A Practical Guide to A\irplane Performance and Design by Donald R. CrawiordA PRACTICAL GUIDE TO AIRPLANE PERFORMANCE AND DESIGN by Donald R. Crawford Published to help the beginning designer through some of the preliminary phases of aircraft design. Revised Printing Crawford Aviation 1981Copyright © 1979, 1981 by Donaid R. Crawford All rights reserved, including that of translation into foreign languages; no part of this book or accompanying nomogram may be reproduced in any form without the specific permission of the author and publisher except in the case of brief quotations ‘embodied in critical articles and reviews. Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 81-67801 ISBN 0-9603934-0-4 Published by Crawford Aviation P. O. Box 1262 Torrance, Ca 90505 Printed in the United States of America by Delta Lithograph Company 14731 Califa Street @ Van Nuys, California 91401 Typeset by Dee Dee D’Arcy Graphic Dimensions 1826 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite A Lawndale, California 90260a inmate gENES qeUeIRt Misipebittesstrecete: uees: eunseuegaatagasrioyy aniseed? parent pitas: au wait Photo by Jack Hobart ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Donald R. Crawford is an aircraft owner and @ private pilot working on his instrument rating. He is also a hang-glider pilot and a member of the Experimental Aircra‘t Association, constructing a homebuilt aircraft with partners from the Chapter 40 Design Group. Currently. he is a member of the technical staff at TRW and a part-time lecturer in Aerodynamics at California State University, Long Beach. He received his Ph.D. degree from the University of California at Berkeley in Aeronautical Sciences. His wife, Sharon, is also a pilot and is active with the Long Beach Chapter of the Ninety Nines — the International Organization of Women Pilots.Preface The nomogram and design procedure described in this book are aids | developed as a result of a design study for “Crawdad” — an ultralight foot-launched motor glider that | hope to build. In the process of learning about aircraft design | discovered the various useful performance and design nomograms of Raoul Hoffman, a noted practical aerodynamicist of the 30’s and 40's. His alignment charts were useful because | could obtain answers to involved problems in aerodynamics by drawing straight lines connecting the related aircraft performance parameters. With this background, ‘| was inspired to seek a single nomogram that t could use to make parametric studies for future designs. With the aerodynamic relations contained on a single graph, the calculation could then proceed in a systematic manner, since the answers from one graphical construction would be automatically available as data for the next. An attractive feature of the nomogram is that it is “preprogrammed” so that we don’t have to worry about exponents and conversion factors in the equations. All of the governing aerodynamic relations are built into the design of the scales and we can dispense with the tedious algebra. Finally, by using @ plastic template and a graphical construction technique, we can simplify the task of finding the rate of climb versus airspeed. One part of the template is used to find the gliding sink rate and the other part gives the rate of climb produced by the engine brake horsepower lifting the weight of the airplane with an efficiency corresponding to that of an idealized propeller. Using each part of the template as a French curve having the mathematically correct shape, we can immediately draw the two curves and subtract to find the rate of climb. The intersection of the curves gives the maximum level speed. The template is positioned using the reference points obtained from the graphical calculation with the nomogram. Then, we can use the reference scales on the template to make rapid parametric studies for the effects of altitude, weight, drag, brake horsepower, propeller diameter, and airplane size. The book began as an instruction pamphlet for the uso of the nomogram, but it has evolved into the present handbook, with the detailed sample calculation, parametric study and theoretical background. The governing equations are tabulated for the convenience of those who want to program them on a computer and a sample listing for a FORTRAN computer program for the performance analysis is given in Appendix E. However, the answers obtained from the nomogram and the grephical construction of the rate of climb curve are adequate in the preliminary design stages. Although the computer will give greater numerical accuracy, the approximations of the governing equations do not justify keeping accuracy greater than two or three digits. The book is written for the homebuilder as well as for the beginning aerodynamicist, The first part of the book is devoted to practical considerations and is meant to be self-contained, The Airplane Perfor- mance and Design Nomogram can be used without really having to understand the details of the aero- dynamic analysis of Part 2, which can be deferred until a working knowledge of the design process is established. In this way, the homebuilder or novice engineering student can gain confidence and experience by working with practical examples before trying to study the mathematics of eerodynamics. The book and nomogram will be especially useful as a supplementary text to aid the student with his (or her) pre- liminary aircraft design project.| would like to acknowledge the encouragement of a number of my friends who also helped with a review of the rough-drafted material. These include Jerry Eakin, Jim Eninger, Jack Hobart, Vance Jaqua, Frank Kelly, Professor Larry Redekopp, my uncle Wayne Streeter, Dr. Norm Thompson, and Bob Young, ‘They provided valuable comments and the feedback necessary for me to complete the text. | also want to thank Cheryl White for performing the task of typing the original manuscript; Lee O'Malley for helping with the technical editing; Carolyn and Neil for letting me be a part-time papa; and Sharon — my flying partner and bride — for her patience while | struggled with my Oshkosh deadline, Donald R. Crawford Redondo Beach, California April 1979 Preface to the Revised Printing The first edition of this book was introduced at the Experimental Aircraft Association Convention at Oshkosh, Wisconson, in 1979, and has been favorably received by students of Aerodynamics and builders of sport aircraft for the past two years. This revised printing is basically a corrected version of the first edition, with the collected errata incorporated into the text. Appendix L has been expanded to include performance data for some more recent airplanes. Appendix M has been written to show how one can determine the drag area and airplane efficiency factor from flight test data. Titles of some recent books and articles on specialized topics in Aerodynamics, as well as some classical texts that were overlooked in the first printing, have been added to the References. 1 would like to thank the readers and reviewers for suggested changes in the presentation of the material. May, 1981 Donald R. CrawfordCONTENTS ix Introduction... 0.0 cece 1 Part 1. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS Descriptive Design Procedure ...... 0.0.2. 00eeeeseveeee 5 Worked Example — Thorp T-18 Tiger 9 Relations for the Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram ........02see0se0eeeeeeeeeuee ee 13 @ cL, W/S — Lift Coefficient, Airspeed, Wing Loading. ..... fede eee e rere eee 15, Stall Analysis, Airfoil Selection Process... ...0..ee0eeee004 ceteveeeeees we 16 ® __S,W/S, W— Wing Area, Wing Loading, Gross Weight ........sessereeeeseeeeeereeees 19 ® 5, be, CAR, Gg — Wing Area, Effective Span, Effective Aspect Ratio, Effective Chord ...... 21 @) bg, W/b,, W — Effective Span, Effective Span Loading, Gross Weight ..... 6.0... 00000 Fr) © Ap. Vax: THP — Drag Area, Maximum Level Speed, Available Thrust Horsepower ..... 27 © Cp. Ap. $ ~Zero-Lift Drag Coefficient, Drag Area, Wing areas... ..+.sssseeee vee 31 @ Ads Vining: W/De- THPmine Pmin — Drea Area, Airspeed for Minimum Sink, Effective Span Loading, Minimum Power Required for Level Flight, Minimum Drag... 2.0.00 0ceee0eece ev eeee enc eeeeeeeeeeeeineeeeees 33 Rg mine TH mine W — Minimum Sink Rate, Minimum Power Required for Level Flight, Weight... 0.002. .00eceeceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeseeeeneet eens 39 ® Apr be (L/D)max — Drag Area, Effective Span, Maximum Lift-to-Drag Ratio ......+.. ++ 43 Ap. CL mins: ¢e — Draa Area, Lift Coefficient at Minimum Sink, Effective Chord . 45 GW, BHP, R& max — Weight, Engine Brake Horsepower, Ideal Maximum Rate of Climb .... 49 @ 7. BHP, Vprop- Op — Static Thrust, Engine Brake Horsepower, Reference Propelier Airspeed for 74% Efficiency, Propeller Diameter . 51 @ _d,, RPM, M, ~ Propeller Diameter, Propeller Rotational Speed, Propeller Tip 57 Mach Number......0+0s40ceeee tere eeee xiVining: Rg,mniny (L/D) max ~ Airspeed for Minimum Sink Rate, Minimum Sink Rate, Maximum Liftto-Drag oo. 00.0. 0cceeceeceeeeeseeeeeeeeeeeeevee 61 @) Cp. CL ming: €AR, (L/DInay — Zero-Lift Drag Coefficient, Lift Coefficient at Minimum Sink, Effective Aspect Ratio, Maximum Lift-to-Drag Ratio . . 65 (L/D max: Onin W— Maximum Lift-to-Drag Ratio, Minimum Drag, Gross Weight ....... 69 Summary of the Nomogram Calculation for the T-18 71 How to Use the Template for Calculation of Rate of Climb 6.6.6... 6 eect e eee eee eee nee 75 Parametric Study of the Baseline Design Power Setting, Cruise Speed, Range ...... 6.606625 cece eee cece eee cette eee e eee 82 Altitude Effects; Absolute and Service Ceilings 00.20.0200. 000 0ecseeeeeeeceeeseeeeeeeees 85 Weight Effects 92 Drag Effects: Streamlining and Flaps... 6... 6.2.02. 0seceecseeeeu eee seeseeceesenn eres 93 Effective Span Changes; Ground Effect ..........6ees 0005 Be Ee eeC eee eee . 95 Power Effects: Larger Engine, Twin vs. Single Engine, Propeller Diameter .......---.-+2+--+ 96 Comparison of the Parametric Variations of Weight, Drag, Span, and Power ..........++ 97 Sample Calculations of Aircraft Performance . . seveee 99 Gossamer Condor and Gossamer Albatross — Man-Powered Aircraft ..... 0.6... 20-05 e eee ee 99 Powered Quicksilver Hang Glider Microlight 2... 0.00... 0cc0eceeceee eee eeeeeeeeereee 102 Cessna 172 — General Aviation Aircraft ........00c00ec cece eee eee c este eee eeeeeeeees 105 “Crawdad” — Foot-Launched Motorglider Design Study ... 2.0.0. 000.0eeeeee cess eerens 108 Airplane Performance Comparisons 15 Part 2, THEORETICAL BACKGROUND. Low Speed Aerodynamics... 120 Force Balance in Gliding Flight ....-- 2... 0 0seecc cece cence eee e eee tnneenee entre 120 (GME) coocceoocconnecc00n 0cnaea0cs00e00000ca2000casc0a00ne0DDNG9BB000 123 125 Minimum Sink Rate ......--6.05++ xiiMaximum Lift-to-Drag Ratio ©... 66. eee eee eee eee eee e ee ee eee e eee e teen eetee eee 128 Level Flight 129 GUROETEG 0009¢00000900000 0600000 7ac0a 00000 0na000R0DBDACAGnAAAGO0CNC ooon0 Idealized Propeller Theory... 2.2.0... ese e cece cece eeenaeeaeeteetseueeerenes vee 131 Propeller Efficiency ....... ‘ 132 Advance Ratio, Power Coefficient, and Nondimensional Velocity V ...........0.0e0ecseeee 135 Static Thrust Propeller Tip Speed ... Summary of Performance Relations ........... 5.000 c0ceseeeeteeeeeeeeeeeeeceeeeren 138 Appendix A. Abbreviations and Symbols .. 143 Appendix B. What is a Nomogram? 149 Appendix C. Discussion of Units . Appendix D. Standard Atmosphere..............- Penne eee eee e renee eenee . 155 Appendix E. FORTRAN Computer Program for Performance Analysis ..........-.00e-00005 159 Appendix F. Airplane Efficiency Factor, e; Ground Effect... ........0ec0eeeceeseeeee sees 165 Appendix G. Drag Analysis... 0.eec0eccseeveeceecunecueetereeee ess eeteeeseeetesene 169 Appendix H. Airfoil Selection . 177 Appendix |. Reynolds Number, Re= PVA... 0. 6- cece eeeeeeeeeceeeeee teense eeee ne 183 Appendix J. Equation of State, p= PRT .........0cccecceeee esse eee eneeesereeeeees 185 Appendix K. How to Find the Solution of a Cubic Equation ..... bec veeeeeeeeeeeeseees 187 Appendix L. Tabulated Performance Data for Various Aircraft .........+ssseceeeeeeeeeees 189 Appendix M. — How to Calculate Drag Area, Ap.an and erceney Factor, e, from Flight Test Data 182° References and Further Reading Feb Index ... “Added in Revised Printing, 1981 xiiiINTRODUCTION The first question the airplane enthusiast usually asks is, “How fast does it do?” followed by, “What's the stall speed? How much horsepower does the engine have? What is the best rate of climb? Useful load? Gross weight? . . .” By finding the answers to these questions, he can compare the performance of one airplane with another. The designer asks himself these same questions, but from a slightly different point of view. He wants to know how to make the airplane go faster, stall slower, climb faster and carry more toad within the limitations of the available engine size, airplane gross weight and pocketbook. The approximate analyses described in this book can be used to help the first-time designer calculate ‘the complete performance of the airplane from seven basic parameters: gross weight, drag area, wing span, wing area, maximum lift coefficient of the airfoil, engine horsepower, and propeller diameter. All airplane performance and design variables are mathematically related to these seven parameters by equations derived in Part 2 and through the Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram described in Part 1 of this book. Most preliminary design problems can be solved by drawing straight lines on the nomogram. The key quantities that come from the graphical calculations are: 1. Rg min — The idealized minimum sink rate 2. Vining — The corresponding airspeed for minimum sink rate 3. (L/D) max — The maximum lift-to-drag ratio 4. Vprop — The airspeed which gives idealized propeller efficiency of 74% 5. R& max — The rate of climb produced if all the brake horsepower of the engine were used to " lift the weight of the airplane 6. T, — The static thrust available from the idealized engine-propeller combination. With these parameters and the dimensionless rate-of-climb and sink-rate curves (which are also included on a plastic template}, the rate of climb can be found asa function of the airspeed. After the baseline design is determined, we can easily use the template to find the parametric effects of altitude, weight, drag, span, power, and propeller diameter on the airplane performance. The first pert of the book is organized as a handbook that can be used without any higher mathe- matics. The Airolane Performance and Design Nomogram is broken down into its elements and described separately in a step-by-step fashion. The use of each relation is illustrated by working through a sample design calculation based on the popular Thorp T-18, a modern two-place sport gircraft. The results of a study of this design show the effects of drag reduction, weight reduction, flaps, power setting, and turbo- charging on overall performance. Then, a performance rating parameter and a kinetic energy parameter are used to compare various types of aircraft.Part 2 describes the theoretical aerodynamics of low speed flight and is more mathematically oriented. The equations derived there form the basis for the construction of the nomograms and dimensionless figures used in Part 1. First, we discuss the aerodynamics of equilibrium gliding, level, and climbing flight. Then, we develop the idealized propeller theory. In the Appendix, we have gathered some supplementary sections that are useful in the course of the design process. These include discussions of drag area, airplane efficiency factor, airfoil selection, Reynolds number, equation of state, and others. Together with Parts 1 and 2, we have a concise description of air- plane performance that can be useful to the homebuilder and beginning aerodynamicist.PART 1. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS.Airplane Design Parameter y, 10 CLmax Power Required Visions 4 CL mins BHP Power Avail Nomogram Relations ‘Cross Checks —_— COO OGHDHOHHODOHV® > START HERE wiTH STALL ANALYSIS STALL SPEED MAX LIFT COEFFICIENT WING LOADING EFFECTIVE ‘SPAN EFFECTIVE ASPECT RATIO EFFECTIVE ‘CHORD, EFFECTIVE SPAN LOADING AVAILABLE THRUST HP MAX LEVEL SPEED ZERO-LIFT DRAG CO) COEFFICIENT AIRSPEED FOR MINIMUM SINK MINIMUM POWER REQUIRED FOR LEVEL e. @) Puce a uuvimum on AG O PROPELLER EFFICIENCY IIMUM SINK RATE ®O) BEST GLIDE ravi €O LIFT COEFFICIENT AT MINIMUM SINK ENGINE BRAKE HORSEPOWER IDEALIZED CLIMB RATE *O PROPELLER DIAMETER REFERENCE PROP-EFFICIENCY SPEED (DEALIZED STATIC THRUST PROPELLER ROTATIONAL SPEED PROPELLER TIP MACH NUMBER Figure 1. Flow Chart for Design Procedure.DESCRIPTIVE DESIGN PROCEDURE Before we describe how to make the step-by-step detailed calculations with the Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram and the related template, we will briefly outline one method for airplane design, represented graphically on Figure 1. The numbered relations listed at the top of the figure — [email protected]. ~~ refer to the way in which the various airplane performance parameters are dependent on each other. These parameters are listed down the left-hand side of the figure and will be defined in the course of the design process. (Also see definitions in the Appendix.) The object of the flow diagram is to point out how to determine the most important parameters for eirplane performance: Vining, ‘idealized velue for the airspeed at minimum sink conditions; Rg minr the minimum sink rate; Vprop: the reference speed cor- responding to a certain value of the ideal propeller efficiency; R&, the climb rate that would be obtained if the brake horsepower of the engine were used to lift a weight equal to that of the airplane; (L/D) may. the maximum lift-to-drag ratio; and T,, the idealized static thrust. These quantities are emphasized in the figure because they will be used later with the template to find the rate of climb versus airspead. We see that there are several paths that could be used to find all of the variables. For the sample design procedure, the relations on the right hand side of the figure are redundant and can be used for cross checks of the design method. In order to begin the design procedure, we start in the upper left-hand comer and choose a desired stall speed, Vz.q, and an estimate of the maximum lift coefficient for the airfoil, CL may- We also have to decide whether we intend to use flaps, and choose the speed and lift coefficient accordingly. With these quantities chosen and using relation (1), we can draw straight lines on the nomogram connecting V, g, Ci max and W/S to determine the wing loading. This wing loading satisfies the stall condition and deter- ines the ratio of the gross weight of the airplane to its wing area, in pounds per square foot (Ib/ft2). If the wing loading goes up, so will the stall speed, unless we pick a better airfoil, or add flaps or other high lift devices to the wing to increase the maximum lift coefficient. An airplane with a wing loading of 10 \b/ft2 and a flaps-up stall speed of 57 mph will have a maximum lift coefficient of about 1.2 (which is a typical value). Relation (1) is an expression of the force balance in the vertical direction (as discussed in the theoretical section), As such, it applies to other flying speeds as well as the stall condition. That is, for a given wing loading, we can use the nomogram to determine the lift coefficient if we know the flying speed, On Figure 1, note that we now have a value to be used in relation (2) that came from the solution of the relation (1) — W/S, the wing loading. To proceed we need to estimate the gross weight of the airplane This can be done by looking at airplanes that are similar to the design we have in mind. The gross weight is, not an easy quantity to estimate in the early phases of the design, because there are so many unknown weights: payload, fuel, powerplant, and structure. At this stage it is a good idea to choose the engine that we plan to use to meet our design goals: maximum level speed, maximum rate of climb, range, etc, If the engine is chosen now we will have one design point pinned down — maximum available power — and we will be better able to make an estimate of the final gross weight. Then, using relation (2) , we can find the required wing area from the knowledge of the wing loading and the weight. This could have been done by division, but one purpose of the nomogram is to eliminate as many of the mathematical steps as possible, including division. We have established a trend: whenever there is a relation that has two known variables, we can determine the other(s) by drawing a straight line on the nomogram and extending the line to intersect the axis of the unknown parameter(s) in the relation. In the case of relation (1) , we found the wingloading, W/S, from the stall speed, V,.¢, and the maximum lift coefficient, Cl max- In relation (2), we found the wing area, S, from the wing loading, W/S, and the weight, W. In this manner, we can continue down and across the flow chart, where we have to assume the value of a parameter when we know only one of the parameters in a particular relation. For instance, in relation (@) we have to choose @ value for the wing span, b, since we only know the wing area, S. Equivalently, we could have chosen the aspect retio, AR, or the mean chord, ¢, since all of these quantities are geometrically related to each other. Note that b, AR, and_¢ are modified by an efficiency factor e. This will be discussed later in the section describing relation @) and in the supplementary section on airplane efficiency factor. ‘The effective span _loading, W/b,, is one of the basic parameters for finding the power required for level flight ( relation ) and can be found fram the previously assumed values for weight and effective span, using relation . Whereas the wing area was chosen to satisfy the stall requirements, the span is, chosen large enough to obtain a reasonable rate of climb. Airplanes with larger spans will normally have better climb characteristics than airplanes with the same weight and wing area, but with a smaller span. Before we can make further progress toward finding the sink rate, we need to determine the drag area of the airplane, Ap. The drag area is defined to be the fictitious area that, when placed normal to the direction of the airstream, would have the same drag as the entire airplane, Typical values for drag area range from 1-2 square feet for small streamlined designs, to more than 20 ft? for large “dirty” airplanes. ‘The way to determine the drag area is discussed in Appendix G located at the end of the book. In order to decide how “clean” -- aerodynamically speaking — to make the design, we need to ask ourselves how fast we want to go: Vinay, the maximum level flight speed. We also need to estimate how much of our original brake horsepower is left for useful work against the drag forces after we accelerate the air through the propeller to produce thrust. If we assume that we have 80 percent of the engine brake horsepower, BHP, available as thrust horsepower, THP., we can use relation (6) to find the maximum allowable drag area for the airplane that will let us meet our high speed requirement. Assuming a value of 80 percent for the propeller efficiency is good first approximation that will be refined later. If we can reduce the drag area below this value, we will be able to have a higher maximum level speed. Since the drag area is some fraction of the projected frontal area of the airplane, it makes sense to keep the frontal area as small as possible to have good high speed performance. Also, because the viscous forces act on the surface of the airplane, we should try to keep the wetted area of the airplane as small as possible. Since the wing area has already been set by the stall requirements, the drag analysis will emphasize fuselage streamlining, engine cooling drag, and the selection of airfoil sections with low drag — unless we also want to sacrifice climb performance for high speed performance by making short wings (like the clipped-wing airplanes seen in air races). Although the zerollife drag coefficient, Cp, g, may seem like a parameter of fundamental importance, we can see from the flow chart in Figure 1 that drag area is the key link between the maximum level spec Vmax: and the speed for minimum sink rate, Ving: The drag coefficient, Cp ¢, found from relatio is the ratio between the drag area, Ap, and the wing planform area, S. The key relation, however, turns out to be relation (7) where the effective span loading and the drag area determine: (1) the speed for mini- mum sink rate; (2) the minimum thrust horsepower required for level flight, THP yj; and (3) the minimum drag, Dprine The speed for minimum sink rate is an idealized quantity and may turn out to be smaller than the stall speed. This is no problem, however, and will be taken into account when we draw the rate of climb curves as we will see later. Since the flying speed cannot be smaller than the stall speed, a graphical adjustment to the sink rate will be made. This will be discussed in more detail in the section describing Rg vs V ~ sink rate versus airspeed. We can find the minimum sink rate, Rg min, using relation(8), weight, W, and the minimum power required for level flight, THP nin: 6The lift-to-drag ratio is a measure of how far a gliding airplane will travel as it descends. A glider with a lift-to-drag ratio of 20 will travel forward 20 feet for each foot of altitude that it loses. The maximum lift-to-drag ratio, (L/D bmaxe is therefore a very important performance parameter for gliders. We can find (L/D) pax from the effective span, b,. and the drag area, Ap. using relation () . It is important to note that the maximum lift-to-drag ratio does not depend on the weight of the airplane. A heavier airplane with ‘the same streamlined shape will have the same lift-to-drag ratio, but will fly at a faster airspeed. Ajumbo jet has @ good (L/D), but it would not make a good sailplane because of the high sink rate. An airplane with a good liftto-drag ratio will have a large effective span and a small drag area, as in the modern sail- planes, Finally, the lift coefficient of the wing under minimum sink conditions C ming, can be found using relation ((0)_, the drag area, Ap, and the effective chord, cg. There is no néed to panic if the lift co- efficient ~ C__ ming ~ turns out to be larger than the maximum lift coefficient. This will alert us and help to remind us that the minimum sink conditions just calculated have to be modified to account for the actual stall condition, The theoretical aspects of this are discussed in Part 2 where we talk about the induced drag and the dependence of the induced drag coefficient on the square of the lift coefficient (the so-called drag polar). The practical consequences are explained in the section on sink rate versus airspeed (Rg vs V). We have now described all of the performance parameters that'are related to the power-required side of the ledger. Before we discuss the variables concerning the power available, we can look at the cross- check features of the nomogram. These are the relations on the right hand side of the flow chart — rela- tions @), @), @© and (). First, since the sink rate and the airspeed determine a glide angle, and since the glide angle at minimum sink is related to the glide angle under the best L/D conditions, we can relate Rg mins Vmin$» 2nd (L/D) max through relation ((4). If it turns out that this relation is not satisfied, there is something wrong and the errors must be found before the graphical construction can continue. Similarly, the effective aspect ratio, eAR, the zero-lift drag coefficient, lp or lift-to-drag ratio, (L/D) ay, and the lift coefficient at minimum sink, C)_ ming, are dependent on each other through relation : The maximum lift-to-drag ratio is obviously related to the weight and the minimum drag, since the weight is equal to the lift in equilibrium flight. This is the statement made by relation ©. And, finally, relation is an expression of the force balance in the vertical direction and applies to all flight conditions: stall, minimum sink, best L/D, maximum speed, ete. The power-required side of the performance equation is contained on the bottom half of the flow diagram in Figure 1. We want to find the idealized climb rate, R& max. reference sveed for propeller efficiency, Vrop and static thrust, T,, The idealized climb rate is defined by the rate at which a weight equal to that oF the aiplane would be lifted if all of the brake horsepower of the engine were used in the process. This climb rate is proportional to the power-to-weight ratio that is often talked about in perfor- mance discussions. Relation (17) shows the key part that weight plays in relation to the rest of the per- formance parameters. The idealized maximum rate of climb, R& max: Will be used to locate the horizontal axis of the template for the ideal powered climb rate in the same way that the minimum sink rate was used with the overlay for velocity dependence of the gliding sink rate. The other parameter needed for the location of the climb-rate template is the reference propeller efficiency speed, Vpyrqp- This parameter comes from idealized propeller theory and is related to the propeller diameter and engine brake horsepower — shown in relation (2) The idealized static thrust can also be calculated from this relation. The limita- tions of the approximate propeller theory are discussed in the section where we calculate R& vs V. Further comments are made in the detailed derivation found in Part 2.Finally, relation (3) gives the propeller tip Mach number if the rotational speed and propeller diameter are known. This is used mainly asa check, since we want to keep the propeller tip Mach number less than about 0.8 for better efficiency and less noise. Note that the rotational speed refers to the pro- peller rotational speed, not to the engine shaft speed. This way we can pick a large propeller diameter and choose the gear ratio that will keep the propeller tip speeds low. In the next few sections, each of the relations will be described and a sample calculation based on the Thorp T-18 will illustrate the use of the elements on the nomogram, Then, all of the elements will be combined to show the geometric interrelation of the lines constructed on the nomogram. If there is some confusion in the course of the geometric solution on the nomogram, these individual sections may be referred to. After all of the nomogram relations are described, we will discuss the construction of the idealized rate of climb (for the engine lifting a weight with an efficiency corresponding to the appropriate propeller efficiency) and the idealized sink rate, including modifications to take into account the actual stall condi- tion. Then, we can find the rate of climb by subtracting these rates. The level flight speed will occur when the two curves cross. We will mention here that the calculations are first performed for our design at sea- level. Then, we can use the templates to find the performance at altitude and other parametric studies.WORKED EXAMPLE — Thorp T-18 Tiger The Thorp T-18 was the example selected for calculation because it is representative of the type of aireraft that a homebuilder may want to build or modify. Figure 2 is a picture of the T-18 and Figure 3 is a threeview with tabulated performance deta. The T-18 is a high performance sport aircraft with two-seat side-by-side seating. The all-metal cantilever low-wing monoplane was designed for engines in the 108-200 hp category. The landing gear is fixed and streamlined to reduce the drag of the airplane. The T-18 is capable of 200 mph in level cruising flight. A T-18 built by Don Taylor, Victoria '76, was the first home- built aircraft to fly around the world — 26,200 miles over a period of 61 days in the summer of 1976. In the design example, we will show how to begin with the desired performance and find the airplane parameters that will satisfy these requirements. We will sometimes work backwards from the known values for the T-18 to show that the airplane does indeed satisfy the relations on the nomogram and the dimen- sionless curves on the template. Then, we will show how to make a parametric study to see how sensitive the performance characteristics are to each of the design variables. Figure 2, Thorp T-18, Built and Flown by Lu Sunderland.Figure 3. Convertible Wing Thorp T-18C Three-View (Sunderland Aircraft)Thorp T-18 Performance Data Wing Span oo. oee eee ceceeeeeceeceeeeeeeeeeetesseeceseeeeeesn seers ses. b= 20ft 10in Wing Chord, Constant .... 2.06.0 cece cece eee eee eee eens 4 ft2in Wing Area, 002... PES eC eee eee eee eee boteeeeeeeee ve. $= 86 ft? Length Overall Height Overall Tailplane Span oo... ee eee cee ce cee eee eee enna tees en tee eeeeee 6 ft 1lin Propeller Diameter .........2e00eeee00s RES Reece eee eee een eee Eeeeee Dp = 63 in Weight Empty... 0... 0. cece cece eevee essen cece eteeeesteeeeeretetsness «We = 900 tb Max Take Off Weight W= 1506 Ib Engine, Lycoming .......-s00eceeeeeeseeee utes seen es bet etee estes .. BHP = 180 hp Max Level Speed at SL... .ees cscs eee bees e ee seeeeeeeeeerees Vmax = 200 mph Max Cruising Speed .......- . . . wees : Vg= 175 mph Se Max rate of climb ........0c0eeeeeeeeeeeeeee ve cceeeteeeeeeeeeeees ++ BG max: 7 2000 f/min Service Ceiling ©... 60... cere eee eee 20000 ft Take Off Run + 300 ft Landing Run . 900 ft Range with Max Fuel ......-.. 0.2000 bedeeteeceteeese ees bette eeseeees .. R= 500 miles Useful Load... 0. 00.0 ee eee eee Pee eee ete EET beter ee Wy = 606 Ib “Performance Rating ........6+++ be betureteeete esses bec eeeeeeees Fy = 0.138 *Kinetic Energy Parameter ....... beceeeeeeeeeee vette teeeeees WV2.ex = 6.02 x 107 Ib mph2 *Drag Arca/Propoller Efficiency . ceveeeeeeeeees Ap/n 23.3 12a, 6 2 *Galculated. See Appendix L. WThis Page BlankRELATIONS FOR THE AIRPLANE PERFORMANCE AND DESIGN NOMOGRAM How to use the Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram: 1 Find a relation that has two known quanti- ties. Draw a line on the nomogram connecting the known parameters with the other variable(s) in the relation. The new value(s} are now availeble for use as input for the next relation. Repeat Step 1. Continue the graphical calculation until Rsminr Ymins« Vprop: 24 RE max fe determined. ‘These parameters ‘serve as reference points to be used with the plastic template to determine the airplane climb performance. POWER REQUIRED POWER AVAILABLE CROSS CHECKS Lift Comer Eine Lowe ws & Vv, WIS i" AIRSPEED wine RAE, Eine Pear e ORES, S, WIS, W WRT Piae TEER tony 3 Vmax’ THPa ‘pane Fos? ca Tire 7 , pRae ARE po gins AREA Verins: W/Pe: THP min’ Prnin Pine, PS mine THE gy WIM PR RE Sain HP min W Cces ween Birod wert (L/D), nex: Omi’ 13This Page BlankRelation(): Lift Coefficient, Airspeed, Wing Loading Relation (1) is a form of the equilibrium force balance in the vertical direction (lift force = weight). The mathematical expression is given by W/S = C, V2/391. The relation is used for the stall analysis and for the airfoil selection process, where we find the lift coefficient at our desired flight conditions. ce, sv? S: wing area (ft2) Lift Force, L (Ib) = —=——— . 391 V: airspeed (mph} Airspeed, V (mph) Drag Force (Ib) Thrust {Ib) ‘Weight, W (Ib) 2A uwkbas VRS TY Gh 2 wets 7 AK MOLT Spe Sut V) Sut wine ARE aa ° Vv fi fsec 15STALL ANALYSIS. If we plan to have an airplane with as low a stall speed as possible and still have a small wing area, we need to select an airfoil with a large value for the maximum lift coefficient. Other factors enter into the airfoil selection process, including the pitching moment of the airfoil section, the minimum drag coefficient, and the shape of the curve of the lift coefficient versus angle of attack curve near the stall point. Details of the airfoil selection process are described to Appendix H. We know that the Thorp T-18 has a NACA 631-412 (see Appendix H). Since this airfoil has a maxi- mum lift coefficient of 1.52 without flaps, and we desire a stall speed of about 67 mph, we can find the wing loading from relation on thenomogram in Figure 4. Connecting the values for Cy max and Vs9, we find that the wing loading, W/S, is 17.4 Ib/ft2, increasing the value of Cmax will decrease the stall speed for the same wing loading. AIRFOIL SELECTION PROCESS. Since relation (1) is a general expression of the equilibrium force balance in the vertical direction, we can use it to find the lift coefficient that corresponds to a particular speed, if we have a known value for the wing loading. in the case of the T-18, where we have already calculated the wing loading that corresponds to the stall condition, we find from Figure 4 that the lift coefficient will be 0.21 at the maximum level speed of 180 mph. We can use this fact when we try to find the best low-drag airfoil at this lift coefficient with a Reynolds number that corresponds to this condition. (See Appendix | for a discussion of the Reynolds number.) An alternative form for relation (1) is presented in Figure 5 where the lift coefficient is plotted versus the airspeed for various values of wing loading. The wing loading can be determined by entering the graph with Cy max and the stall speed. Then, drawing a parallel line, find the lift coefficient at other speeds. Ce = CoeWicien t of Aift V Velo ety w/s Ling Loapine ) y 16Ott, Drone wo Oiway © caoros @rociwig — Breins Man ine @anrme COR ERC ori te We ee @ ime ® Mein Ti DWH Vor 0 BU mm Prin . ox 20 im oo a a ttc) ea a aaa Se preprnepeemer pr rmere prepmer enre ane Le TT sa eee rises meee ee TT Tr Ta ee ses tn 18: 2 a 4 6 ” » 2 = i a riven ee a Re lane he arena ee ots abil aad Pb oat Lalla a lab ola La ttl eel aL Engine Bute HP we fate agus Aan eer Co ee ee ee ere Seren bat ia, SS a oy subst casa g Lad Lafalalil isis egal Aen ~ Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram Figure 4. Sample Calculation for Relation (1), Stall Analysis. 7Lift Coefficient, O, & & 4 08 08 Wing Loading WA, (/#2) 200 00 20 49! 2 10 6 7 2 i 8 ‘a 1 10 20 ao 60100 2001 Airspeed, V (mph) igure 5, Relation (1): Lift Coefficient, Airspeed, Wing Loading. W/S=C, V?/391. 400Relation 2) : Wing Area, Wing Loading, Gross Weight P= OD Relation (2) is merely a definition for the wing loading. That is, the wing loading is defined as the gross weight divided by the wing area. The nomogram can be used to find the wing area if the weight and the wing loading are known, This is the case for the sample calculation in Figure 6 where we know the wing loading from the stall analysis and the weight from a preliminary weight estimate. Wing Area, S (ft2) Weight, W (Ib) Wing Loading, W/S (Ib/ft2) 19Grveatin, 5 Dore Wine — ftp era b, woes 9 Darcimen — [Ovens Pann Ohm D bowen ting ree Sn D9 Rm — [DED Chm OM. UDInwe in Tn 4486 Veron 2p | © Dna ri © Pin mer ®@ ®@ URL Ra 8 1 oa 8 40 0 Nac Powe ian eet d . mys te cian ae Mt oe area or Frente stney “OO a0 90401 st00 amo TLL Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram Figure 8. Sample Calculation for Relation (2) .S= WING ALeO w/s sWinG LOADING w = Weg ar Relation@): Wing Area, Effective Span, Effective Aspect Ratlo, Effective Chord Relation @) can be used with the geometric wing span, aspect ratio, and mean chord as well as the effective span, effective aspect ratio, and effective chord, which have been modified using the airplane efficiency factor, e, This relation is essentially a method of defining the (effective) aspect ratio and the (effective) chord if we know the wing area, S, and the (effective) span. The definition of average chord is ‘the wing area divided by the span (c= S/b). The aspect ratio is then defined as the ratio of the span to the average chord (AR = b/e]. If we substitute the definition for the chord from the above expression, we can determine the aspect ratio directly from the wing area and the span {AR = b2/S). Since we have not mentioned what the plan- form shape is, these expressions hold for all wing shapes; rectangular, tapered, elliptical, delta, etc. The effective aspect ratio, eAR, is e quantity that appears naturally in the discussion of induced drag (see Part 2). It isthe geometric aspect ratio multiplied by an airplane efficiency factor, e. This e-factor has no real theoretical justification except that it allows the use of Prandtl’s theory for a wing of finite span, if we use a fictitious wing with the equivalent aspect ratio, eAR. The method for determining the efficiency factor is given in Appendix F. ‘The airplane efficiency factor is a function of the geometric aspect ratio and the shape of the planform. According to Prandtl's theory. a wing with an elliptical lift distribution will give the least amount of induced drag for 2 given amount of lift. This is the reason for the choice for this planform for the Spitfire of World War II fame. Additional factors that affect the airplane efficieney factor are the shape and size of ‘the fuselage compared to the wing, and the airfoil section used for the wing, As an example, the four ptanforms in Figure 7 have the same geometric aspect ratio, (AR = 4) since they have the same wing area and the same span. The airplane efficiency factor changes the planforms into the equivalent shapes with the new effective aspect ratios and the new effective spans. In the calculations for the airplane performance, the effective span is one of the most important parameters for determining the sink rate (and the rate of climb for powered flight). Therefore, it is desirable to choose a planform that will give the largest effective span for the given amount of wing area. Tho rectangular and tapered plan. forms give results that are not too bad compared to the elliptic planform (and are a lot easier to construct). These examples were made neglecting the effects of the fuselage and other factors that might decrease the efficiency factor. When other factors are taken into account, the airplane efficiency factor for normal a planes usually lies in the range 0.7 to 0.85. In ground effect ~ when the airplane is within an altitude of ‘one wingspan above the surface — the airplane efficiency factor is greatly increased. This reduces the powor required if the airplane is flown at the same airspeed and is one of the reasons the manpowered airplanes fly close to the ground. ‘As a sample calculation, let us determine the effective span for the T-18, First, choose a value for the geometric span (b= 20 ft 10 in}. From the stall analysis we necd a wing arca of G6 ft”, Drawa lino on the fomogram in Figure 8 connecting the span and the wing arez to find the aspect ratio (AR = 5) and the average chord (c = 4.1 ft). Using the method of Appendix F, find the value for the airplane efficiency factor (e = 0.74). Now, multiply the aspect ratio by this value by shifting the value for AR by the distance between 1. and 0.74 to obtain the effective aspect ratio (eAR = 3.7). Connect the effective aspect ratio with the wing area to find the effective span (by = 18 ft) and the effective chord (cg = 4.75 ft). 21Delta Rectangular Elliptical Figure 7. Effective Aspect Ratio for 4Wings of Various Planform Shapes with the same Geometric Span and Wing Area. Relation @) can also be determined from Figure 9, where we have plotted the wing span, b, versus the chord for various values of wing area, S, or aspect ratio, AR. Knowing any two values will let us find a point on the figure which will then give us the other two values. The span efficiency factor for biplanes and canards must be calculated in a different manner from that given in Appendix F. Since the aspect ratio, AR, is defined by span-squared divided by wing area {b?/S), the efficiency factor for biplanes and canards will usually be greater than one (of the order 1.15). (The drag area will most likely be larger than a monoplane of the same span, since there is more wetted surface area for skin-friction drag). Details on how to calculate this factor for various values of span ratio, gap, stagger, etc. are given by Von Karman & Burgers (1935), Betz (1935), Millikan (1941) and Laitone (1978, 1978b, 1979, 1980.) These methods use biplane theory to evaluate Prandtl’s interference factor, which accounts for the effect of one wing upon the airflow over the other. For delta wings, the effects of nonlinear vortex lift are important. Details of how to calculate induced drag can be found in Kiichemann (1978) and McCormick (1979). Charts and formulas are available which account for sweepback angle, aspect ratio, and angle of attack. ‘Once the aspect ratio for the equivalent monoplane has been determined (eAR), the basic design process can continue, following the theory developed In Part 2. 22Ouray Oro wivone f fBucrmo, einen @swew Dtroros : * | Qroccne:f Bais Sri tbInae ‘ * Demon |) Ab Vals We Han Base DN 88 off |B 0 mts 8, Wi” ” Drew CO tanan tan Orme fo» | | Blom Onn we Peas scarier ee F 2 mf mt 2 Eee es ae ful agg me a Fe o 2 ee a 4 bos sae 8 eo eg ws Go on 2m aos eo mo sp ld a La MA LL Ll UIE at Ly Enna ee . rr eee ee ee rg Aallddoadudlusls Uababaliie tail St Libidaaaddaal slalshbivstaliss Stee am gg. < 24 6 6 8 Nw ly © Hm 1m 2m mo ce n Anco 7 ype eS . 5 Presnery ars fd TT — 2am 29mm wmD socw 72500 Poser aide ® m8 « ide 2 Lees yoia Pett thee ite iL LebAes pein ee = 5 pp “ Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram Figure 8. Sample Calculation for Relation@) © aneAspect Ratio, AR ire Area, S (ft2) X87 7 ZN ZK RAR RR R80xk 7 ZZ xx 6 Z VN ANNES 600 RIX ZZ BOS. A BS INRIR OS ZZ [YK IPOXR Span, b (ft) GORY ERA EO RSR 1 2 3. 4 6 8 Chord, ¢ (#t) Figure 9. Relation(3): Wing Area, Span, Aspect Ratio, Chord. S=b-c, AR=b/e = b7/S.Relation(@): Effective Span, Effective Span Loading, Gross Weight This relation defines the effective span loading, W/b,, in terms of the gross weight, W, and the effec- tive span, by. The geometric span is first transformed into the effective span using the airplane efficiancy factor and the method of relation @). The effective span loading is an important parameter used to deter- mine the power required for level flight. This is then usec to find the sink rate, which Is used for the rate of climb caleulation. For the sample problem, connect the effective span (b = 18 ft) and gross weight (W = 1500 Ib} of the T-18 with a straight line on Figure 10 and read the effective span loading on the W/bg- scale (W/bg = 83 Ib/ft). Geometric Span (ft) Effective Span (ft) Ww Gross Weight (Ii) Effective Span Loading: W/bg (Ib/ft} b = Span 25D porn tey Ohare na ff Buen sy a @ 0.408 Cro.cmmis eff (Deas Rei tUD cm, O ovine Wg 9 Oren 8 | Beo.0 Shnhare Ahan © Marie Tain @rwwyffos | @urie Pro® ke aie ta oe a fz deve tint = . a a) j foie, eo “ fect a LT Al ik oe Ladue tu tlae wn ee a Doron wen 6 an 00 200° soo 400 end B50 000° 00 at = Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram Figure 10. Sample Calculation for Relation (2). 26Relation): Drag Area, Maximum Level Speed, Available Thrust Horsepower This relation can be used to give a rough estimate of the drag area necessary to satisfy the requirement for maximum speed from a given engine-propeller combination. The drag area is defined as the area of a flat plate placed normal to the freestream airflow that will produce the same drag as the complete airplane. max — Drag re Hy ad Equivalent Flat Plate Drag Area. The mathematical relationship between available thrust horsepower THP, (hp), drag area, Ap {ft}, and maximum level flight speed, Vinax (mah), is 3 Ap Vmax’ = 3 g 146625 areas THP, for sea level conditions. If other altitudes are desired, the right hand side of the equation needs to be multi- plied by the density ratio, o= p/p gy. However, if the sea level calculations are made first, the plastic template can be used to make rapid estimates of the effects of altitude. Relation 6) is also useful for determining thesize of the engine required if the drag area and the desired maximum level speed are known. Turning this around, we can ask ourselves, "How fast will it go?” if we know the powerplant size, propeller efficiency, and an estimate of the drag area. 27As a first approximation we can choose a propeller efficiency of 0.80, Then, we can find how much thrust horsepower, THP,, is available by multiplying this efficiency times the engine brake horsepower, BHP. For the sample calculation, assume that we have selected a 150-hp Lycoming engine. The thrust horsepower is 120 hp, which can then be located on the THP,-axis of the nomogram in Figure 11. Ifwe desire a maximum level speed of 180 mph, we can calculate the maximum allowable drag area from the nomogram. Locate the speed on the V,,, x-axis, draw a line connecting with THP,, extending to the Ap axis, and read 3.0 ft2 for the drag area, “Therefore, if we want to go 180 mph or faster, we need to keep ‘the drag area below three square feet. The method of estimating the drag area is discussed in Appendix G. Relation G) can also be presented in a chart having the form of Figure 12. The modified drag area, ZAp/n9 _, isplotted as a function of the maximum level flight speed, Vinay. with the engine brake horse- power, BHP, as a parameter. The density ratio, o, and the power-altitude factor, 9, are both equal to unity at sea level and decrease with altitude. This will be discussed later in the parametric study of altitude effects, Also included in Figure 12 are the estimates based on the data for a number of aircraft (tabulated and discussed in Appendix L end based on Jane’s All the Worlds Aircraft 1977 - 1978). To find the drag area of a particular airplane, multiply ( ¢ Ap/n@ ) from the figure by an estimate for the propeller effic- iency (use 1 = 0.8 for a first guess) together with values for the density ratio end power altitude factor (a= 1 and@= 1 at sealevel). For instance, for the T-18 we find Ap/n = 3.3 ft2. If we assume that the propeller efficiency is 0.8 at sea level, then the drag area is 2.64 ft. From Figure 12 we see that an in- crease in power with the same drag area will give a higher level flight speed. Keeping the power constant, we can go faster by decreasing the drag area. 28@) 40.\mae TW Ox erent @ cores Ian Mn Dn ® Ao \aine We tn Soa Be Onmrennn Oren Beo.0 ems A Ia DUP eee Pn wis 174 wr 28m ‘we, 120. " eins = fey 4a on ot “ayes vas Le tadsiticied bivomite —1Dlnee 2 i 1 FCI eects i diet Rctesil es ° Lisl iat Lt atbt co hae a Tatil Liable Daas: 20 Pe wom te E a ean « ‘Goose w+ 1900» PE re ae el Re ee ee Be ee ee oe : : weal Etat 2 tha PF re ee ere © so ; Seid ia ae oe Feet Wcney «RIPE eit Et Sy ate ate ie ay ares ae ; ot a EE a ll ude La gee wa Rew u at dd eer Ls it Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram Figure 11, Sample Caloulation for Relation), 29NAN ae ANG AN Aging (2) Aa il CAN Modified Drag Area Hen ¥ WN scm \N CUANZA AAA Maximum Level Airspeed, Vinay (mob) Figure 12, Relation(6): Drag Area, Maximursi Level Airspeed, Thrust Horsepower atSea Level THP,= Ap V3.,,/146625.Relation@): ZeroLit Drag Coefficient, Drag Area, Wing Area This relation is essentially the definition for the drag area in terms of the zerc-lift drag coefficient and the wing area. Ap = Cp oS. The drag force is expressed in terms of the density ratio, 0, drag coeffi- cient, Cp, wing area, S, (ft2) and relative airspeed, V (mph), by oC S V2 (tb) 391 If we consider sea level conditions o= 1 and assume that the induced drag is zero (no {ift), then the zero-lift drag is — Drag, D V (mph) eo me Airspeed Wing Area, § (ft?) For a flat plate of area Ap placed normal to the airstream, the drag coefficient is approximately equal to 1.0. Therefore, if the drag of the plate is the same as the drag of the complete airplane, we can equate Ary and Cp oS. Ap V? — Drag, D = Alb) V (moh) 301 FlatPlate Area, Ap (ft?) For the sample calculation, the zero-lift drag coefficient is determined from the drag area {see the drag analysis described in Appendix G) and the wing area. Draw a line on the nomogram in Figure 13 between ‘the wing area, S = 86 ft2, and the drag area, Ap = 3 ft2, to find a zero-lift drag coefficient, Cp ¢ = 0.035, on the intersection with the Cp-axis. . 31ee ® M0 You Ty Ov Be 0p sway © coo.nos @re in Pe Phe cine OW he To Oo Decor B00 cms Ohne ® wom © amet Bro. Vl, | @weteae Pan i ee eae Baie re ee fe Lillia Ciel lpia det meme ges Go Siting = Se ~ “ fhe d at dtd nad Litibm Ratio (UDIma* ot A ee eee ee fe bee ae ere eter rena : ey ae SL Oe nee merece entrar Cr aes ee ee Poe SS Ne ie wll ca ety el Meee tan uaa ey 7 ae ee Pettit et Tessie EAT le ct gg men ee ee nten Coo ee ee ee cpt et nd La mete amet * Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram Figure 13. Sample Calculation for Relation), 32Relation @): Drag Area, Airspeed for Minimum Sink, Effective Span Loading, Minimum Power Required for Level Flight, Minimum Drag This relation allows us to calculate more information at one time than any other relation on the Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram. Typically, knowing the drag area and the effective span loading we then use relation (7) to find the speed for minimum sink rate, Vining, Minimum power required for level flight, THP,,j,, and minimum drag, Dinin: For the sample calculation, the drag area is 3 ft2 (from relation (6)) and the effective span loading is 83 Ib/ft (from relation @) ). Draw a line connecting these values, intersecting with the V, THP,yj,-and Dypin-Seales. For this case, Vining = 78 mph, THP iin = 39 hp, and Drain = 163 Ib. These can also be calculated from the formulas tabulated at the end of the theoretical section in Table 2, The speed for minimum sink will be used to construct the curve for the sink rate as a function of the airspeed after the minimum sink rate is determined. The minimum sink rate, Rg min. Will be found with relation using the value of the minimum power required for level flight, THP yj,,, and the gross weight, W. If it tums out that the airspeed for minimum sink is less than the stall speed, we will have to make modifications to the shape of the curve in this region, In this case the calculated quantity, Vining, is merely an idealized speed and is Varig: W/b, THP yj (7) used only to construct the sink rate versus speed curve using the plastic template. This modification process will be expleined later in the section where the use of the sink- rate template is discussed. in Ormin Each of the equations that make up relation@)can be braken down into individual charts. These are given in Figures 15, 16, and 17 for the drag area, Ap ‘versus Vining, THP min. and Drpin, with the span loading as a parameter. 33© c0.408 Bons. Roa GB 0,0. mis AF, (Dy GLP Da ee ieee ‘mm zaa00 a A St et eo! Frosty % L L sates oo pat Patt i Tashi teste tata Cee Nae = i a Lit himeninaetr, ops * Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram Figure 14. Sample Calculation for Relation(7).Drag Area, Ap (#2) FS TNE MABRNAWA VAN Via AA WU u Porat ja Te CANE Figure 15. Relation HEE — Mini =—s a Vinin’ - ph) ra NAN @:: Drag Area, Airspeed for Minimum Sink Rate, Effective Span Loading. 14 Vining = 11-29 VW/b, JanDrag Area, Ap (ft?) 36 100 2 60 40. 2. 1+ / df ] 2 HAL 2 10 f a i 10 HE 6 20 4 30 tt 40 2 100 ' —— ec ~ Effective _200, Ty ‘Span Loading, 4 TTL 2 A 6 1 2 4 6 10, 20 40 60 100 Minimum Thrust Horsepower Required for Level Flight, THP nin Figure 16. Relation@): Drag Area, Effective Span Loading, Minimum Thrust Horsepower Required for Level Flight. THP rnin = 0.09921 Ad! ¢wibg)9/2,100 80 60 40 20 03 o Drag Area, Ap (#12) 10 Effective Span Loading, Wib, (tb/ft): o 4 6 8 10 20 40: 60 80, yf 100 200 ‘400° 600 800 1000, 20 40 60 100 200 400 6001000 Minimum Drag, D,,jn, (Ib) min Figure 17. Relation(7): Drag Area, Effective Span Loading, Minimum Drag. Dinin = 1-128-YAp (W/bg}. 37This Page BlankRelation(@): Minimum Sink Rate, Minimum Power Required for Level Flight, Weight If we know the minimum power required for level flight and the gross weight, we can calculate the minimum sink rate. We can also use relation (8)to find what minimum size engine we need for our airplane if we know the sink rate and the gross weight. The formula for the thrust horsepower is given by W Rg 33,000 THP = (hp) where the weight, W, is given in pounds, the sink rate, Rg, in feet per minute (fpm). We need to divide the thrust power by an assumed value for the propeller efficiency to estimate the engine size required from the sink-rate and weight information. For the sample calculation, the minimum power required for level flight is 39 hp (from relation@)) and the gross weight is 1500 Ib. Locating these on the THP nin and W-scales, we drawa line on the nomo- gram in Figure 18 to find a sink rate of 860 fpm on the Rg min'scale. This value will be used for the construction of the sink rate curve as a function of the airspeed. In the practical use of the Airplane Per- formance and Design Nomogram, values for THP,,j, and W are already available for construction of this relation since they have been found from the previous relations in the design process. nv THP Relation (8) is also represented in Figure 19 where the sink s, rate, Rg, is plotted as a function of the power required for level flight, THP, with weight, W, as a parameter. This can also be used for relation (2) , which has exactly the same form for the relation among BHP, Ro max, and W. In fact, if we know what our sink rate is at a given speed, Rg, and we know what thrust horsepower our engine-propeller combination will deliver at that speed, THP,, and we know the weight of our airplane, W, we can use this relation to find what the climb rate, Aig, will be: THP, R, Rg) = 33000 ——— (Rg + Rs) W 39Oavviwis © se Von toe sake conn ff Kayne 9 @swew ® moro once eff (D¥nins 5m! @rneme © ovo We Trin nin Gh. tve eof | @eno.cinee Pha @ r wenn min Hin GY. we. KL 0p | 'Dinee Bn eee ey a tote s Teor ry Tren rT TT ir r Aeon tee ew ne ww ota Xo ao abe eo ae Gp ee eee fee ofa eee eons “e \ 1 2 r faa N30 tad ene ote = : ne ASN side eon os ee TAT We Clas NaN a pets efi Stitt ttutoh Latah. f.titek 38 RRR Mee me a er eee Pan 4 i. BS ete vw tmertonet | |\\ noe _—. 00 STH 8 Ga (ft/min), amy We see, therefore, that for minimum sink rate, we need to minimize the term Cp/C, 2/2, for minimum alide angle, we need to minimize Cp/Cy. We will now discuss the dependence of the drag coefficient on the lift coefficient for finite span wings. 122INDUCED DRAG For a finite span airplane we can split the drag coefficient into two parts, one for parasite drag, Cr and one for Induced drag, Cr ;- Cp =Cpo tpi (12) The parasite drag of the airplane includes the profile drag of the airfoil alone, as well as the skin friction drag, pressure drag and interference drag on the other aircraft components. If the wing has an elliptic lift distribution, as shown in Figure 69, Prandtl’s lifting line theory relates the induced drag coefficient to the lift coefficient by s—L_ (13) Etfiptic Lift Distribution — Non-Elliptic. Lift Distribution Figure 69. Spanwise Distribution of Lift on the Wing. 123where AR is the aspect ratio of the wing. The aspect ratio is related to the span, b, wing area, S, and average chord, c, by the relation be Reap (14) which is relation @) on the nomogram. However, if the wing does not have an elliptic lift distribution, the induced drag contribution is multiplied by an amount 1/e, where e is the airplane efficiency factor and is usually less than 1.0. The efficiency factor, e, depends on the planform shape of the wing, airfoil section, wing twist, wing sweepback angle, fuselage cross-section shape, and ground effect (when the airplane is flying less than one wing span above the ground). When the airplane efficiency (also called the Oswald efficiency factor after a noted aeradynamicist of the 30's) is taken into account, the airplane drag coefficient can be written as c2 TeAR {18} Sp=Cpot This is the definition of the so-called parabolic drag polar where the curve for Cp asa function of Chas the shape of a parabola. Departures from a parabolic form for the lift-drag polar would require a modified analysis such as that given by Wendt (1947). The combination eAR is called the effective aspect ratio since a wing with this aspect ratio would follow Prantdl’s theory. The practical way in which this value is determined is discussed in Appendix F. 124MINIMUM SINK RATE The minimum sink rate can be determined by substituting the drag polar equation (18) into (11) and using calculus to’find the value of C, that minimizes Cp/C, 9/2, The term Cp/C, 9/2 is given by 1/2 Sp po £e (16) 82 C82 pean If we differentiate this expression with respect to C_and set the result equal to zero, we have a|_°o 3°po 1 Se dc, 3/2 25/2 2 1/2 c8 ep reaR Cl (17) Solving for C_, we find that the value for Cy that minimizes Cp/C,9/? is Chiming = W3r2AR Cy o (18) On the nomogram, this expression is part of relation (B) Let us introduce the drag area, Ap. This is the area of a plate placed normal to the air flow that would produce the same zero-lift drag as the complete airplane. If the drag coefficient of the plate is equal to 1.0, then equating the drag would give Ap = Cry g S, (which is relation If we solve for Cry g from this definition, substitute into (18), use equation (14) to eliminate AR and define the effective chord by cgxc//e , we find that the lift coefficient that minimizes the sink rate is (19) This is relation @. 125From (18) and (19) we see that there is a tradeoff between effective aspect ratio and zero-lift drag coefficient on one hand, and drag area and effective chord on the other, Since we would like to keep the lift coefficient at minimum sink conditions below the maximum lift coefficient value, we need to have a well streamlined airplane (keep Cp g sinall) if we have a large effective aspect ratio. This is the case for sailplanes. On the other hand, if we have a large drag area — such as for hang gliders where the pilot and flying wires are hanging out in the air — we need to have a large effective chord. If either of these criteria is not met, the minimum sink condition will occur very near stall and it becomes dangerous to try to maintain the absolute minimum sink condition while soaring. When the lift coefficient for minimum sink turns out to be greater than the maximum lift coefficient, the theory b: s down and we have to make changes in the stall region. A practical method for this modification is discussed in Part 1 in the section for sink rate versus airspeed (Rg vs V}. If the lift coefficient that was calculated to minimum Gp/C, 2’? is substituted into (15), we find that the induced drag is three times the parasite drag, resulting in a drag coefficient four times the zero-lift drag coefficient. If these results are substituted into (11), we find that the minimum sink rate is given by 1/4 Ww. Ap St/mit (20) Rg min = 88 ¥391 wo a 3A (ft/min), ,° 1294 where the effective span, be = b\fe, has been introduced. The sink rate is strongly dependent on effective span {-3/2 power), and less dependent on the weight (1/2 power), density ratio (-1/2 power), and drag area (1/4 power]. The airspeed at which the minimum sink rate occurs is found by substituting (19) into (7) and solving for V, VET VWhe Vins =~ (gq) 74 Ve aye (mph). {21) 11,285 We see that effective span loading, W/b, (relation @)), isa natural parameter that enters into the expression for the speed at minimum sink conditions, Equation {21) is represented on the nomogram as relation An alternative expression for the sink rate can be found if we substitute (15) and (7) into (11) and use the definitions for drag area and effective span, oApVe = 391 W Rg = 98 |—2— + ———-|_ ft/min) - (22) s1W Tov bs 126The first term represents sink rate due to the parasite drag, while the second term is due to induced drag. The minimum sink rate can also be found by differentiating this expression with respect to the airspeed and setting the result equal to zero. dRg 3oAp V2 391 W ——= 88 -_—sS a (23) av go1w nov? b2 Solving for V, we find that the minimum sink condition occurs wh: 391 VWi/b, Vins = (mph). (24) (3m) /4 Yoaus which is the same as (21). If we divide (22) by (20), and define the dimensionless sink rate, Rig = Rg/Rg min, and the dimension- less airspeed, V = V/Viming, we obtain the equation for the dimensionless sink rate in terms of the dimensionless airspeed 8 aoe oe (25) av This equation is plotted in Figure 37 and is the equation that forms the basis for the construction of the sink rate versus airspeed curves using the plastic template included with the text. The manner in which the template is used in described in Part 1. 127MAXIMUM LIFT-TO-DRAG RATIO The lift-to-drag ratio is related to the glide angle through equation (9), since the ratio of the lift-force to the drag-force is equal to the ratio of the lift coefficient to the drag coefficient. To minimize the glide angle, we have to maximize the lift-to-drag ratio. First, substitute (15) into (9) and differentiate with respect to Cy_ and set equal to zero. da 180 d [Cog Oy 18of Spo (1 =: + =—|-——+—_]=0 (26) dc, or dc, ] C, 7eAR [rem Solving for C_, we find the lift coefficient that minimizes the glide angle and maximizes the lift-to-drag ratio is Ca Lins CLmaxtD = VreAR Cp,o = 9 (27) We see thet the lift coefficient for maximum L/D is smaller than the lift coefficient for minimum sink. (If Chiming = 1+ then CL maxip = 0-577.) In this case, the induced drag is equal to the parasite drag and the maximum lift-to-drag ratio is VieiRCoo Ve [ean (LO max = 2°p,0 2 Vp (28) This expression is contained within relation (§) on the nomogram. If we introduce the drag area and the effective span, we can rewrite (29) as Vee Lo gge2 Pe. (29) (L/D), I mg ag We see that the best glide ratio is obtained for a large effective span and a small drag area, or equivalently, for a large effective aspect ratio and a small drag coefficient. The airspeed for best L/D is found by substituting(27) into (7). Since the velocity ratio Vinaxt D/V minS is equal to C1 mins/CLmaxLb: the speed for best L/D is 3% times that for minimum sink, or about 32 percent larger. Since the lift is equal to the weight in the small angle approximation, the drag is a minimum when the glide angle is the smallest. In this case, the drag is equal to 2 WwW. Dinin = ye Wo a 7128 Ab 4 (30) ‘Again, we see the importance of the effective span loading, W/b,, and the drag area, Ap. This expression is part of relation Q)on the nomogram. 128LEVEL FLIGHT ‘The force balance for equilibrium level flight is shown in Figure 70. Now, the drag force is balanced by the thrust produced by the propeller. Since the available thrust horsepower is equal to the thrust times the airspeed (with an appropriate conversion factor to change into units of horsepower), we have 38 [cA v3 | 391 (wib,! THPaL af 391 mov ay Comparing this expression to (22), we see that the thrust horsepower required to maintain level flight is ‘equal to the gliding sink rate thet would occur at the same airspeed times the weight divided by 33000 ~ the factor that changes foot-pounds per minute into horsepower. Rg W Ss (32) THPaL = aL “33000 {Relation @) } the minimum power required for Jevel flight therefore occurs at the same speed that mini- izes the sink rate, Ving: The minimum power required is 1/4 ur, = BNE ap! fw] 9? sa) min 33000 (34 9/4 Vr by 0.03921 This expression is part of relation @) Lift Foree, L (Ib) Throst Relative uy Drag Fi fete gee et — ftw Drag Force, D (Ib) V (mph) Weight, W (tb) Figure 70. Force Balance for Level Flight in Equilibrium. 129CLIMBING FLIGHT The equilibrium force balance for climbing flight is shown in Figure 71. In the sdirection along the flight path, we have =D+Wsi T=D+Wsing, (34) and in the n-direction, normal to the flight path, we have L=Weos @ , (35) where @, is the climb angle. If it is assumed that the climb angle is small equation (35) reduces to (7) and equation (34) becomes Ap Vv? 391 (W/bg)? . T=Wsin 6+ 391 ov? (36) if we multiply by the relative airspeed, we find that the thrust-horsepower available to climb at this angle, is WRo THP, + THP, . * 33,000 aL (7) That is, the thrust horsepower available to climb at a rate Rg (ft/min) is equal to the weight times the climb rate divided by the conversion factor, plus the power required to maintain level flight. We can turn this relation around, since the power available is equal to the power required, and find that the rate of climb is Re = | 33 000.BHF | (22) =| iS where the efficiency, 7 = THP, ’g/BHP, has been introduced. The term in brackets in equation (38) is found in relation () on the nomogram and is denoted by the symbol R& ayy the idealized maximum rate-of- climb that would result if the weight of the airplane were lifted by the engine brake horsepower. The icy is discussed in the next section. propeller effi 130Lift Force, L (ib) Weight, W (ib) Figure 71. Force Balance for Climbing Flight in Equilibrium, IDEALIZED PROPELLER THEORY As a first estimate, let us calculate the propulsive efficiency of a idealized propeller using momentum theory. The propeller is replaced by disk which is assumed to increase the velocity of the air which passes through it. The change in momentum of this air mass is balanced by the force of the pressure acting at the propeller disk which in turn provides the thrust to propel the airplane. In order to find the propulsive efficiency, we need to find the thrust power that is available from this idealized theory and divide by the power input, The features of the analysis are shown in the schematic drawing in Figure 72. A mass of air enters the streamtube at the left with velocity V at a freestream pressure p,, . As the air is accelerated through the propeller disk the velocity increases to a value Vp and the streamtube area decreases to a value Ap at the propeller disk equal to the circular area swept by the propeller blade. The pressure decreases as the air is accelerated until it reaches a value p, just upstream of the propeller disk. It is then assumed that the pressure jumps to a value po just downstream of the propeller, resulting in a thrust force equal to the pressure jump times the disk area, T= (pg — py) Ap. As the compressed air behind the propeller expands back to atmospheric pressure, p,, , the velocity increases to a value V3 and the streamtube area decreases to a value Ag to maintain the same mass flux. The analysis neglects the effects of wind and viscosity and the precise, but complicated, aerodynamics in the neighborhood of the propeller blades. The objective is to obtain a simplified analysis that will give the scaling of propeller efficiency with altitude, engine size, propeller diameter and airspeed. 131Streamtube Boundary, Propeller Streamtube ea, Disk Area, A,, Freestream "| Velocity, V = \Siostream | locity, Vg PQ Pressure p Distribution, ———~] Pn Py ™ Pressure Jump Across 1 Propeller Disk Figure 72. Schematic Diagram of an Idealized Propeller, PROPELLER EFFICIENCY The mass conservation equation — or continuity equation — states that the mass flow rate, mh, in the streamtube is constant. This is given by m = pAy Vy = PAZ V3 (39) The momentum equation relates the change in momentum, (V3 — V), to the thrust force (equal to the pressure jump, Pp — p. times the propeller disk area, Ap). T= (p2— D4) Ap th{Vg—V) = Ipg—py) Ap = T (40) Bernoulli's equation relates the static and dynamic pressure to the total pressure in incompressible flow. Since we are increasing the energy of the air when it crosses the propeller disk, the total pressure will increase as the air crosses the plane of the propeller. Therefore, upstream of the propeller, we have 1 py2 = 1 y2 oo + VE = prt ee (41) Poa + 5 P| Prt Pv Downstream of the propeller we have atpy2 1 py2 Po +1 py2 = a 42 2 +7 PVE = Pag t PVE (42) If we solve for pg — pq from (41) and (42) we have Pp —Py = Feng -v4y (43) 132so that the thrust force is given by 1 = plvg-V) (V3 + - T =ptVg— VI (V3 #V) Ap fash Comparing to (40), using (39) we find that A =t Wty), Vp > V3 ) (45) or Vg = Vp-V . (46) Substituting (46) into (44) we find that the available propeller thrust is T= 2pA, Vp (Vy-V) « (47) If it is assumed that no power is fost in the conversion of the torque at the shaft to the thrust at the pro- peller disk, then the shaft power is equal to the thrust times the velocity at the propeller disk, Vp. The usable power, however, is proportional to the thrust times freestream velocity, V. Therefore, the propulsive efficiency, 2 (which is equal to the thrust power divided by the shaft power), is proportional to the velocity ratio V/Vp qo Petwust | TV Vv (aa) Pshaft TVp Vp The engine power at the shaft is 2 Pshaft = 2PAp Vp (Vp—V) (49) where consistent units have been used. If we are careful with units and express the airspeed in mph the engine power in brake horsepower, use the density ratio, o= p/P g) , together with the value of the sea level density, and express the propeller disk area in terms of the propeller diameter, we can rewrite (49) as 3 (88) op? v3 122. (50) x BHP = — ].002377 ———_, 2 33000 {60/2} * 73 Therefore, for a given brake horsepower, propeller diameter, and altitude (or density ratio), we have an expression for the propeller efficiency as a function of the velocity. If we define a characteristic propeller velocity, Vprop, bY 32000 160)? |"? [ane]? Vprop = | 002377 (88)? eal cap cl p 41.86 133{as given in relation @ }, then the dimensionless velocity, V = V/Vprqp, is related to the propelier effi ciency by rearranging (50) to find @" 7 \F) 13 (52) Fen This expression is plotted in Figure 38 and forms the basis for the template used to find the idealized rate of climb in equation (38). The practical way that this is used is discussed in Part 1. If (52) is rearranged as a cubic equation for 7, we have 3 [naa ane —— % -(-Vv =o. 1 + (i ) (53) This cubic equation can be solved using Appendix K, to give TV/3 nw 2r 33. 1/3 =(— eyiray 5 o-JPef [i Ws rai -|ey + By? 27 When ¥ = 1 (or when V = Vprop): the ideal propeller efficiency is equal to 0.741. (54) In practice, the propeller efficiency will be smaller than this idealized value. This is especially true at the higher speeds where the propeller efficiency peaks and then decreases. This corresponds to spseds at which the local flow angle at the propeller blade decreases, Problems also appear in static conditions, wherein the propeller blades may stall (like a wing at too high an angle of attack). The actuator disk theory presented in this section is an idealization for a constant speed propeller. In order to analyze the performance for a real propeller, whether fixed or variable pitch, many more para- meters must be taken into account. These include the radial distribution of blade chord, pitch, airfoil section (thickness ratio, section lift/drag characteristics, etc.}, and the effects of local Mach number, blade interference, tip loss factors, and fuselage interference. For preliminary design purposes, the present theory is adequate. However, a more detailed perfor- mance analysis will require a closer look at propeller performance. (See the reference list for further ). readit 134ADVANCE RATIO, POWER COEFFICIENT AND NONDIMENSIONAL VELOCITY ‘The nondimensional advance ratio, J, is defined by the forward speed of the propeller, V (ft/sec], the propeller rotational speed, n (revolutions/second), and the propeller diameter, Lr (ft): Vv (55) nDp When the velocity is given in miles per hour and the rotational speed is given in RPM, ye BBY (RPM)D, (56) J is a measure of the helix angle that the propeller blade makes as it rotates through the air. Tagether with the local propeller blade angle, the advance ratio will give the local angle of attack of the propeller blade element. The dimensionless power coefficient, Cp, is related to the engine shaft power, P (ft-1b/sec); the free- stream density, p (slugs/ft? or lb sec/ft4); propeller rotational speed, n (revolutions/sec); and propeller diameter, Dy (ft), by Pp c-=—— (87) PY on8 DS ° If the engine power is expressed in horsepowers BHP (hp), the density in terms of the density ratio, ¢, and the sea level density ( Pg, = 0.002377 slugs/ft3) and rotational speed in RPM, 550 BHP _(60)3 anee77 JRpand po (58) S 0.002377 (RPM)* oe ‘68 or BHP = 500x100 — 3 (58a) 5.00x RPMS DS P Therefore, we can eliminate the rotational speed by forming the ratio, J/C1/3, and we find that > _— (69) t/3 » Therefore, we see that the characteristic propeller speed, Vprop: is intimately related to the more traditional propeller parameters J and C,. This also allows us to compare the simplified theory with actual propeller data by plotting 7 vs J/Cl/S". The optimized propeller data taken from Figure 3-20 (based on a Boeing Airplane Company General Propeller Chart) in Perkins and Hage (1949) is also plotted an Figure 38. This would correspond to an idealized variable pitch propeller that would constantly adjust itself so as to be optimally efficient. A fixed pitch propeller will have an efficiency that is lower at low and high forward speeds, At the design speed — whether a cruise prop or a climb prop — the efficiency will be as good as the variable pitch propeller, but at off-design conditions (a cruise prop at climb, or vice versa) the fixed pitch propeller will be less efficient. 135This brief introduction to propeller theory will allow us to make first estimates of the power available for engine-propeller combinations. For more detailed aspects of the propeller selection process concerning blade area distribution and pitch angle, the reader is advised to consult Weick (1930) and advanced books on propeller design or Wood (1963) and other detailed design books. STATIC THRUST An approximation to the static thrust can also be made by returning to Equations (47) and (49). If we take V 2s equal to zero, solve for Vp) from Equation (49) and substitute into Equation (49), we find that «W313 2/3 2/3 a =(— Dy P Ts @ Fee hate If we express the propeller diamator in feet and shaft power in HP, the idealized static thrust is 1/3 2/3 10.41 ¢" (D, BHP)” (Ib) . (61) We see that larger propellers with the same power input will generate larger static thrust. Equation (61) is given as part of relation (2 on the nomogram. The actual value of the static thrust will be less than this value, especially for a high pitched propeller, since propelier blades could be stalled at low forward speeds. The ideal thrust available from an engine-propeller combinetion can be found from the propeller efficiency and the dimensionless speed V = V/Vpropy 3. = €) Bens (62) v 1 If we substitute (54) into (62) we find (63) 136where T is defined as T/T., the thrust divided by the ideal static thrust. The idealized thrust ratio is plotted as a function of velocity ratio in Figure 73, together with a line representing a value equal to 85% of the idealized thrust. This is the value thet can probably be obtained by an optimally loaded propeller. Re- ference should be made to the advanced books mentioned earlier for methods of calculating the available thrust for a real propeller. The curve for thrust available is mainly useful for takeoff performance analysis, where it is important to be able to calculate the acceleration as a function of speed, The acceleration is the thrust minus the drag of the wheels) all divided by the mass of the airplan: {including rolling resistance of t mH, ° Dimensionless Thrust, T o 1 2 3 4 5 6 ayel8 iN, Jc, Dimensionless Airspeed, V= V/Vprop Figure 73. Idealized Thrust as a Function of Airspeed. 137PROPELLER TIP SPEED If the propelller diameter is made larger, we expect to obtain better efficiency and more static thrust. However, if the tip speed approaches the speed of sound, the losses associated with compressibility effects reduce the propeller efficiency considerably. It is therefore desirable to keep the propeller tip Mach number — My = Vsjp/2, where Vzip is the propeller tip speed in ft/sec and a is the speed of sound — lower than 0.8. This corresponds to a tip speed of 880 ft/sec if the speed of sound is taken to be 1100 ft/sec. At tip speeds above this, the efficiency drops off rapidly and the noise ievei rises dramaticaliy. The propelier rotational speed, APM, propeller diameter, D, (ft) and tip Mach number are related by mp RPM _ Dy RPM ~ (64) (60) (1100) 21,008 given in relation (8) on the nomogram, This relation is to be used as a check so that the propeller diameter and rotational speed result in a small enough propeller tip Mach number to minimize tip losses and noise. SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE RELATIONS Two conditions are of interest to designers of airplanes and sailplanes, The first is the condition which yields the minimum sink rate for sailplanes and the minimum power required for level flight for an aircraft, This occurs at a relative airspeed, Vining: The second is the condition for maximum tift-to-drag ratio for sailplanes and minimum crag for powered aircraft (corresponding to speed for maximum range if the power available is constant). This occurs at a relative sneedwhich is 3% or 1.32 times higher than Vining. The expressions for airspeed, lift coefficient, power required, sink rate, drag and lift-to-drag ratio are tabulated in Table 2 for the appropriate condition in terms of the weight, effective span, drag area, and effective chord. The characteristic propeller velocity and the idealized static thrust are also tabulated in terms of the propeller diameter and available shaft power. The formulas are gathered here for easy reference and represent the information contained in the Airplane Performance and Design Nomogram. 138ORCI OME OME MEOMEO MEO) © ® ® 9 Table 2, Summary of Airplane Performance Relations. oc, v2 a WIS= (ib/Ft*) {v{mph)] 3 Any; THP, = BHP ~ Ape max (hp) [Ap(tt2)] 146625 v, 11.29 Vibe (mph) V-viv ing = 11.29 —=—8— (mph); 2 . minS Yeas La 3/2 THP gin nana ajié SR the) (Wb); belt] Dmrin= 1-128 YAp tb) e THP, 1/4 WwW Rg min = 33,000 = 1294.0 ate (fom); " 3/2 VF : {L/D ax = 0-8862 VinaxLD = 1-316 Vining VA CL ming = 3.07 SO e BHP FG max = 33.000 == for); n= THP,/BHP V3 BHP. a Vprop = 41.8 lea (mph) [D,(f1; Y= VV prop 13 a Ty= 10.41 (02 BHP?" iy; Fett, MD, m= SM Pp P 21,008 We a.- 2,2 wey f 2) _ (N83 n Rg= tae =n =(2)°2 4 av 17 139This Page BlankAPPENDIX Abbreviations and Symbols What isa Nomogram? Discussion of Units Standard Atmosphere FORTRAN Computer Program for Performance Analysis Airplane Efficiency Factor, e; Graund Effect Drag Analysis Airfoil Selection Reynolds Number Equation of State Solution of Cubic Equation ‘Tabulated Performance Data for Various Aircraft How to Calculate Drag Area, Ap, and Airplane Efficiency Factor, e, from Flight Test Data 141 , a IO 6|e zThis Page Blank‘The following abbreviations are used for the units of length, area, volume, time, force, mass, speed,| power, pressure, temperature and density: ft sec mph radian RPM hp Wo/tt2 F R slug/ft? APPENDIX A. ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS Length in feet Length in statute miles (5280 ft) Area in square feet Volume in cubic feet Time in seconds Time in minutes Time in hours Force in pounds Pounctmass (mass which weighs 1 Ib in the Earth’s gravitational field) Fundamental unit of mass in English Engineering System of units (32.2 Ibjy; Ib sec2/ft) Speed in feet per minute (ft/min) Speed in miles per hour (mi/hr) Angular measure (2x radians = 360 degrees) Angular speed in revolutions per minute Power in horsepower (550 ft Ib/see; 33000 ft Ib/min) Pressure in pounds per square foot Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit Temperature in degrees Rankine (= degrees F + 460) Density in slugs per cubic feet 143The symbols used in the text and figures are listed in alphabetical order. The units of the defined quantity are given in parentheses in modified English Engineering units. an ACCELERATION = RT HERE RCL IS iw TS Local sound speed (ft/sec) wonene 16 = Bd FIMEE = Cp, S. drag area (2) = (64 © Ar) + ¢ .CO3 @ Sw) Drag area of individual aircraft components (ft2) [Appendix G] Projected frontal area (ft2) Propeller disk area (ft2) [Figure 72] = b%/S = b/c, aspect ratio Wing span (ft) = bY; effective span (ft) Brake horsepower (hp) = S/b average chord of the wing (ft) Drag coefficient (-) [Equation (4)] Drag coefficient based on frontal area {-) [Appendix G] Induced drag coefficient (-) [Equation (13)] Drag coefficient based on wetted area {-} [Appendix G] Drag coefficient based on the cheracteristic area S, for a particular aircraft component {-) [Appendix G) Zero-lift drag coefficient (-) = c/ Ve, effective chord (ft) Lift coefficient (-) [Equation (3)] Maximum lift coefficient (-) Lift coefficient at maximum lift-to-drag ratio [Equation (27)] Lift coefficient at minimum sink conditions (-) [Equations (18) and (19)] Power coefficient for engine-propeller combination (-) [Equation (58)]D Drag force {Ib} Dmnin Minimum drag (Ib) [Equation (30)] Doe Propeller diameter (Ft) e Airplane efficiency factor (-} [Appendix F] ey Wing efficiency factor (-} [Figure F.1] eAR Effective aspect ratio (-) 7 _ Pemex Wu | _ Yin f . pb TD. Vmax Performance rating parameter (-) h Density Altitude (ft) [Appendix D] J Advance ratio, 88 V/RPM D,, (-) [Equation (56)] L Lift force (Ib) uo Liftto-drag ratio (-) (L/D max Maximum lift-to-drag ratio [Equations (28) and (29)] in Mass flow rate through the propeller disk (slugs/sec) [Equation (39)] Mp = Vip/@. Propeller tip Mach number (-) [Equation (64)] Re Rate of climb (fpm) [Equation (38)] Remax Maximum rate of climb (fpm) R& = TRE maxr Ideal rate of climb (fpm) RE max = 33000 BHP/W Maximum ideal rate of climb (fpm) Rs =V sin 6g, sink rate (fp) Rg min Minimum sink rate (fpm) [Equation (20)] Rs Nondimensional sink rate (-) [Equation (25)] * Py Pressure just upstream of propeller disk (Ib/ft2) [Figure 72] Po Pressure just downstream of propeller disk {Ib/ft2) [Figure 72] *The circumflex (~) and tilde ( ~ ) represent nondimensional quantities. 145 = 14.69 —> PSL 2 in? N 1.013 x 108 — m2 Sea-level temperature Ts_ = 58.7°F = 15°C Sea-level density slug Ib sec? Pot = ovens 0.002377 — Table D.1, Standard Sea Level Atmospheric ConditionsAPPENDIX E, FORTRAN COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS In this appendix we present a sample computer program for the airplane performance based on the equations derived in Part 2 of thisbook. The standard atmosphere as well as the calculation of the Reynolds number are als included. The airplane efficiency, e, and the drag area have to be determined from analyses similar to those of Appendix F and Appendix G. The listing is self-explanatory when studied with the program input and output for the sample calculation of the performance for the T-18. Although the program is given in FORTRAN, the program can be easily converted to BASIC or other program languages. If there are questions about the programming, consult the equations themselves. The omogram will give results that are as reliable as the computer program, however, since the uncertainties in the calculation of the drag area, airplane efficiency factor, and maximum lift coefficient more than “ry the numerical inaccuracy of the nomogram. 159160 PROGRAN TO CALCULATE AIRPLANE PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS. INPUT PARAMETERS: eo ENPAT Sys} STALL SPEED WITHOUT FLAPS (MPH) syst “OLMAK MAXINUR LIFT COEFFICIENT 5 ChMAY SCLMAXF © MAXTHUM LIFT COEFFICIENT WITH FLAPS CL MAYE “W GROSS WEIGHT (LB) on) uy USEFUL Loam (LB) ew “RB WINS SPAN (FT) we 8 ve AIRPLANE EFFICIENCY FACTOR Aa \ BHP BRAKE HORSEPOWER OF ENGINE (HP) an, SHE ax ymax DESIRED MAXIMUM LEVEL FLIGHT SPEED (HPHY —4'2 Op “oP PROPELLER DIAMETER (FT) aoe RPM PROPELLER SPEED (RPK) ay RPA ALT ALTITUDE (FT) ae “HELY AIRSPEED INCREMENT FOR PERFORMANCE DaTA (HPH)” 5 PFE Yoo 410 Qe 430 440 pe oO 450 480 19D soe 510 520 $30 S40 S56 REAL LONAX, HP VALUES FOR INPUT PARAMETERS (THORP 1-18 SAMPLE CALCULATION) BHP=150. UMAX=180. BEGIN CALCULATION a WS=CLMAX#USISUSI/391 Wie Leaving Ysg=Sak (WS4391 /CLHAKF) STALL wi FLAPS SEU/US winG AREA aR=B4R/S Aspect Ratie C=B/AR crore BE=B#SGR (E) ERR EC TIE SPA . EAR=RESRE/S ErRBeT we. Aspect Ratio CE=9/BE EFFECTIVE Choad | J Ee eet Spon boa UBE=W/BE AB= .B#BHP#146625 /(uMAXees) DRAG Ares cag=an/s aR (AD) aR (AD2) UMINS=11.29450R CUBED /ADG THPH=0.039224AD44UBE+SGR (WRE) ROHINE2E000 sTHPH/Y+B8628BE/A02 S20 wwIN=W/LDKAX SGO CLMINS=3.0740N2/cE SFO RCSTAR=33000 4HHE/Y GOO DPF= DP S12 PROP Diam jw CHES O10 VTIP=RPHAUP Ar. 05236 620 HP=yTIP/1100 630 ypROP=11.96(BHP/DPF/DPF)4* (1/3 > GO 18=10.414( BHPSDEF Dee 2/3.) 1O@0 PRInT wv TAT PaaAn reese; paine FOlO fa 7 estalt SPEED VITHOUT FLAPS... VSL 4020 PMT HAXTHUR LIFT COEFFICIENT... SCGMAY _ (O3O FRM MMAXIMUM LIFT COEFF WITH FLAPS ,...7 3c CMAXL 1oue MiMT sEROSS VEIGHT. 2. ne se oe EW foSG FRM TNSEFUL LOAD D6 + 2 oe 2 oe « [060 PRIWTWING SPAN. 2. ee ee ee 40% Pawo r MMIRPLAHE EFFICIENCY FACTOR... - = 1O8G CAUwWT ENGINE BRAKE HORSEPOWER... . 2 Bee (O80 fewer “maxIHUN LEVEL SPEED. 2 2. . 2 YB) 1100 Paw? “PROPELLER DIAMETER. 2D agm VEO PRIPTPROPELLER RPM gy eve ee 8% 1126 Peer, Sg ee ALT 1130 PRINT Zoco fRINT — OUTPUT QUANTITIES: PRIM T Qolo FRET YUING LOADING. eee se ee 202 PLNT STALL SPEED VITH FLAPS.0.0° 6 2030 PROT YING AREAS 65 ey arte’ Re4O PludT “ASPECT RATIO. go ve ee HS 2050 Pure cHORD, A2e Roto (RT W EFFECTIVE ASPECT RATIO es 6.5 5 Rode pau? “EFFECTIVE SPAN ¢ ou. ve cca ue! 2O8O peur EFFECTIVE CHORD ei ese . RO%0 Pawo “EFFECTIVE SPAN LOADING... ey ys BlO0 PRT SM DRAG AREA os a ee ee NO FRMT. \TERO-LIFT DRAG COEFFICIENT y vss, ghanm mmm2 yO? 2120 foi ATRSPEED FOR HINEMUM SINK, OZ. 6. 2 'S VMING Bio fT HINTMUM POWER REQUIRED FOR LEVEL FLIGHT,."> 7 HP 7 2140 fem HINTHUM DRAB, 2 eo a ty PIN 2156 PAT SHINTHUM SINK RATE ye CE RS MIL QNoO PAW’ MAXIMUM LIFT-TO-DRAG RATION «6. SLD MAK QO faisT™ LIFT COEFFICIENT AT MINIMUM SINK. . 5 CL MINS AtSO jens v HAXIMUM IDEAL CLIMB RATE, (OCS o. IG ROSTAR RIGO PosT \~ REFERENCE PROP AIRSPEED FOR «74 EFF, | “SH PROP 2300 plots EALIZED STATIC THRUST. © Qo es LP TS 2AI& pairs PROPELLER TIP HACH NUMBER, ) . s 73 mf an 3000 pRin7 “AIRSPEED, SRATE-OF-CLIME! prop EFF, © SSINK RATE, “RegfwoLvs wo,” 161162 a er 1 q , 8 0 3010 PMT Sy nens, — “eecePn”, “ere, egirens. ‘Mes RHO YRC /mX BO20 tHaxeo go3O istaL 3040 #¢t -BLT148800. J). 265 BOsO 2-0, 00356#ALT 3066 3070 23 gos — RLIAK=0 SEO 5) “FI0O Fe=0 Zito 19 1 P/O, - B1AOveveuery dele 3/30 FY YSt BU TG aItO Ascceash 6f? 1Yo Re 3150 AUNANS BLO 258 VHS UH 3170 SHARSAIN SISO /VFROP IFO ORTCS + 2327 1A THES) 3200 sP22GH0VTHC(L FFE RATISCT2-1 DeATI D4 OS 3210 ESTARSETA-RS BARD KCHAX=ANAXTIRC |ROHAK) » 3230 REZ=RE 3246 I REK=O THEM B3Y6 3250 FEC=S1GHVECIIZA / KAU 3260 PRINT V,RE,ETA,RS,REC 320 IF I5taL = THEM 3300 B2SO IF IhAX = 1 THEM 3390 3240 GH 19 3/20 FI CONTINUE 3310 3320 3336 60 To 1120 3340 CONTINUE 3350 TWaK=1 3360 V=N-DELVSREZ/(REI-REN 2378 6 10 3140 3380 CONTINUE 3390 WsvEY sttee CHAXAMU/ 33000. /BHPH C1 =< 54/07) BY! PRINT el Eg, F920. thwe PERFORMANCE RATING PARAMETER... 0000 PRY ? FP B43O fame KINETIC ENERGY PARAMETER vv yo ee WHE” S WVBR 3440 ent (0 =3120) (21 =3140) C22 = F708) (23> 33740) (24> 3950)INPUT PARAMETERS: STAL( SFEEW WITHOUT FLAPS HAXIAUN LIFT COEFFICIENT WAXTAUN LIFT COEFF WITH FLAPS GROSS UELGHT USEFUL Lea UTHG SPAH AIRPLANE EFFICIENCY FACTOR ENGTHE BRAKE HORSEPOWER AAXINUM LEVEL FLIGHT SPEED PROPELLER DTANETER PROPELLER APH ALTITUDE OUTPUT auaBrETtEs: WING LoaDtHG STALL SPEED WITH FLAPS WING AREA ASPELT RAYIO CHORD EFFECTIVE ASPECT RATIO EFFECTIVE SPAN EFFECTIVE CHORD EFFECTIVE sPat LOADING DRAG AREA ZERO-LIFT ORAG COEFFICIENT AIRSPEED FOR HIWIAUN SIAK MINIMUM FOUER REQUIRED FOR LEVEL FLIGHT HINTHUA oRAG MINIAUN SINK RATE NAXINUM LIFT-TO-DRAG RATIO LIFT COEFFICIENT AT WINIHUK STHK MAXIMUM IDEAL CLINE RATE REFERENCE PROP AIRSPEED FOR .74 EFF IDEALIZED STATIC (RUST PROPELLER TIP AACH NUNDER AIRSPEED RATE~OF-CLIME PROP EFF viMPHD ROLFP RY ETA $7.0 1195.9 9.6278 70.0 4235.7 6.6818 0.0 1384.0 0.6824 70.0 1463.3 0.7187 1482.0 0.7404 1445.6 0.7607 1357.4 9.7768 1220.2 0.7895, 1034.4 0.7997 860.1 0.8078 517.0 O.B144 183.8 0.8197 6.5 0.8219 PERFORMANCE RATING PARAMETER KINETIC ENERGY PARAMETER vst PH cLmax. CLHAX 0 Lk uu LE B FT E BHF uF vax EH ne INCHES RPA RPM ALT FT ws LasFT2 80 aPH 8 FID ak c fi EAR ME 7 ET ce FT WBE Lave t2 aD FI2 cng vares rH ine ne aAIN LB RSH FPA Lomax CLNINS RCSTAR Fra PRA PH 15 ur We = 0.7911 SINK RATE RETMOLDS NO PS(FPH) «RE = RHO#VEC/HU 895.8 0.256407 882.4 0.268407 867.9 0. $06E+07 295.3 0.344E+07 961.3 0.382407 1064.7 0.420E+07 1205.7 0.459E+07 1385.2 0.497E402 1604.6 0.5356 407 1865.7 0.573407 2170.5 0. 612E+07 2821.3 0. B50E+02 2705.8 0, S68E+07 FP = 0.1209 WU2 = 0.45BE#O8 LB NPH2 163rr 1.0 Rev: 03/01/2010 PROGRAN: index.htm DESCRIPTION: www.neatinfo.com nain menu BY: Jan Zumwalt - www.2oomaviation.com COMMENTS: Practical calculation of aircraft performance Compiled and ran on the free heep: //wuw.smorgasbordet .com/pellesc/ Ver info: V1.0 usere will note elight variations in output compa version of this program due to different round off error in math se Hinelude #include yt that can be customized to a particular riptions. This section is user able: aircraft. See The book for */ const float altitude_ft // Defines the value of Pi as fixed const float alr density_stug 0.09. 17 \sealevel) const floar pl 3.44 // Defines the value of Pi as fixed const float vel_delta 200; // airepeed increment for each iteration Const float vel7stall clean mph = 67.00; // We const float 1.537 const float flap 2 Genet float gross Ib const float useful _load_1b const float const flost const float e of Pi as fixed const Eloat prop dia ft wing_span_ft prop_max_rpm user editable custom variables 1_max_clean * pow(vel_stall_elean_mpn,2) / 391; // sqrt (ving_load_lb ft * 391 /~cl_max flap) i/ VSO " = gross_lb 7 wing load_lb ft; WH wing aspect pow(wing_span_ft,2) 7 wing_area_ft; " wing_chord_ft = wing_span_ft / wing_aspect i wing_span_ft * sqrt (plane_efficiancy) ; " ~ Wing area_ft / wing_epan_effective, wing load éfiective = lb 7 wing_span_effective; i drag_area_ft = ‘vel_ma2c_mph, 3) 7 i “ cd_drag = drag_area_ft / wing area ft WW vel_sink_min_ft oad_effective) / sqrt(sqrt [drag_area ti); // float pwe_min_req_hp = 09922 * sqrt( sqrt (drag_area_ft)) * wing_load effective + sqrt (wing _load_effective); // float Tate_sink_min_ft float 14_max 33000 * pwr_min_ze: ba62 * wing_spal q_hp / gross_1b; i effective / Sqrt(drag_area_ftl; //float érag_min float ¢l_min_sink = float rate_climb_ideal float Eloat Float p_tip_mach pro printf ("\n\t wing_load_lb_ fe printf ("\n\t vel_stall_flaps_mph printf ("\n\t wing_area_ft printi("\n\t wing_aspect printé("\n\t wing_chord_ft printf (*\n\t wing span_effectLve print£("\n\t wing chord effective (*\n\t wing load_effective print printf ("\n\t drag_area_ft printé("\n\t cd_drag print#("\n\t vel_sink_min_ft printf ("\n\t pwr_min_req_hp printi ("\n\t rate_sink_min_ft printé(*\n\t 1d_max printé("\n\t drag_min print ("\n\t ¢1_min_sink printé("\n\t rate_climb ideal printé("\n\t prop tip print? ("\n\t prop_vel_ref printf(*\n\t static thr printz("\n\n") 5 princé("\n\t Te print£(*\n\t airspeed vimph) \t printé ("\n\t printé ("\n\t on \t climb rate re(fpm) \c gross_lb / 14_max; 3.07 # sqrt (dbag_area_ft) / 23000 * bhp / aross_lb; Prop_max_rpm + prop dia 41.9°* pow (bap / pow (pr 10.41 * pow(bhp * prop éi wing_chord_ef fective; * .08236 / 1100; » dia_ft,2),.33333); £t,.66666) ; wing_load_ib_ft); 3.02£", 3.026", s.o2t", 7 o2f", wing_aspect) ; oat", wing_chord_s 2", wing span_ee. purimin, = 8.026", o2f", rate_sinl » Ld_max) ; o2é", drag_min); o2f”, ¢l_min_sink) ; ; rate climb prep tip_ma prop_vel_ret); static_thrust_ideal); oat", 3.026", $028", num") 5 \t re=rhotyte/mu") ; \e prop eff \c sink eta \n rs (fom) 1 - altitude_te / 145800,4.265); 518.7 - 0.00356 * altitude_ft; 23923; o vel_stal1_clean_mph; while (re > 0) { vh v_/ vel_sink_min_ft; rsh 228 * (pow(vh,4) 4 3) / vh; rs. rsh * rate_sink_min_ft; ve v / prop _vel_ref; 2 sqrt(1 + .23271 * pow(vt,3)); eta 92264 * ve * (pow( 1 + t2,t1) - pow(t2 - 1 * 85; re rate_climb_ideal * eta - rs;re; sig * v * wing_ch break; fmax (re, remax) 5 wma = fmax(v,vmax) 7 ft * 9324 / rmu; printe("\a\e #.02 Sof \t ¥.02f \t \e .0f" eta, rs, v + vel delta * re2 / (x02 - rel); 3 ip remax * us w2 = gross_lb + pow(y,2); printf("\n\n\t performance parameter......... fp s.oare printf("\n\t kinetic energy parameter wea o2t" printé("\n\c mescimum x climb. remax = $.02£", remax ; printf ("\n\t max 02£° ymax); printé("\n\t uacful load lb = ¢.028" printf ("\n\n\e + “7 printé(*\n\t | ank you for using In: printf ("\n\e | printé("\n\e + printf ("\n\n\t Prese key to exit... "17 while ((getchar()) != "\n"); print£("\n") ; I OUTPUT. airspeed climb rate prop eff sink rate rennolds num vimph) re (Epa) eta rs (£pm) vic /mu 67.0 0.63 296.1 2561021 68.0 0.63 91.1 2599255. 63.0 Led 986.6 2637480 70.0 0.64 082.6 2675704 no °. 79.1 2 72.0 °. 876.1 2752153 170.0 183.4 0.82 2521.4 e4ga13e 471.0 147.3 0.82 2559.0 6536362 172.0 110.7 0.82 2597.2 6574587 173.0 73.5 0.82 2635.9 6612811 174.0 35.8 0.82 2675.0 6651035 performance paramet 0.1206 Kinetic energy paranet: 45937500.00 maximum rate of clisb. 1482.42 maximum speed. 174.00 useful Load 600.00 | Taank you for using | | Air-Performance 1.0 |APPENDIX F. AIRPLANE EFFICIENCY FACTOR, e; GROUND EFFECT The airplane efficiency factor, e, is used to modify Prandtl’s lifting line theory for wings so that the theory can be used for performance calculations for complete airplanes. This is done by multiplying the actual aspect ratio of the airplane wing, AR, by the factor “e'” to obtain an effective aspect ratio, eAR, that is then used with the theory (see Part 2). Agreement of results is good as long as the airplane efficiency factor is so chosen that the lift-dependent part of the drag acts as it it were the induced drag of an airfoil with an effective aspect ratio eAR. If we compare the drag of the ideal airplane with effective aspect ratio eAR to the drag of the airplane with each of the components added to form the total drag, we will see how to calculate the drag area and the airplane efficiency factor. First, for comparison, we write the term CpS, where Cp is the drag coetti- cient (including induced drag) and $ is wing area. c,2. LU ep8= o0+= Js (F.41) The term Cp 08 is defined as the drag area, Ap. If we add together the contributions to the drag of the airplane for éach component, we have cross-sectional area of fuselage 2 CpS= Cp wingSt! + Kying®L2) + Cp, fuseStusel™ + Ktuse Meg oS parasite drag of the wing Parasite drag of angle of attack the fuselage of fuselage (F.2) L te op gS, + — (1+8)S Da Sr yan TOS Parasite drag induced drag of other parts of airfoil where the term Kyying gives the change in the parasite drag versus lift coefficient as determined from the airfoil section data (see Appendix H), The angular-dependent drag coefficient for the fuselage is referred to the cross-sectional area of the fuselage, Sjug- The term Cp, S; is meant to represent the component drag of the other parts of the airplane, such as the drag of struts, landing gear, antennas, tail surfaces, etc. And, the induced drag of the airfoil includes the theoretical correction of the planform in the term (1 + 6). For an elliptical planform Prandttls lifting line theory tells us that 6 will be equal to zero. If we compare the two expressions (F.1) and (F.2) at zero lift conditions (a= 0, C= O). we see that the drag area is given by FS) AD = Cp,wing S + Cp fuse Stuse * Cp,2 Se - (F.5) 165This expression is discussed in Appendix G where the drag area is estimated by adding the drag areas for the airplane components, To compare the liftdependent parts of the two expressions, we first need to determine the lift-stope with corrections for finite aspect ratios. The change with aspect ratio of the slope of the curve of the fift coefficient, C, , versus angle-of-attack, a, is given by Wood (1963), dc, AR —- orto (1/deg). (F.6) dageg AR+ 3 ‘Therefore, if we take a linear approximation for the variation of lift coefficient dy CL =——= egeg (F.7) dageg "9 we can solve for deg and substitute into (F,2) and equate the C2 dependent parts with the induced drag part of (F.1): 1 (AR +3)? Stuse e~ (145) + TAR CO wingXwing + ™Cp,iuse

You might also like

• Smith Hubert The Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics

  

  100% (6)

  Smith Hubert The Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics

  244 pages
• Design of Light Aircraft

  

  50% (2)

  Design of Light Aircraft

  216 pages
• (1983) Composite Aircraft Design

  

  95% (19)

  (1983) Composite Aircraft Design

  130 pages
• Modern Aircraft Design by Martin Hollman

  

  95% (20)

  Modern Aircraft Design by Martin Hollman

  238 pages
• MCHSAC-1 Composite Construction

  

  100% (3)

  MCHSAC-1 Composite Construction

  26 pages
• GA Airfoils PDF

  

  100% (7)

  GA Airfoils PDF

  142 pages
• Sailplane Design

  

  0% (1)

  Sailplane Design

  35 pages
• Roskam Airplane Design PDF - Google Search PDF

  

  0% (1)

  Roskam Airplane Design PDF - Google Search PDF

  3 pages
• Donald R. Crawford - A Practical Guide To Airplane Performance and Design-Crawford Aviation, Torrance, CA. (1979)

  

  No ratings yet

  Donald R. Crawford - A Practical Guide To Airplane Performance and Design-Crawford Aviation, Torrance, CA. (1979)

  250 pages
• Pega Stol Wing Kit Wing Stress Analysis

  

  100% (2)

  Pega Stol Wing Kit Wing Stress Analysis

  39 pages
• Gear Loads

  

  No ratings yet

  Gear Loads

  8 pages
• Roncz Design Articles PDF

  

  100% (1)

  Roncz Design Articles PDF

  64 pages
• Long-EZ POH

  

  100% (4)

  Long-EZ POH

  72 pages
• Calculation of Wing Loads PDF

  

  100% (1)

  Calculation of Wing Loads PDF

  55 pages
• Homebuilt Aircraft Drag Reduction

  

  100% (2)

  Homebuilt Aircraft Drag Reduction

  15 pages
• Basic Glider Criteria Handbook

  

  100% (1)

  Basic Glider Criteria Handbook

  157 pages
• App c4 Design of Sailplanes

  

  No ratings yet

  App c4 Design of Sailplanes

  32 pages
• Minimizing Fuselage Drag

  

  100% (2)

  Minimizing Fuselage Drag

  7 pages
• The Gyroplane Its Principles and Its Possibilities by Louis Breguet

  

  100% (1)

  The Gyroplane Its Principles and Its Possibilities by Louis Breguet

  56 pages
• Fuselage Sections

  

  No ratings yet

  Fuselage Sections

  1 page
• Rameez - Ducted Fans Vs Propellers

  

  No ratings yet

  Rameez - Ducted Fans Vs Propellers

  2 pages
• Ultra Baby Homebuilt Airplane Plans PDF

  

  100% (2)

  Ultra Baby Homebuilt Airplane Plans PDF

  79 pages
• Analysis of The Cricri MC 15

  

  100% (1)

  Analysis of The Cricri MC 15

  6 pages
• Experimental Homebuilt Aircraft Safety Study

  

  100% (1)

  Experimental Homebuilt Aircraft Safety Study

  169 pages
• Aircraft Flight Testing & Design

  

  No ratings yet

  Aircraft Flight Testing & Design

  95 pages
• Light Airplane Design Pazmany

  

  No ratings yet

  Light Airplane Design Pazmany

  88 pages
• Basic Aircraft Design Rules

  

  100% (3)

  Basic Aircraft Design Rules

  8 pages
• Preliminary Design Approach of The Wing Box

  

  No ratings yet

  Preliminary Design Approach of The Wing Box

  3 pages
• EAA Prop Selection

  

  100% (1)

  EAA Prop Selection

  56 pages
• Ultra Light Aircraft Design Philosopy

  

  100% (4)

  Ultra Light Aircraft Design Philosopy

  44 pages
• Flutter - Reducing The Risk

  

  No ratings yet

  Flutter - Reducing The Risk

  9 pages
• Efficient Light Aircraft Design - Gliding

  

  100% (2)

  Efficient Light Aircraft Design - Gliding

  43 pages
• Development of The Microlift Glider: OSTIV Sailplane Development Panel

  

  No ratings yet

  Development of The Microlift Glider: OSTIV Sailplane Development Panel

  7 pages
• Drag Reduction Possibilities

  

  No ratings yet

  Drag Reduction Possibilities

  5 pages
• Landing Gear Design

  

  83% (6)

  Landing Gear Design

  22 pages
• Hiller Rotor Cycle Info

  

  100% (1)

  Hiller Rotor Cycle Info

  17 pages
• Design of A Twin Engine Propeller Aircraft

  

  No ratings yet

  Design of A Twin Engine Propeller Aircraft

  16 pages
• Wing Box Design

  

  No ratings yet

  Wing Box Design

  7 pages
• Pitch Stability

  

  No ratings yet

  Pitch Stability

  6 pages
• Propeller Design Workshop

  

  No ratings yet

  Propeller Design Workshop

  36 pages
• 2010sep Sailplane Builder

  

  100% (1)

  2010sep Sailplane Builder

  12 pages
• How To Design and Build Your Own Airplane: Y'.' 3. Has The Best Possible Performance For The Power Available

  

  100% (1)

  How To Design and Build Your Own Airplane: Y'.' 3. Has The Best Possible Performance For The Power Available

  2 pages
• Human Powered Flight

  

  No ratings yet

  Human Powered Flight

  25 pages
• Airplane Performance & Design

  

  100% (18)

  Airplane Performance & Design

  250 pages
• Ultra and Very Light Ducted Fan Propulsion

  

  100% (2)

  Ultra and Very Light Ducted Fan Propulsion

  10 pages
• Autogyro Monoplaza

  

  No ratings yet

  Autogyro Monoplaza

  27 pages
• 7 Wing Section1

  

  100% (1)

  7 Wing Section1

  10 pages
• The Design Development and Testing of A PDF

  

  No ratings yet

  The Design Development and Testing of A PDF

  109 pages
• Midwest Production Plane Article 2013

  

  100% (1)

  Midwest Production Plane Article 2013

  9 pages
• Aircraft Engine Operating Guide

  

  0% (1)

  Aircraft Engine Operating Guide

  217 pages
• Burt Rutan Aircraft 3 - 1

  

  100% (2)

  Burt Rutan Aircraft 3 - 1

  14 pages
• Adp Fighter Aircraft

  

  No ratings yet

  Adp Fighter Aircraft

  35 pages
• Enhancing Aerodynamic Performance Estimate in Small Aircraft Development Using Object-Oriented Technique

  

  No ratings yet

  Enhancing Aerodynamic Performance Estimate in Small Aircraft Development Using Object-Oriented Technique

  52 pages
• Chapter 1

  

  No ratings yet

  Chapter 1

  84 pages
• Aircraft Conceptual Design Synthesis by Howe.D PDF

  

  100% (7)

  Aircraft Conceptual Design Synthesis by Howe.D PDF

  475 pages
• Aircraft Flight

  

  No ratings yet

  Aircraft Flight

  50 pages
• Aircraft Design Project - I Fighter Jets

  

  100% (2)

  Aircraft Design Project - I Fighter Jets

  62 pages
• ME3465- Final Exam- Fall 2023

  

  No ratings yet

  ME3465- Final Exam- Fall 2023

  3 pages
• Aircraft Conceptual Design Synthesis

  

  100% (1)

  Aircraft Conceptual Design Synthesis

  474 pages
• Aircraft Design Project On Fighter Aircraft Sukhoi

  

  No ratings yet

  Aircraft Design Project On Fighter Aircraft Sukhoi

  53 pages
• Proadvice 3 - Aileron Sizing

  

  100% (1)

  Proadvice 3 - Aileron Sizing

  12 pages
• EGEE 448: Digital Systems Design With FPGA Summer 2019

  

  No ratings yet

  EGEE 448: Digital Systems Design With FPGA Summer 2019

  15 pages
• Fluid PWR PDF

  

  No ratings yet

  Fluid PWR PDF

  54 pages
• Design and Selection of Chain Conveyor

  

  100% (1)

  Design and Selection of Chain Conveyor

  30 pages
• Human Powered Aircraft Report

  

  No ratings yet

  Human Powered Aircraft Report

  83 pages
• Acoustic Treatment - Noise Control: MEBS6008 Environmental Services II

  

  No ratings yet

  Acoustic Treatment - Noise Control: MEBS6008 Environmental Services II

  64 pages
• ST 21

  

  No ratings yet

  ST 21

  9 pages
• Is - 12778 - 2004

  

  100% (1)

  Is - 12778 - 2004

  17 pages
• Silecner

  

  No ratings yet

  Silecner

  17 pages
• Vent Sys E-06

  

  No ratings yet

  Vent Sys E-06

  28 pages
• Flow Control Valves Pressure Compensated Cartridge Type

  

  No ratings yet

  Flow Control Valves Pressure Compensated Cartridge Type

  6 pages
• Overall Shape and Dimensions: General

  

  No ratings yet

  Overall Shape and Dimensions: General

  40 pages
• 1.7 - Is 12779

  

  No ratings yet

  1.7 - Is 12779

  6 pages
• Fan Parameter

  

  No ratings yet

  Fan Parameter

  40 pages