AIRCRAFT DESIGN PROJECT

SINGLE SEATER MULTIROLE FIGHTER AIRCRAFT (F-16)

A PROJECT REPORT
Submitted by
A. ASWIN (962023101002)
K. SELVAM (962023101014)

in partial fulfilment for the award of the degree

of
BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING
in
AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING
SATYAM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING ANDTECHNOLOGY

ANNA UNIVERSITY: CHENNAI 600 025

MAY 2026
 ANNA UNIVERSITY: CHENNAI 600025

BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

Certified that this project on “DESIGN OF SINGLE SEATER MULTIROLE

FIGHTER AIRCRAFT (F-16)” is the bonafide work of [Link]
(962023101002), and K. SELVAM (962023101014) who carried out the project
work under my supervision.

SIGNATURE SIGNATURE
Mr. S. SIVAJOTHI BE, M.E, (Dstn), MISTE Ms. M.L. JORLIN B.E, M.E
HEAD OF THE DEPARTMEND ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
Department of Aeronautical Engg Department of Aeronautical Engg
Satyam College Of Engineering and Satyam College Of Engineering and
Technology Technology

Submitted for the viva voce conducted by anna university, Chennai at SCET on
…………………….

EXTERNAL EXAMINAR INTERNAL EXAMINAR

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, we wish to acknowledgement our department to the

“ALMIGHTY GOD’’ Who have given as knowledge and good health.

I wish to express my sincere thanks to my honourable chairman

Mr. A. THINAGAR M.E, MBA, MISTE, (Ph.D.) for providing us all the
facilities and good environment.

I wish to express my sincere thanks to my honourable principal

Dr. SURESH KUMAR M.E, Ph.D. for providing us academic support.

I wish to express my sincere thanks to my honourable vice principal

Prof. W. ANISH, M.E, (Ph.D.) for providing us academic support.

I wish to express my sincere thanks to my head of the department

Mr. S. SIVA JOTHI B.E, M.E (Dstn), MISTE for the enthusiastic
encouragement for the successful completion to this project work.

I take it great privilege to express my deep thanks to my supervisor

Ms. M.L. Jorlin B.E, M.E for this constant guidance, valuable assistance and
encouragement.
 ABSTRACT

The Current scenario in Aerial Combat requires an Aircraft that can perform
multirole tasks to complete various missions with same airframe. The report
summarizes the design of an aircraft with its design parameters and design
considerations. The design includes the blend wing stealth technology which can
perform multiple roles with greater flexibility. Aircraft is designed with a
capability of carrying payload up to 7700kg that includes missile (Air to Air &
Air to ground). Bombs, Guns etc. The Huge amount of thrust allows the aircraft
to attain STOL (Short Take-Off and Landing) along TVC (Television
Commercial) and the cruise altitude in minimum time. The design has fully
variable inlet and Nozzle for good performance of the engine at various speed
also this report includes the CAD (Computer Aided Design) diagrams of Top
View, Front View, Side View model of single seater multirole fighter aircraft
F-16 FIGHTER FALCON
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER NO TITLE PAGE

ABSTSACT
LIST OF SYMBOLS
1 INTRODUCTION TO DESIGN 1
2 INTRODUCTION OF AIRCRAFT 4
3 COMPARATIVE DETAILS 5
GRAPH
3.1. RANGE VS LENGTH
3.2. RANGE VS WINGSPAN
3.3. RANGE VS HEIGHT
3.4. RANGE VS EMPTY WEIGHT
3.5. RANGE VS WING AREA
3.6. RANDE VS MAX,TAKE OFF WT
3.7. RANGE VS RATE CLIME
3.8. RANGE VS WING LOAD
4 WEIGHT ESTIMATION 14
[Link] PROFILE
5 AEROFOIL SELECTION 37
6 WING SELECTION 40
7 AIRCRAFT FUSELAGE 52
8 TAIL PLANE SELECTION 59
9 LANDING GER SELECTION 63
10 ENGINE SPECIFICATION 66
11 DRAG ESTIMATION 69
12 V-N DIAGRAM 75
13 THREE DIMENSSIONAL VIEW GIAGRAM 73
14 CONCLUSION 79
15 REFERENCE 80
 LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1:- NACA AEROFOIL

FIGURE 2:-LOW WING DIHEDRAL
FIGURE 3:-STRAIGHT DIHEDKERAL
FIGURE 4:-WING GEOMETRY
FIGURE 5:-M201 WITH A RETRACTABLE

LIST OF GRAPH

GRAPH 1:- LENGTH VS SPEED

GRAPH 2:-WING SPAN VS SPEED
GRAPH 3:-WING AREA VS SPEED
GRAPH 4:-EMPTY WEIGHT VS SPEED
GRAPH 5:-RATE OF CLIMB VS SPEED
GRAPH 6:-MAX. TAKE OFF WT VS SPEED
GRAPH 7:- LOADED WEIGHT VS SPEED
GRAPH 8:-HEIGHT VS SPEED
GRAPH 9:-COMBAT RADIUS VS SPEED
GRAPH 10:-RANGE VS SPEED
GRAPH 11:-SERVICE CEILLING VS SPEED
GRAPH 12:-WING LOADING VS SPEED
GRAPH 13:-THRUST/WEIGHT VS SPEED
GRAPH 14:-THRUST VS SPEED
GRAPH 15:-ASPECT RATIO VS SPEED
GRAPH 16:-EMPTTY WT VS SPEED
GRAPH 17:-CL VS CD & CL VS ALPHA
 LIST OF TABLE

TABLE 1:-COMPARATIVE DETAILS-1

TABLE 2:-COMPARATIVE DETAILS-2
TABLE 3:-COMPARATIVE DETAILS-3
TABLE 4:-COMPARATIVE DETAILS-4
TABLE 5:-COMPARATIVE DETAILS-5
 LIST OF SYMBOLS

SYMBOL ABBREVIATION

B Climb angle
P Density factor

∅ Glide angle

Θ Turn angle

B Wing span
C Chord length

Ĉ Mean chord

CD Drag coefficient

Cr Root chord

Ct Tip chord

D Drag force

D Tire diameter

E Endurance

G Acceleration due to gravity

L Lift force

LE Leading edge of wing

Lf Length of fuselage

Rr Rolling radius of tyre

t/c Wing thickness ratio

T/W Thrust loading
 V Velocity of air/aircraft
Vf Volume of fuel
Vstall Velocity at stall
W/S Wing loading
W0 Gross weight of aircraft
Wcrew Crew weight
We Empty weight of aircraft
Wf Weight of fuel
Wpayload Aircraft payload weight
Λ Taper ratio of wing
W Weight of aircraft
Cl Coefficient of lift
S Wing area
A.R Aspect area
Cr,Ct Chord length of root, tip
Tr,Tt Thickness of root, tip
Sπ Wetted surface area
CDπ Coefficient of drag of wetted surface
area
Β Dihedral angle
ΛL.E Sweep angle of the leading edge
 CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION OF DESIGN

Modern aircraft are a complex combination of aerodynamic performance,

lightweight durable structures and advanced systems engineering. Air passengers
demand more comfort and more environmentally friendly aircraft. Hence many
technical challenges need to be balanced for an aircraft to economically achieve
its design specification. Aircraft design is a complex and laborious undertaking
with a number of factors and details that are required to be checked to obtain
optimum the final envisioned product. The design process begins from scratch
and involves a number of calculations, logistic planning, design and real world
considerations, and a level head to meet any hurdle head on. Every airplane goes
through many changes in design before it is finally built in a factory. These steps
between the first ideas for an airplane and the time when it is actually flown make
up the design process. Along the way, engineers think about four main areas of
aeronautics: Aerodynamics, Propulsion, Structures and Materials, and Stability
and Control.

Aerodynamics is the study of how air flows around an airplane. In order for an
airplane to fly at all, air must flow over and under its wings. The more
aerodynamic, or streamlined the airplane is, the less resistance it has against the
air. If air can move around the airplane easier, the airplane's engines have less 2
work to do. This means the engines do not have to be as big or eat up as much
fuel which makes the airplane more lightweight and easier to fly. Engineers have
to think about what type of airplane they are designing because certain airplanes
need to be aerodynamic in certain ways. For example, fighter jets maneuver and
turn quickly and fly faster than sound (supersonic flight) over short distances.
Most passenger airplanes, on the other hand, fly below the speed of sound
(subsonic flight) for long periods of time.
Propulsion is the study of what kind of engine and power an airplane needs. An
airplane needs to have the right kind of engine for the kind of job that it has. A
passenger jet carries many passengers and a lot of heavy cargo over long distances
so its engines need to use fuel very efficiently. Engineers are also trying to make
airplane engines quieter so they do not bother the passengers onboard or the
neighborhoods they are flying over. Another important concern is making the
exhaust cleaner and more environmentally friendly. Just like automobiles,
airplane exhaust contains chemicals that can damage the earth's environment.

1
Structures and Materials is the study of how strong the airplane is and what
materials will be used to build it. It is really important for an airplane to be as
lightweight as possible. The less weight an airplane has, the less work the engines
have to do and the farther it can fly. It is tough designing an airplane that is
lightweight and strong at the same time. In the past, airplanes were 3 usually made
out of lightweight metals like aluminium, but today a lot of engineers are thinking
about using composites in their designs. Composites look and feel like plastic, but
are stronger than most metals. Engineers also need to make sure that airplanes not
only fly well, but are also easy to build and maintain. Stability and Control is the
study of how an airplane handles and interacts to pilot input and feed. Pilots in
the cockpit have a lot of data to read from the airplane's computers or displays.
Some of this information could include the airplane's speed, altitude, direction,
and fuel levels as well as upcoming weather conditions and other instructions
from ground control. The pilot needs to be able to process the correct data quickly,
to think about what kind of action needs to be taken, and to react in an appropriate
way. Meanwhile, the airplane should display information to the pilot in an easy-
to read and easy-to-understand way. The controls in the cockpit should be within
easy reach and just where the pilot expects them to be. It is also important that the
airplane responds quickly and accurately to the pilot's instructions and maneuvers.
When you look at aircraft, it is easy to observe that they have a number of common
features: wings, a tail with vertical and horizontal wing sections, engines to propel
them through the air, and a fuselage to carry passengers or cargo. If, however, you
take a more critical look beyond the gross features, you also can see subtle, and
sometimes not so subtle, differences. This is where design comes into play. Each
and every aircraft is built for a specific task, and the design is worked around the
requirement and need of the aircraft. The design is model about the aircraft role
and type and not the other way around. Thus, this is why airplanes differ from
each other and are conceptualized differently. Aircrafts that fall in the same
category may have similar specifications and performance parameters, albeit with
a few design changes.
Design is a pivotal part of any operation. Without a fixed idea or knowledge of
required aircraft, it is not possible to conceive the end product. Airplane design is
both an art and a science. In that respect it is difficult to learn by reading a book;
rather, it must be experienced and practiced. However, we can offer the following
definition and then attempt to explain it.
Airplane design is the intellectual engineering process of creating on paper (or on
a computer screen) a flying machine to (1) meet certain specifications and

2
requirements established by potential users (or as perceived by the manufacturer)
and/or (2) pioneer innovative, new ideas and technology. An example of the
former is the design of most commercial transports, starting at least with the
Douglas DC-1 in 1932, which was designed to meet or exceed various
specifications by an airplane company. (The airline was TWA, named
Transcontinental and Western Air at that time.) An example of the latter is the
design of the rocket-powered Bell X-1, the first airplane to exceed the speed of
sound in level or climbing flight (October 14, 1947). The design process is indeed
an intellectual activity, but a rather special one that is tempered by good intuition
developed via experience, by attention paid to successful airplane designs that
have been used in the past, and by (generally proprietary) design procedures and
databases (handbooks, etc) that are a part of every airplane manufacturer.

3
 CHAPTER-2
INTRODUCTION TO AIRCRAFT
A fighter aircraft is a military aircraft designed primarily for air-to-air combat
against other aircraft, as opposed to bombers and attack aircraft, whose main
mission is to attack ground targets. The hallmarks of a fighter are its speed,
maneuverability, and small size relative to other combat aircraft.
Many fighters have secondary ground-attack capabilities, and some are designed
as dual purpose fighter-bombers; often aircraft that do not full fill the standard
definition are called fighters. This may be for political or national security
reasons, for advertising purposes, or other reasons.
A fighter's main purpose is to establish air superiority over a battlefield. Since
World War I, achieving and maintaining air superiority has been considered
essential for victory in conventional warfare The success or failure of a
belligerent's efforts to gain air supremacy hinges on several factors including the
skill of its pilots, the tactical soundness of its doctrine for deploying its fighters,
and the numbers and performance of those fighters. Because of the importance of
air superiority, since the dawn of aerial combat armed forces have constantly
competed to develop technologically superior fighters and to deploy these fighters
in greater numbers, and fielding a viable fighter fleet consumes a substantial
proportion of the defence budgets of modern armed forces.

4
 CHAPTER-3
COMPARATIVE DETAILS
In the designer's perspective it is necessary to compare the existing airplanes that
are of same type as that of our desired airplane. Their important parameters,
positive aspects and pitfalls to be overcome are taken into consideration. The data
has been collected for military transport aircrafts. Several parameters are
compared for 15 aircrafts and different parameters are plotted on the graph. The
parameters compared are:

➤ Seating capacity

➤ Length

➤ Wingspan

➤ Height

➤ Wing loading

➤ Aspect ratio

➤ Service ceiling

➤ Rate of climb

➤ Range

➤ Cruise speed

➤ Maximum speed

➤ No of engines

➤ Maximum thrust capability

➤ Maximum take-off weight

➤ Empty weight

➤ Payload weight

➤ Engine type

5
PARAMETER UNIT F22 F16 SU35

CREW NUMBER 1 1 1

LENGTH m 18.92 15.06 29.9

WINGSPAN m 13.56 9.96 15.3

HEIGHT m 5.08 4.8 5.9

WING AREA m² 78.04 27.87 62

EMPTY WT Kg 19700 8570 18400

LOADED WT Kg 29410 12000 25300

MAX TAKE OFF

Kg 38000 19200 34500
WT

RATE OF CLIMB m/s 325 250 212

DRY THRUST KN 116 76.3 86.3

MAX SPEED Km/h 2410 2414 2500

COMBAT RADIUS Km 1188 550 1580

RANGE Km 3220 4220 4500

SERVICE
m 20000 15240 18000
CEILING
WING LOADING Kg/m² 377 431 408

THRUST/WEIGHT - 1.08 1.095 1.13

AF AF AF
POWERPLANT -
TURBOFAN TURBOFAN TURBOFAN
ASPECT RATIO - 2.35 3.09 3.77

6
 F-35
PARAMETER UNIT CHENGDU J20
LIGHTNING
CREW NUMBER 1 1

LENGTH m 15.67 20

WINGSPAN m 10.7 13

HEIGHT m 4.33 4.45

WING AREA m² 42.7 78

EMPTY WT Kg 13199 19391

LOADED WT Kg 22470 32092

MAX TAKE OFF
Kg 31800 36288
WT
RATE OF CLIMB m/s 350 304

DRY THRUST KN 125 76.18

MAX SPEED Km/h 1930 2100

COMBAT
Km 1158 1252
RADIUS
RANGE Km 2220 3400
SERVICE
m 18288 18000
CEILING
WING LOADING Kg/m² 107.7 410

POWERPLANT - AF TURBO FAN AF TURBO FAN

ASPECT RATIO - 2.68 2.1

7
 COMPARITIVE GRAPHS
The comparative graphs are plotted for various parameters from the comparative
sheets of various military transport aircrafts. Comparison of datas of similar
aircrafts of same classification are necessary to know the strengths and weakness
of every aircraft and develop an aircraft such that it would be more superior than
other aircrafts of the same classification. Using these graphs, the mean value from
each graph is recorded with the help of a circle. The circle should be plotted such
that most no of points are covered by the circle. The circle with same dimensions
as that of the first graph is to be used in all other graphs. The co-ordinates of the
centre of the circle gives us the mean value of the parameters that are plotted.
Here, using the cruise speed of the aircraft, other parameters are compared.
The list of graphs that are used to compare the parameters are:
1. Length vs. max speed

2. Height vs. max speed

3. Fuselage diameter vs. max speed

4. Wing span vs. max speed

5. Wing area vs. max speed

6. Wing loading vs. max speed

7. Aspect ratio vs. max speed

8. Service ceiling vs. max speed

9. Rate of climb vs. max speed

10. Range vs. max speed

11. Maximum speed vs. max speed

12. No of engines vs. max speed

13. Max thrust capability vs. max speed

14. Max take-off weight vs. max speed

15. Empty weight vs. max speed

16. Payload weight vs. max speed

8
 LENGTH VS SPEED
40

35

30

25
LENGTH

20

15

10

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
SPEED

Graph 1

WING SPAN VS SPEED

30

25

20
WING SPAN

15

10

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
SPEED

Graph 2

9
 WING AREA VS SPEED
180

160

140

120
WING AREA

100

80

60

40

20

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
SPEED

Graph 3

EMPTY WEIGHT VS SPEED

30000

25000

20000
EMPTY WEIGHT

15000

10000

5000

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
SPEED

Graph4

10
 MAX TAKE OFF WT VS SPEED
70000

60000

50000
MAX TAKE OFF WT

40000

30000

20000

10000

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
SPEED

Graph 5

RATE OF CLIMB VS SPEED

450

400

350

300
RATE OF CLIMB

250

200

150

100

50

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
SPEED

Graph 6

11
 WINGLOADING VS SPEED
700

600

500
WING LOADING

400

300

200

100

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
SPEED

Graph 7

HEIGHT VS SPEED
8

5
HEIGHT

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
SPEED

Graph 8

12
 OPTIMISED VALUE

PARAMETERS FROM GRAPH UNITS

HEIGHT 5 m

WING AREA 15 m²

EMPTY WEIGHT 15000 Kg

LOADED WT 20000 Kg

MAX TAKE OFF WT 30000 Kg

RATE OF CLIMB 275 m/s

DRY THRUST 76.07 KN

MAX SPEED 2400 Km/h

COMBAT RADIUS 1000 Km

RANGE 3700 Km

SERVICE CEILING 18000 m

WING LOADING 360 Kg/m²

THRUST/WEIGHT 0.9 -

POWERPLANT TURBOFAN -

ASPECT RATIO 2.05 -

COST 240 m

CREW 2 Number

LENGTH 18 m

13
 CHAPTER-4
WEIGHT ESTIMATION
The estimation of the weight of a conceptual aircraft is a critical part of the design
process. The weights engineer interfaces with all other engineering groups, and
serves as the "referee" during the design evolution. Weights analysis per se does
not form part of the aerospace engineering curriculum at most universities. It
requires a broad background in aerospace structures, mechanical engineering,
statistics, and other engineering disciplines. There are many levels of weights
analysis. Previous chapters have presented crude statistical techniques for
estimating the empty weight for a given take off weight. These techniques
estimate the empty weight directly and are only suitable for "first-pass" analysis.
More sophisticated weights methods estimate the weight of the various
components of the aircraft and then. sum for the total empty weight. In this
chapter, two levels of component weights analysis will be presented. The first is
a crude component builds up based upon plan form areas, wetted areas, and per
cents of gross weight. This technique is useful for initial balance calculations and
can be used to check the results of the more detailed statistical methods. The
second uses detailed statistical equations for the various components. This
technique is sufficiently detailed to provide a credible estimate of the weights of
the major component groups. The take off gross weight-the sum of the empty
weight and the useful load-reflects the weight at take off for the normal design
mission. The flight design gross weight represents the aircraft weight at which the
structure will withstand the design load factors. Usually this is the same as the
take off weight, but some aircraft are designed assuming that maximum loads will
not be reached until the aircraft has taken off and climbed to altitude, burning off
some fuel in the process.
Gross weight W0 = Wcrew + Wpayload + Wfuel + Wempty
Wcrew = 200lbs
= 92kg
Wpayload = 8000kgs
(Operating Empty weight) WOE = WE+WINST (10%*WTO)
(Fuel weight) WF = WF (USED)+WF(RESERVED)(10-25%OF USED)
𝑤 𝑤 𝑤 𝑤 𝑤 𝑤 𝑤
(Fuel Fraction) MFF = ( 8 ∗ 7 ∗ 6 ∗ 5 ∗ 4 ∗ 3 ∗ 2)
𝑤7 𝑤6 𝑤5 𝑤4 𝑤3 𝑤2 𝑤1
WF(USED) = (1-MFF)*WTD
WF(RESERVED) = 0.25* WF(USED)
WF = (1-MFF)*1.25 WTO
Payload Weight WPL = 8000kgs

14
(Crew weight) W crew = Cockpit + Cabin crew
=200lbs
Error percentage = (WOE th-WOE grp/WOE th)*100
PHASE 5(Cruise Brequet Eqtn)
Jet RCR = (V/CJ)CR(L/D)CR In(W4/W5)
WS/W4 = 0.999
PHASE 6(Loiter)
Jet ELTR = (1/CJ)LTR*(L/D)LTR In(W5/W6)LTR
W6/W5 = 0.94

4.1 MISSION PROFILE

Fig. 4.1
1- Warm-up
2- Taxi
3- Take-off
4- Accelerate
5- Climb to altitude
6- Outbound Cruise
7- Descent
8- Manoeuvre

15
 9- Weapon drop
10- Climb to altitude
11- Descent
12- Loiter
13- Landing
14- Shut Down
15- Towing

𝑤8 𝑤7 𝑤6 𝑤5 𝑤4 𝑤3 𝑤2
(Fuel Fraction) MFF = ( ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ )
𝑤7 𝑤6 𝑤5 𝑤4 𝑤3 𝑤2 𝑤1
WOE = WTO-WPL-WF-WCREW-Winst
WE = 30000-3300-8000-92-3000
WETh =15608kg
WEGRH = 15000kg
Percentage error = (15608-15000)/15608 *100
=3.89 %

EMPTY WT VS MAX TAKE OFF WT

25000

20000

15000
EMPTY WT

10000

5000

0
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000
MAX TAKE OFF WT

Fig 4.2

16
RESULT:
WEth =15608kg
WEGRH = 15000kg
% error = 3.98%
They are as follows:
Lift force (given by Schrenk's curve)
Self-weight of the wing
Weight of the power plant
Weight of the fuel in the wing
4.2 SCHRENK'S CURVE:
Lift varies along the wing span due to the variation in chord length, angle of attack
and sweep along the span. Schrenk's curve defines this lift distribution over the
wing span of an aircraft, also called simply as Lift Distribution Curve. Schrenk's
curve is an approximation for the lift distribution along the span for the wing. The
equation of the curve is obtained by taking the average of the trapezoidal and
elliptic lift distributions.
Schrenk's Curve is given by
𝑌1 + 𝑌2
𝑌=
2
Where,
Y1 is Linear Variation of lift along semi wing span also named as L1
Y1 is Elliptic Lift Distribution along the wing span also named as L2

LINEAR LIFT DISTRIBUTION:

Density = 1.225kg / m³
Root chord of the wing, Cr = 8.054m
Tip chord of the wing. C= 2.013m
Area of the wing planform, S = 126.66m²
Wing span, b = 25.16m

17
4.2.1 Lift at Root:
𝜌𝑉 2 𝐶𝐿 𝐶root
𝐿Root =
2
1.225 × (61.7329728)2 × 3.2 × 5.081016
𝐿Root =
2
𝐿Root = 37952.46532 (𝑁/𝑚)

4.2.2 Lift at Tip:

𝜌𝑉 2 𝐶𝐿 𝐶tip
𝐿tip =
2
1.225 × (61.7329728)2 × 3.2 × 0.5090
𝐿tip =
2
𝐿tip = 3801.957098 (𝑁/𝑚)

By representing this lift at sections of root and tip, we can get the equation for the
wing.

Fig 4.3

y1 = Lroot−*x
𝑦1 = 37952.46532 −∗ 𝑥
𝑦1 = 35517.42964 − 5983.653𝑥

18
 LINEAR LIFT DISTRIBUTION
SEMI SPAN
(WING)
0 37952.4
0.28536 36244.9
0.57073 34537.4
0.85609 32829.8
1.14146 31122.3
1.42682 29414.8
1.71219 27707.3
1.99755 25999.7
2.28292 24292.2
2.56828 22584.7
2.85365 20877.2
3.13901 19169.6
3.42438 17462.1
3.70974 15754.6
3.99511 14047.1
4.28047 12339.5
4.56584 10632.0
4.85120 8924.53
5.13657 7217.01
5.42193 5509.48
5.7073 3801.96

19
 Fig 4.4

Lift Distribution (Linear)

4.3 ELLIPTIC LIFT DISTRIBUTION:

Twice the area under the curve or line will give the lift which will be required to
overcome weight.
Considering an elliptic lift distribution we get:

𝐿 𝑊 𝜋𝑎𝑏1
= =
2 2 4

Where,
b₁=Actual lift at root
a=wing semi span
W= Gross Weight in kg
4𝑤
𝑏1 =
2𝛱𝑎

𝑏1 =(4×29500.64726)/(2πx5.70)
=3290.6444

20
 Fig 4.5 Elliptic Lift Distribution

4.3.1 EQUATION OF ELLIPTIC LIFT DIRSTRIBUTION:

2𝑏1
𝑌2 = √𝑎 2 − 𝑥 2
𝑎

𝑌2 = 1153.13582√32.57327 − 𝑥 2

21
 Fig 4.6 Lift distribution (elliptic)

4.4 CONSTRUCTION OF SCHRENK’S CURVE:

Schrenk’s Curve is given by

𝑌1 +𝑌2
𝑌=
2

22
WING SPAN Y2 Y2 Y

0 37952.4 6581.28 22266.8

0.28536 36244.9 6573.05 21409

0.57073 34537.4 6548.3 20542.8

0.85609 32829.8 6506.82 19668.3

1.14146 31122.3 6448.32 18785.3

1.42682 29414.8 6372.30 17893.5

1.71219 27707.3 6278.15 16992.7

1.99755 25999.7 6165.02 16082.4

2.28292 24292.2 6031.85 15162.0

2.56828 22584.7 5877.27 14231.0

2.85365 20877.2 5699.56 13288.3

3.13901 19169.6 5496.46 12333.0

3.42438 17462.1 5265.03 11363.6

3.70974 15754.6 5001.34 10377.9

3.99511 14047.1 4699.98 9373.54

4.28047 12339.5 4353.11 8346.35

4.56584 10632.0 3948.77 7290.41

4.85120 8924.53 3466.90 6195.72

5.13657 7217.01 2868.21 5042.86

5.42193 5509.48 2055.00 3782.24

5.7073 3801.96 0 1900.98

23
 Fig 4.7
4.5 SELF-WEIGHT OF WING(Y3):
For this preliminary analysis, the structural weight of the wing is assumed to vary
parabolically along the span, with zero weight per unit span at the wingtips.

Again, the area enclosed between the weight distribution curve and the semi-span
axis should be equal to wing structural [Link]-weight of the wing,
𝑊𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔
= 0.0759
𝑊𝑇𝑂

Wing Weight Calculation:

𝑊wing = 0.0759 × 29500.64726 × 9.81

𝑊wing = 21965.56244 N
𝑊Port wing = −10982.78122 N(Acting Downwards)
𝑊Starboard = −10982.78122 N(Acting Downwards)

Assuming Parabolic Weight Distribution:

𝑏 2
𝑌3 = 𝑘 (𝑥− )
2

24
Where,

5.7073
𝑏 2
10982.78122 = ∫ 𝑘 (𝑥− ) 𝑑𝑥
0
2
𝑘(5.7073)3
−10982.78122 =
3
𝑘 = −177.23173
𝑌3 = −177.23173 (𝑥 − 5.7073)2

25
SEMI SPAN WEIGHT OF EMPTY WING

0 -5060.532949

0.8386 -4408.33654

1.6772 -3801.115496

2.5158 -3238.869815

3.3544 -2721.599498

4.193 -2249.304545

5.0316 -1821.984956

5.8702 -1439.64073

6.7088 -1102.271869

7.5474 -809.8783721

8.386 -562.4602388

9.2246 -360.0174696

10.0632 -202.5500642

10.9018 -90.05802286

11.7404 -22.54134544

12.579 -3.19768E-05

26
 Fig 4.8

4.6 FUEL WEIGHT:

This design has fuel in the wing, so we have to consider the weight of the fuel in
one wing.

𝑊fuel wing 10125.50716

= (kg)
2 2

𝑊fuel wing = 49665.61261 N

27
 Fig 4.9
Again, by using the general formula for a straight line:
𝑦 = 𝑚𝑥 + 𝑐

we get,
𝑑𝑦 = 1.426825 𝑥
𝐷𝑦 = (5210.148434 − 𝑑𝑦)

Where,
5210.148434 − 1.426825 × 3.42438
𝑚=
3.42438

Solving,
𝑁
𝑚 = 1073.990572
𝑚2
𝑌𝑓 = 1073.990572 𝑥 − 5210.148434

28
SEMI SPAN LOAD ACTING ON WING

0 -11937.2032

0.8386 -10611.30214

1.6772 -9285.401078

2.5158 -7959.500017

3.3544 -6633.598956

4.193 -5307.697895

5.0316 -3981.796834

5.8702 -2655.895773

6.7088 -1329.994712

7.5474 -4.093651259

8.386 1321.80741

9.2246 2647.708471

10.0632 3973.609532

10.9018 5299.510593

11.7404 6625.411654

12.579 7951.312715

29
Fig 4.10

Fig 4.11

30
Loads Simplified As Point Loads:
Area enclosed / Centroid (from wing
Curve / Component
structural weight (N) root)
y₁ / 2 119152.5073 3.631640234 m
y₂ / 2 14750.32319 2.422253351 m
Wing 10982.78122 1.426825 m
Fuel 49665.61261 1.71219 m

4.7 REACTION FORCE AND BENDING MOMENT CALCULATIONS:

The wing is fixed at one end and free at the other end.

Fig 4.12
∑𝑉,
Then,
𝑉𝐴 − 119152.5073 − 14750.32319 + 10982.78122 + 49665.61261 = 0
𝑉𝐴 = 73254.43666 N

31
4.7.1 Moment Equilibrium
∑𝑀
𝑀𝐴 − (119152.5073 × 3.631640234) − (14750.32319 × 2.422253351)
+(10982.78122 × 1.426825) + (49665.61261 × 1.71219) = 0
𝑀𝐴 = 367740.5881 N\m

Now we know 𝑉𝐴 and 𝑀𝐴 , using this we can find shear force and bending
moment.
4.7.2 Shear Force:
𝑦 + 𝑦2
𝑆𝐹𝐵𝐶 = ∫ ( 1 −𝑦3 ) 𝑑𝑥 − 𝑉𝐴
2
−(5983.653)𝑥 + 37952.46532 + 1153.13582√(32.57327−𝑥 2 )
𝑆𝐹𝐵𝐶 =∫ [
2

+ 177.23173(𝑥 − 5.7073)2 ] 𝑑𝑥 − 73254.43666

−1
𝑥 𝑥3
= 32.57327sin ( ) + 177.23173 ( − 5.7073𝑥 2 + 32.57327𝑥)
5.7073 3
− 73254.43666

𝑆𝐹𝐶𝐷 = 𝑆𝐹𝐵𝐶 + ∫ 𝑦𝑓 𝑑𝑥
𝑆𝐹𝐶𝐷 = 𝑆𝐹𝐵𝐶 + ∫ (1073.990572𝑥 − 5210.148434)𝑑𝑥
𝑆𝐹𝐶𝐷 = 𝑆𝐹𝐵𝐶 + (536.995286𝑥 2 − 5210.148434𝑥)

𝑆𝐹𝐷𝐸 = 𝑆𝐹𝐶𝐷 + (536.995286𝑥 2 − 5210.148434𝑥) + 49665.61261

By using the corresponding values of 𝑥in appropriate equations, we get the plot
of shear force.

32
 Fig 4.13 Shear Force Acting on Wing

4.7.3 BENDING MOMENT:

𝑦 + 𝑦2
𝐵𝑀𝐵𝐶 = ∬ {( 1 −𝑦3 ) 𝑑𝑥−𝑉𝐴 } 𝑑𝑥 + 𝑀𝐴
2
𝐵𝑀𝐵𝐶 = −73254.43666𝑥 − 1994.551𝑥 3 + 18976.23266𝑥 2
𝑥
+288.283955 [𝑥√(32.57327−𝑥 2 )+32.57327sin −1 ( )]
5.7073
+59.07(32.57327 − 𝑥 2 )1.5
𝑥4
−177.23173 ( + 16.286635𝑥 2 − 1.902433𝑥 3 ) + 367740.5881
12
𝑦 + 𝑦2
𝐵𝑀𝐶𝐷 = ∬ {( 1 − 𝑦3 + 𝑦𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 ) 𝑑𝑥−𝑉𝐴 } 𝑑𝑥 + 𝑀𝐴
2
𝐵𝑀𝐶𝐷 = 𝐵𝑀𝐵𝐶 + ∬ 𝑦𝑓 𝑑𝑥
𝐵𝑀𝐷𝐸 = 𝐵𝑀𝐶𝐷 + 357.9968573𝑥 3 − 2605.074217𝑥 2
𝐵𝑀𝐸𝐴 = 𝐵𝑀𝐷𝐸 − (357.9968573𝑥 3 −2605.074217𝑥 2 ) + 49665.61261𝑥
By using the corresponding values of 𝑥in appropriate equations, we get the plot
of bending moment

33
 Fig 4.14
4.7.4 TORQUE:
In the aircraft wing, at any section, the net aerodynamic force always acts at the
centre of pressure. For convenience, we assume the aerodynamic force to act
through the aerodynamic centre, since this point is fixed for a given aerofoil
section and does not depend on factors like angle of attack. Along with the
force, we also have a moment about the aerodynamic centre 𝑀𝑎𝑐 , which has a
constant value. Since the center of pressure is always located behind the
aerodynamic center, 𝑀𝑎𝑐 is always a nose-down moment.
In this section, we analyse the torque or twist distribution along the wing semi-
span. It is known that when a force acts through the shear centre of a section, no
rotation is produced in the section. Applying this concept, we shift the
aerodynamic forces to the shear centre. In performing this shift, in addition to the
existing 𝑀𝑎𝑐 , an additional moment due to the shifting is also to be considered.
The variation of net moment per unit span about the section wise shear center is
investigated in this section.
We resolve the aerodynamic forces acting on each section of the wing into
components normal and parallel to the chord. Since the parallel component passes
through the shear center, it does not contribute to any torque. Only the normal
force component contributes to section torque. For the preliminary analysis, we
assume the shear center to lie at 0.35c from the leading edge. Since this location

34
is very close to the C.G location, and because weight is a relieving force as far as
section twist is concerned, we neglect the contribution of weight towards torque
distribution.
Torque Due To Normal Force:
T’ = Cn
T’=0.017
Co-efficient of force along the normal direction,
=0.0648 cos(5°)+0.011 sin(5°)
=0.065512129
T’ =0.017*0.065512129*1.2256*333.33² c²
T’ = 151.6590026 c ²
For the wing, we have the variation of chord is given by
C =2.013+0.640222575.x
Therefore torque
T’ = 151.6590026
T’ = 151.6590026
T’ = 151.6590026
T’ =20.72091474x³ +195.4532761x²+ 614.5479089x

35
 Fig 4.15

RESULT:
Thus, the structural load distribution is estimated. Schrenk’s curve, shear force,
bending moment, and torque graph for the wing are plotted.

36
 CHAPTER 5
AIRFOIL SELECTION

5.1 Airfoil Selection:

1
𝑊 = 𝐿 = 𝜌𝑉 2 𝑆𝐶𝐿wing
2

1 𝑊 𝑊𝑇𝑂 − 0.4𝑊𝐸
𝐶𝐿wing = [ ( )] =
0.5𝜌𝑉 2 𝑆 𝑆 0.5𝜌𝑉 2 𝑆

Where:
• 𝑉= stall velocity
• 𝑆= wing area
• 𝜌= density at altitude (service ceiling)
𝑊
• = wing loading
𝑆
1 𝑊
𝐶𝐿wing = 𝐶𝐿airfoil [ ( )]
0.5𝜌𝑉 2 𝑆

𝐶𝐿wing = 1.43

Fig 5.1

The first family of NACA airfoil sections, developed in the 1930s, was the “four-
digit” series. Following are some definitions of airfoil section characteristics,
followed by a description of how the NACA four-digit series specifies these
characteristics.
The mean chamber line is the locus of points midway between the upper and
lower surfaces, measured perpendicular to the chord line.

37
The most forward point of the mean camber line is the leading edge.

The most rearward point of the mean camber line is the trailing edge.

The straight line connecting the leading and trailing edges is the chord line of the
airfoil.

The actual distance between the leading and trailing edges, measured along the
chord line, is the chord, 𝑐.

The maximum camber is the maximum distance between the mean camber line
and the chord line, measured perpendicular to the chord line.

Fig 5.2: 𝐶𝐿 vs 𝐶𝐷 and 𝐶𝐿 vs 𝛼

The thickness is the distance between the upper and lower surfaces, also
measured perpendicular to the chord line.
Having defined these fundamental characteristics, additional properties are now
defined before proceeding to an explanation of the NACA system. Because airfoil
sections vary in size, the following properties are generally stated in terms of the
chord, 𝑐.The shape of the airfoil section at the leading edge is usually circular,
with a radius of approximately 0.02c.

The digits in NACA's four digit numbering system are defined as follows:

• the first digit denotes the maximum camber, Cmas, as a percent of the
chord;

38
• the second digit denotes the chordwise position of the maximum camber,
Xcmax, in tenths of the chord:
• the last two digits denotes the maximum thickness of the airfoil section, t,
as a percent of the chord.

39
 CHAPTER-6
WING SELECTION

6.1 Low Wing with Dihedral

Fig 6.1

Low wing

A low wing is one which is located on or near the base of the

fuselage.

Placing the wing low down allows good visibility upwards and frees
up the central fuselage from the wing spar carry-through. By reducing
pendulum stability, it makes the aircraft more manoeuvrable, as on the
Spitfire; but aircraft that value stability over manoeuvrability may then
need some dihedral. A low wing allows a lighter structure because the
fuselage sides carry no additional loads, and the main undercarriage
legs can be made shorter.

A feature of the low wing position is its significant ground effect,

giving the plane a tendency to float further before landing. Conversely,
this very ground effect permits shorter takeoffs.

The low wing configuration has proved particularly suitable for

passenger jetliners

Dihedral Angle and Dihedral Effect:

Dihedral Angle is the upward angle from horizontal of the wings of a
fixed-wing aircraft, or of any paired nominally-horizontal surfaces on

40
any aircraft. The term can also apply to the wings of a bird. Dihedral
Angle is also used in some types of kites such as box kites. Wings
with more than one Angle change along the full span are said to be
polyhedral.

Dihedral effect of an aircraft is a rolling moment resulting from the vehicle having
a nonzero angle of sideslip. Increasing the dihedral angle of an aircraft increases
the dihedral effect on it. However, many other aircraft parameters also have a
strong influence on dihedral effect. Some of these important factors are: wing
sweep, vertical center of gravity, and the height and size of anything on an aircraft
that changes it’s sidewards force as sideslip changes.

Fig 6.2

Aspect Ratio (AR):

𝑏2
𝐴𝑅 =
𝑆
= 2.64
Taper Ratio:
𝐶𝑡𝑖𝑝
𝜆=
𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑡

For rectangle wing, λ = 1

For elliptical wing, λ = 0.9
For tapered wing, λ = 0.5

41
Root Chord :
𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑡 =
2𝑆
𝑏(1+𝜆)
𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑡 = 5.79 m
=0.5*5.79
=2.89m
Sweep angle (from graph) = 31.8∘
Mean Aerodynamic Chord (MAC)
𝑏 (1+2𝜆)
𝑦ˉ =
⋅
6 (1+𝜆)
𝑦ˉ = 5.75 m
Mean Aerodynamic Chord length:
2 (1+𝜆+𝜆2 )
𝑐ˉ = 𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑡 ⋅
3 (1+𝜆)
𝑐ˉ = 4.503 m

Fig 6.3

42
 Fig 6.4

6.2 DESIGN OF WING COMPONENT – SPAR:

The wing spars are the main load carrying structural member of the aircraft wing.
The wing spars are used to carry the loads that occur during the flight (flight loads)
as well as carry the weight of the aircraft wing while on the ground (ground loads).
The wing spars run throughout the root to the tip and can be placed
perpendicularly or at an angle. Commercial aircrafts sometimes have less number
of wing spars than fighter aircrafts, this is due to the fact that, the fighter aircrafts
have to deal with much higher flight loads. Therefore, the analysis has to be very
accurate. The structural analysis of the wing by defining the primary load carrying
member Spars is done below.

Spars are members which are basically used to carry the bending and shear loads
acting on the wing during flight. There are two spars, one located at 15–20% of
the chord known as the front spar, the other located at 60–70% of the chord known
as the rear spar. Some of the functions of the spar include:
→ The spar flange takes up the bending loads whereas the web carries the
shear loads.
→ The rear spar provides a means of attaching the control surfaces on the
wing.

43
The loads taken by the wing spars include bending loads mainly, as well as part
of the shear force. The spar is responsible for resisting nearly 90% of the bending.
The common section for the spar is the I-section, in which the flanges resist
bending moments while the webs resist shear forces. For the front and rear spars
in the wings, the material used is A12024 alloy. This material is selected for its
high strength, relatively high strength to weight ratio, as well as smooth elastic
properties.
For this Al 2024 alloy, the properties are listed below:
Ultimate tensile strength :530.896MPa
Yield tensile strength : 455.05 MPa
Yield compressive strength : 525.1 MPa
Ultimate shear strength : 206.84 MPa
Young's modulus : 73.1 GPa
Shear modulus : 21.48 GPa
Density : 2800 kg/m³
Considering these functions, the locations of the front and rear spar are fixed at
0.20c and 0.65c from the leading edge respectively.
This location satisfies the condition of locating the front spar close to the
maximum thickness position in the wing as well as the fuel space requirement.
In this section, we design the spars for the critical bending moment developed
at the wing root. Hence, we take a section close to the wing root and design the
spar based on it.

The aerofoil selected for the aircraft is the NACA 63210. The section selected for
this analysis has a chord of 5.032 m, and the critical bending moment developed
at this section is approximately N-m.
At the spar locations, the distance between the top and bottom surfaces of the
wing are:
Height of front spar, h₁ = 0.20c = (0.20 × 5.032) = 1.0064 m
Height of rear spar, h₂ = 0.65c = (0.65 × 5.032) = 3.2708 m
The bending moment is assumed to be shared between the front and rear spar in
the ratio:
M₁ / M₂ = h₁² / h₂²

44
 M₁ / M₂ = 1.0064² / 3.2708²
M₁ + M₂ = M_max
From the above two equations,
Mf = 165713.5568 Nm
Mr= 1750349.443 Nm
We use the Euler bending theory to find the areas of the spar caps. The design is
carried out assuming that when this moment is resisted, the stress in the material
reaches the yield stress value.
Also, we use the lumped mass analysis with the assumption that the areas of the
top and bottom caps are the same. With this assumption, the location of the neutral
surface of each spar lies midway between the top and bottom surfaces.
Using the above assumptions,
We have the following formulae,
𝑚
𝜎𝑦 =
𝑎𝑧
Where,
M – bending moment taken by each spar
A – flange area of each spar
Z – centroid distance
Front Spar:
Using Euler bending theory,
𝑚1
𝜎𝑦 =
𝑎1𝑧1
M₁ = bending moment @ front spar
A₁ = Area of the spar
Z₁ = centroid

𝑍1 =

45
 𝑍1 = 0.5032 𝑚

Area of front spar,𝐴𝑓 = 0.00072369 𝑚2

Thickness of front spar,𝑡𝑓 = 14% of 𝐶1

𝑡𝑓 = 0.28182 𝑚

Length of front angle section,𝑙𝑓 = 6𝑡 = (6 ∗ 0.28182)

𝑙𝑓 = 1.69092 𝑚

Height of the front angle section,

ℎ𝑓 = 5𝑡 = (5 ∗ 0.28182) = 1.4091 𝑚

Rear Spar:
Using Euler bending theory,
𝜎𝑦 = 𝑚2/𝑎2 𝑧2
M₂ = bending moment @ rear spar
A₂ = area of rear spar
Z₂ = centroid
Z₂ = h₂ / 2
Z₂ = 1.6354 m
Area of rear spar, Aᵣ = 0.0023519 m²
Thickness of rear spar tᵣ = 14% of Cᵣ
tᵣ = 0.12756 m
Length of rear angle section, lᵣ = 8t = (8 × 0.12756)
lᵣ = 1.02048 m
Height of the rear angle section, hᵣ = 3.5t = (3.5 × 0.12759)
hᵣ = 0.44646 m
Now to determine the thickness of the web portion, the ultimate shear
stress of Al 2024 alloy is 206.84 MPa. The shear force at the spar supports are
found to be
Vf = 13649682.3 N

46
 Vr = 3830940.904 N
We know that,
Where,
V – shear force at the spar
t – thickness of the web
Q=A×Z
I = A × Z²
Thus,
Where factor of safety, FOS = 1.5
Thus the thicknesses of the web portion are,

For front spar,

tf = 0.19671 m
For rear spar,
tr = 0.016987 m

Figure 6.5. All Dimensions are in m.

47
6.3 SHEAR FLOW:
The shear flow can be considered for the two cells in the airfoil cross section. The
shear flow will be due to the torque as well as due to the bending moments. These
are computed separately and summed up to obtain the net shear flow pattern for
the wing cross section.
The shear flow due to bending is calculated using the formula,
q = (Vx Ixx − Vy Ixy) / (Ixx Iyy − Ixy²) ΣAx + (Vy Iyy − Vx Ixy) / (Ixx Iyy −
Ixy²) Σay

Vx = 186287.512 N
Vy = 1588540.96 N
Ixx = 2.499 × 10⁻³ m⁴
Iyy = 9.998 × 10⁻³ m⁴
Ixy = 3.749 × 10⁻³ m⁴
With these values, we have the equation for open section shear flow through the
sections as 𝑞 = 1.104 × 109 + 1.340958 × 1010
The above equation is modified by adding a constant term while closing the
cuts.
The shear flow due to torque,
𝑇 =2×𝐴×𝑄
Where,
A = area of each cell
Q = shear flow due to the torque
The shear flow from the two cases is superimposed, using which the net shear
flow through the wing section is computed. Using this distribution, we have the
maximum value of shear flow in the skin without any stringers to be in the
segment between the front and rear spar on the top surface of the wing.
𝑞max = 3259165.159 N/m

48
With this value of shear flow, we obtain the skin thickness required from the
strength as well as buckling aspects. For strength requirements, we have the
relation.
Using the above relation,
we have,
𝑡 = 0.0158 m
For the buckling analysis, we consider the wing panel with the maximum shear
flow. The relation used to determine the thickness required is
Where,
𝐾𝑏 = constant based on the panel supports and aspect ratio
𝑣= poisson’s ratio
𝑏= shorter edge of the panels
For the panel considered,
𝐾𝑏 = 32

Using the above relation,

we have ,
𝑡 = 3.0848 m

Selecting the higher of the two values computed we have the required thickness
of the wing skin without stiffening stringers as 3.0848 m.
6.4 DESIGN OF STRINGER:
The thickness of the skin determined above is too high for the skin of an aircraft.
Therefore, in order to reduce skin thickness and redistribute the shear flow in the
wing skin, stringers are added. The number of stringers can be determined by
evaluating the amount by which the skin thickness should be reduced.
The section selected for the stringers is the Z-section with end tabs. This section
is selected as it gives the maximum area moment of inertia for the minimum cross
section area. The properties of the stringer section selected are given below:
h = 0.2406 m
t = 0.01 m
A = 0.004812 m²

49
For the wing root chord of 5.032 m, we select the number of stringers to be 12.
There are no stringers in cell 3 as the region has other components like control
surfaces, and the space restriction makes it difficult to insert stringers in this
portion.
ℎ3 𝑡 (0.2406)3 × 0.01
𝐼𝑥𝑥 = = = 4.642 × 10−5 𝑚4
3 3
ℎ3 𝑡 (0.2406)3 × 0.01
𝐼𝑦𝑦 = = = 1.160 × 10−5 𝑚4
12 12
ℎ3 𝑡 (0.2406)3 × 0.01
𝐼𝑥𝑦 = = = 1.741 × 10−5 𝑚4
8 8
2 2
𝑞 = (𝑉𝑥 𝐼𝑥𝑥 − 𝑉𝑦 𝐼𝑥𝑦 /𝐼𝑥𝑦 − 𝐼𝑥𝑥 𝐼𝑦𝑦 )∑𝐴𝑥 𝑡 + (𝑉𝑦 𝐼𝑦𝑦 − 𝑉𝑥 𝐼𝑥𝑦 /𝐼𝑥𝑦 − 𝐼𝑥𝑥 𝐼𝑦𝑦 )∑𝐴𝑦

𝑞 = −2.50135 × 1010 − 6.45117 × 1010

Once again superimposing the shear flows due to bending and torsion, we
evaluate the shear flow and identify the wing skin panel with the maximum
value of shear flow. This panel is located between the rear spar and the adjacent
stringer on the top surface, and is of size 0.2376 m × 0.6 m. The shear flow in
this panel is calculated as
𝑞max = 3,259,165.159 N/m
From the strength point of analysis, we have
𝑞max
𝜏𝑢𝑙𝑡 =
𝑡
Using the above relation, we have
𝑡 = 0.1666 m
For the buckling analysis, using the relation
𝑞 𝜋𝑘𝑏 𝐸 𝑡 2
= ( )
𝑡 12(1 − 𝜈 2 ) 𝑏
Using the above relation, we have
𝑡 = 0.07 m
It is seen that there is a 60.4% reduction in skin thickness due to the addition of
stiffening stringers. The values of stringer number and dimensions are arrived at
after several iterations, changing the area and section of each [Link]

50
important factor to be considered simultaneously while designing the stringers is
whether the stringers will buckle due to the compressive stress which is exerted
on them as a result of wing bending.

6.5 BENDING STRESS FOR WING:

An important factor to be considered simultaneously while designing the
stringers is whether the stringers will buckle due to the compressive stress.
σb=Ixy2−IxxIyy(MxIyy−MyIxy)Y+Ixy2−IxxIyy(MyIxx−MxIxy)X
𝑀𝑥 = 2,846,175.788 N/m
𝑀𝑦 = 985,047.2371 N/m
Using the above relation,
𝜎𝑏 = 6.741 × 1010 𝑦 + 1.628 × 1010 𝑥

The stringer subjected to maximum stress is identified as the stringer one away
from the top flange of the rear spar. The stress value acting on this stringer is
calculated as
𝜎exerted = 1.755 × 1010 Pa

Since the stringer is assumed to be simply supported between ribs, the buckling
stress for each stringer segment is calculated using the formula
𝜋 2 𝐸𝐼
𝜎𝑐𝑟 =
𝐴𝐿2
Using the data for stringer dimensions and the above equation, we have
𝜎𝑐𝑟 = 7.260 × 1010 Pa

RESULT:
Thus the spar and stringer was designed, bending stress and shear flow
calculation, buckling analysis for a wing panel are estimated.

51
 CHAPTER-7
AIRCRAFT FUSELAGE
AIM:
To estimate the various loads on fuselage and plot the shear force and bending
moment diagram.
7.1 FUSELAGE DESIGN:
The fuselage is the main structure or body of the fixed-wing aircraft. It provides
space for cargo, controls, accessories, passengers, and other equipment. In single-
engine aircraft, the fuselage houses the power plant. In multiengine aircraft, the
engines may be either in the fuselage, attached to the fuselage, or suspended from
the wing structure. There are two general types of fuselage construction: truss and
monocoque.
A truss is a rigid framework made up of members, such as beams, struts, and bars
to resist deformation by applied loads. The truss-framed fuselage is generally
covered with fabric. The truss-type fuselage frame is usually constructed of steel
tubing welded together in such a manner that all members of the truss can carry
both tension and compression loads. In some aircraft, principally the light, single
engine, truss fuselage frames may be constructed of aluminum alloy and may be
riveted or bolted into one piece, with cross-bracing achieved by using solid rods
or tubes Monocoque Type
The monocoque (single shell) fuselage relies largely on the strength of the skin or
covering to carry the primary loads. The design may be divided into two classes:
Monocoque
Semi monocoque
Different portions of the same fuselage may belong to either of the two classes,
but most modern aircraft are considered to be of semi monocoque type
construction. The true monocoque construction uses formers, frame assemblies,
and bulkheads to give shape to the fuselage. The heaviest of these structural
members are located at intervals to carry concentrated loads and at points where
fittings are used to attach other units such as wings, power plants, and stabilizers.
Thus, the biggest problem involved in monocoque construction is maintaining
enough strength while keeping the weight within allowable limits.

52
7.1.1 Semi-Monocoque Type:
To overcome the strength/weight problem of monocoque construction, a
modification called semi monocoque construction was developed. It also consists
of frame assemblies, bulkheads, and formers as used in the monocoque design
but, additionally, the skin is reinforced by longitudinal members called longerons.
Longerons usually extend across several frame members and help the skin support
primary bending loads. They are typically made of aluminium alloy either of a
single piece or a built-up construction.
7.1.1 Semi Monocoque Type:

Fig 7.1
Stringers are also used in the semi-monocoque fuselage. This is accomplished
with gussets, rivets, nuts and bolts, screws, and even friction stir welding. A
gusset is a type of connection bracket that adds strengthen of the skin. Stringers
and longerons together prevent tension and compression from bending the
fuselages summarize, in semi-monocoque fuselages, the strong, heavy longerons
hold the bulkheads and formers, and these, in turn, hold the stringers, braces,
web members, etc.

53
7.2 DESCRIPTION:
Fuselage contributes very little to lift and produces more drag but it is an
important structural member/component. It is the connecting member to all load
producing components such as wing, horizontal tail, vertical tail, landing gear etc.
and thus redistributes the load. It also serves the purpose of housing or
accommodating practically all equipment, accessories and systems in addition to
carrying the payload. Because of large amount of equipment inside the fuselage,
it is necessary to provide sufficient number of cutouts and discontinuities result
in the fuselage for access and inspection purposes. These cutouts and
discontinuities result in fuselage design being more complicated, less precise and
often less efficient in design. As a common member to which other components
are attached, thereby transmitting the loads, fuselage can be considered as a long
hollow beam. The reactions produced by the wing, tail or landing gear may be
considered as concentrated loads at the respective attachment points. The
balancing reactions are provided by the inertia force contributed by the weight of
the fuselage structure and the various components inside the fuselage.
This is much simpler for structural analysis due to its symmetrical cross-section
and symmetrical bending. The main load in the case of fuselage is the shear load
because the load acting on the wing is transferred to the fuselage skin in the
form of shear only. The structural design of both wing and fuselage begin with
shear force and bending moment diagrams for the respective members. The
maximum bending stress produced in each of them is checked to be less than the
yield stress of the material chosen for the respective member.
Loads And Its Distribution:
To find out the loads and their distribution, consider the different cases. The
main components of the fuselage loading diagram are:

➤ Weight of the fuselage

➤ Engine weight

➤ Weight of the horizontal and vertical stabilizers

➤ Tail lift

➤ Weight of crew, payload and landing gear

➤ Systems, equipment, accessories

54
Values for the different components weights are obtained from aerodynamic
design calculations.
Loads Acting on Fuselage:
Distance from
[Link] Components reference line load
(m)
1 Crew 3.04 7.22 KN/m
2 nose landing gear 6.8 122.176 KN
3 Pay load 12.17 158.82 KN

4 Fuselage mass 15.88 109 KN

Main landing
5 18.52 1099.9 KN
gear
Horizontal
6 21.32 20.356 KN/m
Stabilizer
7 Vertical stabilizer 24.82 24.435 KN/m

7.3 SHEAR FORCE FOR FUSELAGE:

Shear force at I = R_B
Therefore, Shear force at I = 1489.21 KN
Shear force at H = R_B – 303.238
Shear force at H = 1185.972 KN
Shear force at G = R_B – 303.238 – 216.994
Shear force at G = 969.978 KN
Shear force at F = R_B – 303.238 – 216.994 – 1099.9
Shear force at F = –130.922 KN
Shear force at E = R_B – 303.238 – 216.994 – 1099.9 – 109
Shear force at E = -239.922 KN
Shear force at D = R_B – 303.238 – 216.994 – 1099.9 – 109 – 158.82

55
Shear force at D = -398.742 KN
Shear force at C = R_B – 303.238 – 216.994 – 1099.9 – 109 – 158.82 – 122.176
Shear force at C = -520.918 KN
Shear force at A = R_B – 303.238 – 216.994 – 1099.9 – 109 – 158.82 – 122.176
– 10.9744
Shear force at A = -561.8924 KN
7.4 BENDING MOMENT FOR FUSELAGE:
Moment at B = 0
Bending moment at I = (R_B * 24.82)
Bending moment at I = 36962.1922 N-m
Bending moment at H = (R_B * 24.82) – (303.238 * 21.32)
Bending moment at H = 30497.15804 N-m
Bending moment at G = (R_B * 24.82) – (303.238 * 21.32) – (216.994 * 18.52)
Bending moment at G = 26478.42916 N-m
Bending moment at F = (R_B * 24.82) – (303.238 * 21.32) – (216.994 * 18.52)
– (1099.9 * 15.88)
Bending moment at F = -9012.01716 N-m
Bending moment at E = (R_B * 24.82) – (303.238 * 21.32) – (216.994 * 18.52)
– (1099.9 * 15.88) – (109 * 12.17)
Bending moment at E = -7685.48716 N-m
Bending moment at D = (R_B * 24.82) – (303.238 * 21.32) – (216.994 * 18.52)
– (1099.9 * 15.88) – (109 * 12.17) – (158.82 * 6.8)
Bending moment at D = -6605.5116 N-m
Bending moment at C = (R_B * 24.82) – (303.238 * 21.32) – (216.994 * 18.52)
– (1099.9 * 15.88) – (109 * 12.17) – (158.82 * 6.8) – (122.176 * 6.8)
Bending moment at C = -5774.71436

56
Bending moment at A = (R_B * 24.82) – (303.238 * 21.32) – (216.994 * 18.52)
– (1099.9 * 15.88) – (109 * 12.17) – (158.82 * 6.8) – (122.176 * 6.8) – (10.9744
* 3.04)
Bending moment at A = -5741.352184 N-m

Fig 7.2 Fuselage Shear Diagram

57
 Fig 7.3 Fuselage Moment Diagram

RESULT:
Thus the various loads on fuselage is estimated and the shear force and bending
moment diagram are plotted.

58
 CHAPTER-8
TAIL PLANE SELECTION
A tail plane, also known as a horizontal stabiliser, is a small lifting surface located
on the tail (empennage) behind the main lifting surfaces of a fixed-wing aircraft
as well as other non-fixed-wing aircraft such as helicopters and gyroplanes. Not
all fixed-wing aircraft have tail planes. Canards, tailless and flying wing aircraft
have no separate tail plane, while in tail aircraft the vertical stabilizer, rudder, and
the tail-plane and elevator are combined to form two diagonal surfaces in a V
layout.
The function of the tail plane is to provide stability and control. In particular, the
tail plane helps adjust for changes in the centre of pressure or centre of gravity
caused by changes in speed and attitude, fuel consumption, or dropping cargo or
payload.
8.1 Types of Tail Configuration:

Fig 8.1: Types of tail configurations

59
8.1.1 Conventional Tail:
The vertical stabilizer is mounted exactly vertically, and the horizontal stabilizer
is directly mounted to the empennage (the rear fuselage). This is the most
common vertical stabilizer configuration.
8.1.2 T-Tail:
A T-tail has the horizontal stabilizer mounted at the top of the vertical stabilizer.
It is commonly seen on rear-engine aircraft, such as the Bombardier CRJ200, the
Fokker 70, the Boeing 727, the Vickers VC10 and Douglas DC-9, and most high-
performance gliders. Ttails are often incorporated on configurations with fuselage
mounted engines to keep the horizontal stabilizer away from the engine exhaust
plume. T-tail aircraft are more susceptible to pitch-up at high angles of attack.
This pitch-up results from a reduction in the horizontal stabilizer's lifting
capability as it passes through the wake of the wing at moderate angles of attack.
This can also result in a deep stall condition. T-tails present structural challenges
since loads on the horizontal stabilizer must be transmitted through the vertical
tail.
8.1.3 Cruciform Tail:
The cruciform tail is arranged like a cross, the most common configuration having
the horizontal stabilizer intersecting the vertical tail somewhere near the middle.
The PBY Catalina uses this configuration. The "push-pull" twin engine Dornier
Do 335 World War II German fighter used a cruciform tail consisting of four
separate surfaces, arranged in dorsal, ventral, and both horizontal locations, to
form its cruciform tail, just forward of the rear propeller. Falcon jets from Dassault
always have cruciform tail.
8.1.4 Twin Tail:
Rather than a single vertical stabilizer, a twin tail has two. These are vertically
arranged, and intersect or are mounted to the ends of the horizontal stabilizer. The
Beechcraft Model 18 and many modern military aircraft such as the American F-
14, F-15, and F/A-18 use this configuration. The F/A-18, F-22 Raptor, and F-35
Lightning II have tailfins that are canted outward, to the point that they have some
authority as horizontal control surfaces; both aircraft are designed to deflect their
rudders inward during takeoff to increase pitching moment. A twin tail may be
either H-tail, twin fin/rudder construction attached to a single fuselage such as
North American B-25 Mitchell or Avro Lancaster, or twin boom tail, the rear

60
airframe consisting of two separate fuselages each sporting one single fin/rudder,
such as Lockheed P-38 Lightning or C-119 Boxcar.
8.1.5 Triple Tail:
A variation on the twin tail, it has three vertical stabilizers. An example of this
configuration is the Lockheed Constellation. On the Constellation it was done to
give the airplane maximum vertical stabilizer area while keeping the overall
height low enough so that it could fit into maintenance hangars.
8.1.6 V-Tail:
A V-tail has no distinct vertical or horizontal stabilizers. Rather, they are merged
into control surfaces known as rudder vators which control both pitch and yaw.
The arrangement looks like the letter V, and is also known as a butterfly tail. The
Beechcraft Bonanza Model 35 uses this configuration, as does the F-117
Nighthawk, and many of Richard Schreder's HP series of homebuilt gliders.
8.2 TWIN TAIL :
A twin tail is a specific type of vertical stabilizer arrangement found on the
empennage of some aircraft. Two vertical stabilizers—often smaller on their own
than a single conventional tail would be—are mounted at the outside of the
aircraft's horizontal stabilizer. This arrangement is also known as an H-tail, as it
resembles a capital "H" when viewed from rear - these were used on a wide
variety of World War II multi-engine designs that saw mass production, especially
on the American B-24 Liberator and B-25 Mitchell bombers, the British Avro
Lancaster and Handley-Page Halifax heavy bombers, and on the Soviet Union's
Petlyakov Pe-2 attack bomber.
A special case of twin tail is twin boom tail or double tail where the aft airframe
consists of two separate fuselages, "tail booms", which each have a rudder but are
usually connected by a single horizontal stabilizer. Examples of this construction
are the twinengined Lockheed P-38 Lightning; Northrop P-61 Black Widow;
Focke-Wulf Fw 189; the single jet-engined de Havilland Vampire; cargo-carrying
Fairchild C-119 Flying Boxcar and the little known Transavia PL-12 Air truck.
8.3 DESIGN :
Separating the control surfaces allows for additional rudder area or vertical
surface without requiring a massive single tail. On multi-engine propeller designs
twin fin and rudders operating in the propeller slipstream give greater rudder

61
authority and improved control at low airspeeds, and when taxiing. A twin tail can
also simplify hangar requirements, give dorsal gunners enhanced firing area, and
in some cases reduce the aircraft's weight. It also affords a degree of
redundancy—if one tail is damaged, the other may remain functional. Most often,
the twin vertical surfaces are attached to the ends of the horizontal stabilizer, but
a few aircraft in aviation history—like the Armstrong Whitworth Whitley,
Mitsubishi G3M and Dornier Do 19 bombers, had their twin vertical surfaces
mounted to the upper surface of the fixed stabilizer instead, at some distance
inwards from the horizontal stabilizer's tips. Many canard aircraft designs
incorporate twin tails on the tips of the main wing. Very occasionally, three or
more tails are used, as on the Breguet Deux-Points, Lockheed Constellation and
Boeing 314 Clipper. A very unusual design can be seen on the E-2 Hawkeye,
which has two additional vertical tails fixed to the horizontal stabilizer between
the normal vertical twin-tail surfaces. This arrangement was chosen for the
stringent size limitations of carrier-based aircraft. Significant aircraft with twin
tails include the Consolidated B-24 Liberator, Handley-Page Halifax, Avro
Lancaster, and P-38 Lightning. The arrangement is not limited to World War II-
vintage aircraft, however. Many fighter aircraft, like the F-14 Tomcat, F-15 Eagle,
Sukhoi Su-27, Mig-29, and A-10 Thunderbolt II, make use of twin tail
configurations, as do civilian and cargo designs like the Antonov An-14, Antonov
An-22, Antonov An-28, Antonov An-38.

62
 CHAPTER-9
LANDING GEAR SELECTION
The landing gear supports the aircraft when it is not flying, allowing it to take off,
land and usually to taxi without damage. Landing gear placement is essential for
ground stability and controllability. A good landing gear position must provide
superior handling characteristics and must not allow overbalancing during take-
off or landing.
Landing Gear Arrangement:
Landing gears normally come in two types: conventional or "taildragger" landing
gear, where there are two main wheels towards the front of the aircraft and a
single, much smaller, wheel or skid at the rear; or tricycle landing gear, where
there are two main wheels (or wheel assemblies) under the wings.
To decrease drag in flight some undercarriages retract into the wings and/or
fuselage with wheels flush against the surface or concealed behind doors; this is
called retractable gear. With a tricycle landing gear, the c.g is ahead of the main
wheels, so the aircraft is stable on the ground. It improves forward visibility on
the ground and permits a flat cabin floor for passengers and cargo loading.
9.1 TRICYCLE GEAR:
Tricycle gear is a type of aircraft undercarriage, or landing gear, arranged in a
tricycle fashion. The tricycle arrangement has a single nose wheel in the front,
and two or more main wheels slightly aft of the centre of gravity. Tricycle gear
aircraft are the easiest to take-off, land and taxi, and consequently the
configuration is the most widely used on aircraft.
Several early aircraft had primitive tricycle gear, notably very early Antoinette
planes and the Curtiss Pushers of the pre-World War I Pioneer Era of aviation.
Waldo Waterman's 1929 tailless Whatsit was one of the first to have a steerable
nose wheel.

63
 Fig 9.1

A Mooney M20J with a retractable tricycle landing gear

Fig 9.2

Polish 3Xtrim 3X55 Trener With a Fixed Tricycle Landing Gear

Taxiing

9.2 TRICYCLE GEAR AND TAILDRAGGERS COMPARED:

Tricycle gear aircraft are easier to land because the attitude required to land on
the main gear is the same as that required in the flare, and they are less vulnerable
to crosswinds. As a result, the majority of modern aircraft are fitted with tricycle
gear. Almost all jet-powered aircraft have been fitted with tricycle landing gear,
to avoid the blast of hot, high-speed gases causing damage to the ground surface,
in particular runways and taxiways. The few exceptions have included the
Yakovlev Yak-15, the Supermarine Attacker, and prototypes such as the Heinkel
He 178, the first four prototypes (V1 through V4) of the Messerschmitt Me 262,

64
and the Nene powered version of the Vickers VC.1 Viking. Outside of the United
States – where the tricycle undercarriage had solidly begun to take root with its
aircraft firms before that nation's World War II involvement at the end of 1941 –
the Heinkel firm in World War II Germany began building airframe designs meant
to use tricycle undercarriage systems from their beginnings, as early as late 1939
with the Heinkel He 280 pioneering jet fighter demonstrator series, and the
unexpectedly successful Heinkel He 219 twin-engined night fighter of 1942
origin.
9.3 A CESSNA 150 TAIL DRAGGER :
The taildragger configuration has its own advantages, and is arguably more suited
to rougher landing strips. The tailwheel makes the plane sit naturally in a nose-up
attitude when on the ground, which is useful for operations on unpaved gravel
surfaces where debris could damage the propeller. The tailwheel also transmits
loads to the airframe in a way much less likely to cause airframe damage when
operating on rough fields. The small tailwheel is much lighter and much less
vulnerable than a nosewheel. Also, a fixed-gear taildragger exhibits less
interference drag and form drag in flight than a fixed-gear tricycle aircraft whose
nosewheel may sit directly in the propeller's slipstream. Tailwheels are smaller
and cheaper to buy and to maintain, and manhandling a tailwheel aircraft on the
ground is easier fit in lower hangars.

65
 CHAPTER-10
ENGINE SPECIFICATIONS
10.1 F16 FIGHTING FALCON (GE F110):
Type: Turbofan
Natural Origin: United States
Manufacturer: General Electric
First run: 1980
Major Application:
General Dynamics
F16 Fighting Falcon
Grumman F14 Tomcat
McDonnel Douglas F15E Strike Eagle
Developed from: General Electric F101
Variants: General Electric F118
Specifications:
• Type: Afterburning Turbofan
• Length: 463–590 cm
• Diameter: 118 cm
• Dry weight: 1778–1996 kg
• Compressor: 2spool: 3 fan, 9 hp stage
• Combustors: annular
• Turbine: 2 LP and 1 HP stages
Performance:
• Max Thrust: 16610 lbf (76.3 KN)
• Turbine inlet temperature: 2750 F (1510 C)
• Thrust to weight: 129:7.29

66
10.2 DISCRIPTION :
F-14:
The F-14A entered service with the United States Navy in 1973 powered by Pratt
& Whitney TF30s. By the end of the decade, following numerous problems with
the original engine (and similar problems with the Pratt & Whitney F100 on the
F-15 and F-16), the DoD began procuring the upgraded TF30-P-414As. While
these engines solved the serviceability problems, the fuel consumption and thrust
was comparable to the initial model-considerably less than what the F-14 had
been designed for.
In 1979, a derivative of the GE F101 turbofan called the F101-X was selected to
power the F-14 and was later designated the F110-GE-400. The primary
difference between the F110-GE-400 and the F110-GE-100 is length - the F110-
GE-400 has a 50-inch (1.3 m) tailpipe extension to suit the F-14 airframe, which
is fitted downstream of the argumenter (afterburner section). The F110-GE-400
engine produced 23,400 lbf (104 KN) of thrust with afterburner at sea level, which
rose to 30,200 lbf (134 KN) at Mach 0.9.[3] This provided a significant increase
over the TF30's maximum thrust of 20,900 lbf (93 KN).[4] These upgraded jets
were known as F-14Bs, as were production aircraft powered by the F110. The
same engine also powers the final variant of the aircraft, the F-14D.
F-16:
The F-16 Fighting Falcon entered service powered by the Pratt & Whitney F100
afterburning turbofan. Seeking a way to drive unit costs down, the USAF
implemented the Alternative Fighter Engine (AFE) program in 1984, under which
the engine contract would be awarded through competition. The F110 currently
powers 86% of the USAF F-16C/Ds (June 2005).
The F110-GE-100 provides around 4,000 lbf (17.8 KN) more thrust than the
F100-PW-200 and requires more air, which led to the increase in the area of the
engine intake. The F-16C/D Block 30/32s were the first to be built with a common
engine bay, able to accept both engines, with block 30s having the bigger intake
(known as "Big Mouth") and block 32s retaining the standard intake.
Initial orders were for the F110-GE-100 rated at 28,000 lbf (125 KN). Later
versions of the F110 include the F110-GE-129 delivering 29,400 lbf (131 KN)
thrust and the F110-GE-132 delivering 32,000 lbf.

67
F-15:

An F110 engine undergoes performance testing at the Air Force's Arnold

Engineering Development Centre.
Two F110-GE-129 engines, with 29,400 lbs (131 KN) of thrust, power 40 F-15K
fighters of South Korea. This is the first time production F-15s will be powered
by a GE engine, since all previous F-15 models were powered by Pratt and
Whitney. The GE engines will be manufactured through a joint licensing
agreement with Samsung Tech win Company. It has also been chosen by the
Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) to power its F-15SG, and Saudi Arabia
to power its F-15SA.

68
 CHAPTER-11
DRAG ESTIMATION:
11.1 DRAG:
In fluid dynamics drag is a force acting opposite to the relative motion of any
object moving with respect to a surrounding fluid. This can act between two fluid
layers or a fluid and a solid surface unlike other resistive forces, such as dry
friction, which are nearly independent of velocity, drag forces depend on velocity.
Types of drag are generally divided into the following categories:
1. Parasitic Drag Consists of,
a) Form Drag
b) Skin friction
c) Interference Drag
2. Wave Drag:
Accurate drag estimation is critical in making computational design studies. Drag
may be estimated thousands of times during a multidisciplinary design
optimization, and computational fluid dynamics is not yet possible in these
studies. The current model has been developed as part of an air-vehicle
conceptual-design multidisciplinary design optimization framework. Its use for
subsonic and transonic aircraft configurations is presented and validated. We
present our parametric geometry definition, followed by the drag model
description. The drag model includes induced friction.

FORMULAS:
1
𝐷 = 𝜌𝑉 2 𝑆𝐶𝐷
2
𝐶𝐷 = 𝐶𝐷0 + 𝐾𝐶𝐷𝑖
𝐶𝐿2
𝐾𝐶𝐷𝑖 =
𝜋𝑒𝐴𝑅

CALCULATION:
1.24 × 1.24
𝐾𝐶𝐷𝑖 = = 0.24
3.14 × 0.7 × 6.75

69
 𝐿 1
( ) =
𝐷 max 2√𝐾𝐶𝐷0
𝐿
( ) = 150, 𝐾 = 0.301
𝐷 max
𝐶𝐷0 = 0.00003
𝐶𝐷 = 0.000031 + 0.240 = 0.24
TAKE OFF DRAG:
1
𝐷 = 𝜌0 𝑉 2 𝑆𝐶𝐷
2
𝑉 = 1.15𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙
𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙 = 74.06 𝑚/𝑠
𝜌0 = 1.225 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3 , 𝑆 = 50 𝑚2 , 𝐶𝐷 = 0.54
Take off drag = 90.706 KN
LANDING DRAG:
1
𝐷 = 𝜌0 𝑉 2 𝑆𝐶𝐷
2
𝑉 = 1.3𝑉𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙
𝜌0 = 1.225 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3 , 𝑆 = 50 𝑚2 , 𝐶𝐷 = 0.24
Landing drag = 115.911 KN
CRUISE DRAG:
1
𝐿 = 𝜌𝑉 2 𝑆𝐶𝐿
2
= 68.87 𝐾𝑁
2𝑊
𝑉=√
𝜌𝑆𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥
= 178.194 𝑚/𝑠
1
𝐷 = 𝜌𝑉 2 𝑆𝐶𝐷
2
= 68.586 𝐾𝑁

70
RESULT:
Landing Drag = 115.911 KN
Cruise Drag = 68.586 KN
Take off Drag = 90.706 KN

71
PARAMETERS UNITS VALUES

EMPTY WT (THEO) Kg 15608

AIR FOIL SELECTION N/A NACA 4415

TAIL N/A TWIN TAIL

TRICYCLE LANDING
LANDING GEAR N/A
GEAR

F16-FIGHTING
ENGINE N/A
FALCON (GE F110)

DRAG KN 68.586

TAKEOFF DRAG KN 90.76

LANDING GEAR KN 115.911

CRUISE DRAG KN 68.873

72
 CHAPTER-12
V–N DIAGRAM
V–n Diagram: Flight regime of any aircraft includes all permissible combinations
of speeds, altitudes, weights, centres of gravity, and configurations. This regime
is shaped by aerodynamics, propulsion, structure, and dynamics of aircraft. The
borders of this flight regime are called flight envelope or manoeuvring envelope.
The safety of human onboard is guaranteed by aircraft designer and manufacturer.
Pilots are always trained and warned through flight instruction manual not to fly
out of flight envelope, since the aircraft is not stable, or not controllable or not
structurally strong enough outside the boundaries of flight envelope. A mishap or
crash is expected, if an aircraft is flown outside flight envelope. Pilots are using
several graphs and charts in their flight operations. Four important envelopes are
as follows:
1. Diagram of variations of aircraft lift coefficient versus Mach number
(CL–M)
2. Diagram of variations of airspeed versus altitude (V–h)
3. Diagram of variations of centre of gravity versus aircraft weight (Xcg–W)
4. Diagram of variations of airspeed versus load factor (V–n)
One of the most important diagrams is referred to as flight envelope. This
envelope demonstrates the variations of airspeed versus load factor (V–n). In
another word, it depicts the aircraft limit load factor as a function of airspeed. One
of the primary reasons that this diagram is highly important is that, the maximum
load factor; that is extracted from this graph is a reference number in aircraft
structural design. If the maximum load factor is under calculated, the aircraft
cannot withstand flight load safely. For this reason, it is recommended to
structural engineers to recalculate the V–n diagram on their own as a safety factor.
Load Factor:
The load to the aircraft on the ground is naturally produced by the gravity (i.e. 1
times g). But, there are other sources of load to the aircraft during flight; one of
which is the acceleration load. This load is usually normalized through load factor
(i.e. “n” times g). In another word, aircraft load is expressed as a multiple of the
standard acceleration due to gravity (g = 9.81 m/sec² = 32.17 ft/sec²). Recall that
we defined CCC

73
where “a” is the centrifugal acceleration (𝑉 2 /𝑅). As this acceleration increases;
i.e. airspeed increases or radius of turn decreases; the load factor will increase too.
For other flight operations, similar expressions can be drawn. In some instances;
especially for missiles; this load factor may get as high as 30. Hence, the structure
must carry this huge load safely. The aircraft structure must be strong enough to
carry other loads including acceleration load such that aircraft is able to perform
its mission safely.
MAXIMUM MAXIMUM
AIRCRAFT TYPE POSITIVE LOAD NEGATIVE LOAD
FACTOR FACTOR
Acrobatic 6 -3
Homebuilt 5 -2
Transport 3 to 4 -1 to -2
Highly manoeuvrable 6.5 to 12 -3 to -6
Bomber 2 to 4 -1 to -2
Velocity:
Velocity is the major parameter we need to consider while estimating the safety
of an aircraft. Aircraft has different velocities at different stages of flight. These
velocities play a crucial role in structural damages while in flight. The following
are the velocities:
• Maximum velocity (VMAX)
• Corner velocity (V*)
• Dive velocity (VD)
V–n diagram is the diagram between the various stages of velocity of aircraft in
flight and the load factors of an aircraft.
Plotting of V–n Diagram For Cargo Aircraft:
Calculation:
The positive load factor value is taken as
𝑛 = 3.5(from table)
𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1.5(from airfoil tools website)
𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥 (negative) = −1.0(from airfoil tools website)
𝑛𝑚𝑎𝑥 (positive) = 3.

74
Negative Load Factor:
𝑛𝑚𝑎𝑥 (negative) = 0.4 × 𝑛𝑚𝑎𝑥 (positive)
= 0.4 × 3.5 = 1.4
Maximum Velocity For Positive Load Factor:
1/2
2𝑊
𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = ( )
𝜌𝑆𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥
2 × 30000 × 9.81 1/2
𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = ( )
1.225 × 50 × 1.5
𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 (positive) = 115.4 𝑚/𝑠
Maximum Velocity For Negative Load Factor:
1/2
−2𝑊
𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = ( )
𝜌𝑆(−𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥 )
𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 (negative) = 141.2 𝑚/𝑠
Corner Velocity (Positive):
0.5𝜌(𝑉 ∗ )2 𝑆𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑛𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
𝑊
∗
𝑉 (positive) = 216.6 𝑚/𝑠
Corner Velocity (Negative):
𝑉 ∗ (negative) = 167.7 𝑚/𝑠
Dive Velocity:
𝑉𝐷 = 1.4 × 𝑉𝑐
𝑉𝑐 = 230 𝑚/𝑠
𝑉𝐷 = 1.4 × 230 = 323.6 𝑚/𝑠

In aerodynamics, the flight envelope, service envelope, or performance envelope

of an aircraft refers to the capabilities of a design in terms of airspeed and load
factor or altitude.
The term is somewhat loosely applied, and can also refer to other measurements
such as maneuverability. When a plane is pushed, for instance by diving it at high
speeds, it is said to be flown "outside the envelope", something considered rather
dangerous.

75
 Fig 13.1 Load Factor vs Velocity
Load Factor vs Velocity:
1. It indicates the graph between the velocity and the load factor
2. Upper part of the graph shows the positive limit load factor
3. Beyond the point A in the graph it shows the structural damage of the air
craft
4. Point inside the graph indicates the CL < CLmax
5. Point on the graph indicates CL = CLmax
6. Point outside the graph indicates CL > CLmax it leads to the stall region
that is unstable region
7. Lower part the graph shows the negative limit load factor
8. Point B in the graph shows the maximum negative lift capability
9. Beyond the point B or beyond the negative limit load factor it leads to the
negative ultimate load factor and may cause the structural damage

2𝑛𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑊
𝑉∗ = √ ⋅
𝜌 𝐶𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑆
ℎ2
𝑑ℎ
The rate of climb can also be written as:𝑡 = ∫
𝑅/𝐶
ℎ1

76
 CHAPTER-13
THREE DIMENSSIONAL VIEW DIAGRAM

FRONT VIEW:

TOP VIEW:

77
SIDE VIEW:

78
 CHAPTER-14
CONCLUSION
The preliminary design of a modern efficient fighter jet is done and the various
design considerations and performance parameters required are calculated and
found out. The obtained design values are not necessarily a definite reflection of
the airplane's true and conceptualized design, but the basic outlay of development
has been obtained. The final design stays true to the desired considerations of a
long- range aircraft that can provide high fuel efficiency as well. There is no ideal
design as such and continuous changes, improvements and innovations serve to
make the design as ideal as possible, while always looking to achieve optimum
performance.
The challenges we faced at various phases of the project made clear the fact that
experience plays a vital role in successful design of any aircraft or aircraft
component. A lot of effort has been put into this project and as much as we have
worked, we have learnt in turn.

79
 CHAPTER-15
REFERENCES
1. Anderson, John D. Jr., (1999) Aircraft Performance and Design,
McGraw-Hill, New York
2. Anderson, John D. Jr., (2001) Introduction to Flight, McGraw-Hill, New
York
3. Perkins, C. and Hage, R. (1949) Airplane Performance, Stability and
Control, Wiley, New York
4. Raymer, Daniel P. (1992) Aircraft Design: A Conceptual Approach, AIAA
Education series, Washington, DC
5. Roskam, J. (1985) Airplane Design, Roskam Aviation and Engineering
Corp., Ottawa, Kansas
6. Taylor, J. (2004) Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft, Jane’s, London, UK
7. Boeing technical characteristics, viewed 2 March 2014
[Link]
8. Engine selection and technical Information, viewed 25 March 2014
[Link]
[Link]
9. Java Foil – Analysis of airfoil, viewed 29 March 2014
[Link]
[Link]://[Link]/wiki
[Link]://[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]

80
81