
o
Fuel Burn
o
Static Stability
o
+
+
Fuel Capacity
o
+
o
Fast
o
o
Clean Wing CL
o
+
o
Passenger Volume
o
+
Induced Drag
o
Parasite/Form Drag
o
Low Stall Speed
o
+
Low Alpha Req for T.O.
o
Noise Factor
o
+
Small Airport Compatible
o
+
o
Aesthetic Appeal
o
Passenger Visibility
+
0
6
2
o
16
1
6
0
9
8
6
7
8
9
Tri-Tail
Lifting Canard
Advanced Avionics
Possible
Rear Egress
Geared Turbofans
10

Composites
 Stronger and Lighter
than Metals
 Glue replaces
Fasteners
 20% empty weight
savings
 Current Obstacle:
Manufacturability and
Repairability

AI/UAV
 Reduction in flight




crew
Potentially Lower
Operational Cost
Reduced human error
incidents
Automatic Flight
Control
Current Obstacle:
Reliability and Risk
11

Pulse Detonation
 Up to 10% fuel savings (GE)
 Durable, Easy to Maintain
 Capable of using Multiple Fuels
 Current Obstacle: Noise
http://www.seas.ucla.edu/combustion/images/pdwe/engine_schematic2.jpg
12

Geared Turbofan
 12% fuel savings
 40% reduction in
maintenance cost
 70% lower emissions
 30 dB less than stage 3
noise limit
http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRHeft/FRHeft07/FRH0710/FR0710a1.jpg
13

Unducted Fans
 Increase of fuel
economy of 35%
 Increase in range of 45%
 Increase in noise but
current test models
meet noise criteria
 Blade-Out Risk
http://www.md80.it/OLDFILES/immagini/thrust/McDUHB-3.jpg
14

Magnetic Bearings

Vectored Thrust
 “Floating” shaft reduces
 Angled Thrust Provides
friction in turbine engine
 More thrust
 Possible elimination of
engine oil system
 Current Obstacle: Heat
generated by magnets
Vertical Force
 AV-8B Harrier II
▪ VTOL Weight: 22,000 lbs
▪ STOL (1400ft) Weight:
46,000 lbs
 Reduce TO Runway
Length
 Reduce Approach Speed
15

Circulation Control
Wing
 85% Increase in CLmax
 35% Reduction in power on




approach speed
65% Reduction in landing
ground roll
30% Reduction in lift off
speed
60% Reduction in take off
ground roll
75% Increase in typical
payload/fuel at operating
weight
AIAA-57598-949 Advanced Circulation Control Wing System for Navy STOL Aircraft
16

Blown Flaps
 CLmax > 7
 Types
▪ Internally Blown
▪ Externally Blown
▪ Upper Surface Blowing
 Reduce takeoff distance by as much as 74%
W.H. Mason Some High Lift Aerodynamics
17

Co-Flow Jet Flow Control
AIAA 2005-1260 High Performance Airfoil Using Co-Flow Jet Flow Control

Test results show:




Reduction of CL=0 from 0° to -4°
Increase of CLmax of 220% from 1.57 to 5.04
AoA CLmax increase of 153% from 19° to 44°
Reduction of CDmin(AoA=0°) from 0.128 to -0.036
18









TRL 1 Basic principles observed and reported
TRL 2 Concept and/or application formulated
TRL 3 Analytical and experimental proof-of concept
TRL 4 Component validation in lab environment
TRL 5 Component validation in relevant environment
TRL 6 Prototype demo in a relevant environment
TRL 7 Prototype demo in operational environment
TRL 8 Actual system completed and “flight qualified”
TRL 9 Actual system “flight proven” through successful
mission operations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_Readiness_Level
19
Type
Description
Weight/Cost
Savings
Composites
9
UAV/AI Pilot
6
Pulse Detonation
3
Geared Turbofans
6
Magnetic Bearings
3
Thrust Vectoring
7
Circulation Control
7
Blown Flaps
9
Co Flow Jet Control
4
Propulsion Type
Propulsion
Enhancement
High Lift
TRL
20



Fuselage sketches before configuration set
Aircraft evolution -> Fuselage change
Pressurized Cabin Shape
 Cylindrical Cross-Section
 Non-Cylindrical Cross-Section

Investigation of existing aircraft
 Fuselage Dimensions
 Galley/Lav/Cockpit Dimensions
 Seat Dimensions

Generated CAD Model
21








Length: 72.1 ft
Width: 14 ft
102 Seats, Single Class
Seat Pitch: 32 in
Aisle Width: 20 in
Seat Width: 24 in
2 Galley Areas: 35 and 16 ft2
2 Lavs: ~20 ft2
22

Major Constraints






2500 ft TO/Landing Roll
5000 ft Balanced Field OEI
500 ft/min Climb Rate at 36000 ft Top of Climb
100 ft/min Climb Rate at 41000 ft Service Ceiling
2g Maneuver at 36000 ft
Second Segment Climb Gradient OEI
▪ 2.4%--2 Engine
▪ 2.7%--3 Engine
▪ 3.0%--4 Engine
23






High and Hot Takeoff— 500o ft + 25°F
Aspect Ratio 10
Oswald Efficiency Factor 0.8
CD0 0.015
CLMax 4.0—Technology Improvement
L/D Second Segment Climb 11.5
24
TO Field & 2ND
Segment
Climb Size
Aircraft
 W/S—84 psf
 T/W—0.23

25

Design Mission





Altitude: 36,000 ft
Speed: 0.75 M
Cruise Range: 1,800 nmi
Steady, Level Flight
Analysis Tools:
 RDS
 Historical Database
 CATIA
26

Model Construction
 Basic Model of Aircraft
 Neglecting Landing Gear
 Technology Weight Savings Not Included

Sizing Analysis
 Initial “Guess” Values Used
 Initial Values Derived from Aircraft Database
27

Sizing Inputs:





W/S – 84 lbs/ft2
T/W – 0.23
AR – 10
Wing Sweep – 10°
Sizing Output:
 We/Wo – 0.60
 Wo – 88,000 lb
28
Metric
Status
Current
Takeoff Distance
2500
Landing Distance
2500
Gross Takeoff Weight
88000
Range
1800
Maximum Cruise
0.75
Passenger Capacity
102
Payload Capacity
26300
Fuel Burn
0.05
Condition








Target
Threshold
Unit
2500
3500
ft
2500
3500
ft
80000
100000
lbs
1800
1500
nmi
0.85
0.75
M
110
90
pax
28300
23300
lb
0.10
0.12
lbs/seat-nmi
/////////////////////////////////////////
/////////////////////////////////////////
///////////////////////////////////
Key
Meets or Exceeds
Target
Meets or Exceeds
Threshold
Noncompliant
-Fuel Burn suspect. Sizing code analysis to be investigated.
-Weight neglects gear and tech savings.
Data Out of Date
Capability Frozen
29
102 Passengers
1800 nmi Range
ESTOL Capable
Ability to operate at
small airports,
alleviating large
airports
 Advanced Technologies




30

Sizing
 Refine current models
 Size Control Surfaces and Stabilizers
 Comparison with Other Codes




Final Technology Selection
Aerodynamic Analysis
Performance and Stability Analysis
Cost Analysis
31