Design Of Structural Components - Wing, Fuselage and Tail

• Mainplane: Airfoil cross-section shape, taper ratio selection,

sweep angle selection, wing drag estimation.
Spread sheet for wing design.
• Fuselage: Volume consideration, quantitative shapes, air inlets,
wing attachments; Aerodynamic considerations and drag
estimation. Spread sheets.
• Tail arrangements: Horizontal and vertical tail sizing.
Tail planform
shapes. Airfoil
selection type. Tail
placement.
Spread sheets for tail design
Main Wing Design
1. Introduction: Airfoil Geometry:
• Wing is the main lifting surface of the aircraft. conceptual design of the aircraft, after selecting
•Wing design is the next logical step in the the weight and the wing-loading that match the
 mission requirements.
• The design of the wing consists of selecting:
i) the airfoil cross-section,
ii) the average (mean) chord length,
iii) the maximum thickness-to-chord ratio,
iv) the aspect ratio,
v) the taper ratio, and
vi) the sweep angle which is defined for the
leading edge (LE) as well as the trailing edge
(TE)
•Another part of the wing design involves Wing Geometry:
enhanced lift devices such as leading and
trailing edge flaps.
• Experimental data is used for the selection of
the airfoil cross-section shape.
• The ultimate “goals” for the wing design
are based on the mission requirements.
•In some cases, these goals are in conflict and will
require some compromise.
 Main Wing Design (contd)
2. Airfoil Cross-Section Shape: • Effect of cmax on
Cfor a variety of
t • The shape of
the wing l

cross-section m
determines a

the pressure 2-D airfoil sections

distribution on is
the upper and shown in the Fig.
lower surfaces • It can be noted
of the wing. that
• The pressure
distribution
integrated
around the
w Clmax
i
n
g
is
t
h
e
li
ft
 Main Wing Design (contd)
o •A v 2-D wing n
e section is d
• The lift
force
t p r shown in i
c , the l s Fig. c
normalize decre o u• L a
d by the ma ase in
t si t
wing area 
x e
and o n
dynamic 14 A
e s
f o
pressure is % a
• Bey l A t
the lift r
ond i h
coefficient the f a
(Cl ) opti f a
o t
mu t i
r
mt r
c c f
max af o
•N 2-D 3 is caused by a o o
o lift - flow e si r
ta coe D separation f yl
ti that occurs a
fft; li f m
o CL ft i mt 2
n: c c eh -
Cl o i t e D
e e r o
f n i r (
ft t cy i
. n
i
 Main Wing Design (contd)
f Cl   d t foil • From a
i o h (“trailing- structural
n w i edge point of
i n c separation) . view, there
t s k • Such flow is a benefit
e t n separations to having
r e are more thicker wing
A e s cross-
R likely to
a s occur sections (t).
) m at lower • A small
a p chord increase in the
i o o Reynolds thickness in
r f i numbers. the wing has
f n d a
o t t C/ large
i h l 2 bene
l e o d fit
n  towa
s m rd
e a t incre
c x h asing
t i e the
i m bendi
o u a ng
n m i stiffn
, r ess.
 Main Wing Design (contd)
• At C g ec • The maximum weight of the
•A lift coefficient
stal l ma wing can be
s is also
 em reduced by
l a affected by
l a increasing
Ao C c
A
l r ed the be W w
0.5
max

( s e me maximum  t ca 
s e thickness-to- m cus
), nl
u chord ratio ax e, 
l ti t m t
t sg a
h x
,
i t
t Airfoil •H t
ne Cross-
h is
r Section
e t, t
Shape:
ha (contd) o
l
en ri
o
a wd c
d i t al
nh v
c al
ge
a u
r c e
r as s
y nt o
i r
bu f
n
 Main Wing Design (contd)
M es.
cmax of as function des •T s s
aircraft a ign h e u
c e
• In c also of cruise W c p
cr  incre Mach f
 t e
a i r
e m ases number is m
t ax i o s
a ax the shown in the
•T o r n o
si inter Fig.
h n f s n
n nal
th o i
g e
e i o c
t cri l n
volume of • It can be e tic nu
the wing and noted ) for a aircraft tend to
f al mb be
more fuel variety
can be f M er ( of 2-D
carried ac M airfoil
e crit
i cmax c
h
ical

• Historica decreases as t sections is i

l data shown in the t
show Fig. i
that the o c
•T
weight f h a
of fuel e l
carrie , increases 
d in as: c M
the t r a
main
 Main Wing Design (contd)
c n a r nsonic or thinner and
h f m supersonic. have
d t ay  This would result a smaller nose
in an increase of
n e ha the base drag, radius.
w ve C D0 .
u c i • The purpose is
co  The cruise M ach
m r t number at which to minimize the
nd
b e h iti the local Mach base and wave
e a on number over the
s wing is supersonic drag
r s s
u is called the components.
e ov
f b critical
s er • In addition,
o s
th the critical
o
r w e Mach
n
i wi number for
i
a t ng
c
w
the wing is
w h he designed to
c
i t cmax r re be different
n u th from that of
g • Critical Mach i e the other
No. s M components
s A e ac (horizontal
n M h
e and vertical
ac nu
c a m tail sections
t h
i be and fuselage)
nu
i r m r so that drag
o c be is buildup that
r tra
 Main Wing Design (contd)
occurs compone
near nts at the
Mach 1 same
does not free-
simultan stream
eously Mach
occur for number.
all the
M Mcritical
ac
h
nu
m
be
r,
oil Cross-Section Shape: (contd) • Camber is a parameter corresponding to
effect of camber on Cl vs and Cd vs Clis shown in the Figs.
a curving of the airfoil section.
• It can be noted from the plot Cl vs that
of 
without camber (solid line), a wing section
produces zero lift at zero AoA.
• It can also be noted from Cd vs Cl plot, that
the
the base drag is a minimum when AoA is zero.
• Many airfoil types have a noticeable
depression near the minimum drag coefficient.
This depression is referred to as the “drag
bucket”.
• The effect of positive camber is to shift the AoA
for zero lift ( 0 ) to negative values.
L
• As shown in the bottom figure, positive camber
shifts the value of the lift coefficient for
minimum drag (drag bucket) from zero to
positive values.
• This is important for in the design of aircraft for
efficient cruise.
Airfoil Shape Selection: (contd) • The choice of the airfoil section type that is most
i) At cruise conditions, the required lift equals the suitable for a new design depends on the
weight: general type of the aircraft.
C  W
L cruise  q  • For example, smaller low sub-sonic speed
S
 cruise M cruise  aircraft would likely to use the
0.4
•For long-range aircraft, the weight of the aircraft NACA 5-digit series with a thickness-to-chord
can change significantly from the start of the ratio near the optimum 14%.
cruise to the end of cruise.
• Assuming that the cruise altitude and speed
remain the same, this means that the
required lift coefficient changes during cruise.
• The average of the required lift coefficient during
cruise is referred to as the “design CL “.
ii) In order to have the maximum range during
cruise, the drag needs to be a minimum.
• The airfoil shape is then selected based on
two criteria:
•High sub-sonic speed aircraft Mcruise  0.8 , such
1)that it can provide the “design C L “ in level
flight, and as commercial or business jets, use the NACA
supercritical (SC) airfoils.
2) that the range of CL values from the start of • A typical super critical airfoil is shown in the Fig.
cruise to end of cruise is within the “drag
bucket”.
Airfoil Shape Selection: (contd)

•This super critical airfoil was developed to give

higher critical Mach numbers compared to
other shapes with comparable thickness-to-
chord (t/c) ratio.
• This airfoil is used on the Boeing C-17 and 777,
and the Airbus A-330/340.
•Supersonic military aircraft use the NACA Series 6
airfoils since they have good characteristics at
both subsonic and supersonic Mach numbers.
•In order to reduce wave drag in supersonic flight,
the (t/c) ratio should be relatively small, of the
order of 4%.
•Following the selection of the airfoil section
shape, the conversion from the 2-D lift
coefficient, Cl , to the 3-D lift coefficient, C L
depends on the wing planform design.
(wing span, taper ratio, sweep angle)
3. Wing Taper Ratio Selection:
• The wing taper ratio is defined as: cr ct
c
  t tipchord
cr root
chord
• Taper ratio should be selected such that the
amount of lift-induced drag is minimum.
•The ‘lifting line theory’ indicates that for an
unswept and untwisted wing, an ellipse-
shaped wing planform gives the minimum
drag.
• An ellipse-shaped wing planform gives an elliptic
spanwise (y) variation in lift.
• This lift profile can be approximated reasonably
well with a more simply constructed
trapezoidal wing with a taper ratio of 0.4, as
shown in Fig.
• The taper ratio for a trapezoidal wing, which
Taper Ratio

gives the minimum lift-induced drag, is slightly

dependent on the aspect ratio and more
significantly dependent on the wing sweep
angle. Wing sweep angle
4. Wing Sweep Angle Selection:
Fig. 1
•Wing sweep is defined as the angle between a
line perpendicular to the aircraft centerline
and
a line parallel to the leading edge   LE  .
•The primary reason for adding a sweep angle
to a wing is to increase its section critical
Mach number, as shown in Fig. 1.
•Sweep reduces the effective Mach number at the
leading edge as

•The critical Mach number in this case is increased Fig. 2

as

where m is a function of the lift coefficient,C L .

• Disadvantages of adding sweep:
i) Lowers the lift through a lower effective
dynamic pressure, according to
ii) Increases the wing weight, according to
The dotted line shows the minimum sweep angle for the LE to be inside the Mach c

iii) Degrades take-off and landing characteristics

because enhanced lift devises are less effective.
• Fig. 2 shows the historic trend for sweep angle
as a function of the cruise Mach number.
In aerodynamics, the critical Mach umber (Mcr or M* ) of an aircraft is the
lowest Mach number at which the airflow over some point of the aircraft
reaches the speed of sound, but does not exceed it. At the lower critical
Mach number, airflow around the entire aircraft is subsonic.
 Main Wing Design (contd)
Wing Sweep Angle Selection - Summary:
1. For aircraft with cruise Mach number below 0.4
the wings are designed without sweep.
2. For transonic cruise numbers, sweep angles
of approximately 30 degrees are used.
3. With cruise Mach numbers in the range 1.0 - 2.4,
the sweep angles are close to the angle of the
Mach line.
4. At Mach numbers greater than 2.4, the sweep
angles are less than needed to have subsonic
flow at the wing LE.
This is primarily the result of the poor subsonic
flight characteristics and the excessive structure
weight that comes from having excessively
large wing sweep.
5) 3-D Lift Coefficient:
• Experimental airfoil data provide 2-D
section coefficients.
•For aircraft design, they need to be converted to
3-D coefficients.
• The effect of finite wing span on the 2-D lift
coefficient,Cl , is to reduce the slope dCl d
• This is illustrated in the Fig. for a cambered airfoil
•The reduction in the slope amounts to a
clockwise rotation of the Cl versus  line about
•Using the slope, 3-D lift coefficient versus AoA is
the 0 L point.
given by,
•The result is that at the same AoA, the lift
generated by the 3-D wing will be less than that where
based the 2-D lift coefficient.
•For subsonic Mach numbers, the slope of the 3-D • Note:  0L = 0 for uncambered airfoil, and it
lift coefficient is given as, is negative for a positive cambered airfoil.
• If the design 2-D lift coefficient, Cl , is provided at zero
[ <1.0 for AoA, then the design 3-D coefficient, C L , requires
subsonic placing the airfoil at a slight positive AoA
flows ] • Otherwise, the design process requires selecting an
airfoil section which provides a higher C l such that the
where, and lower 3-D coefficient matches the CL at zero AoA.
design
6. WING DRAG ESTIMATION BASE DRAG ESTIMATION
• The drag coefficient for the wing corresponds to • The base drag , is the ‘zer0-lift’
coefficient,CD0
the base drag, the lift-induced drag, and any drag coefficient that corresponds to viscous skin
additional drag that results from viscous losses friction and flow separations.
such as produced by flow separations. • In the best case, CD0  Cd0 which is the minimum
where drag coefficient in the drag bucket for the 2-D
wing section.
• In practice, CD0  C as a result of flow
d
0
cruise, then and the drag
coefficient simplifies to:

and, ‘e’ is a wing efficieny factor that accounts

for taper ratio and fuselage effects on the wing,
and ‘d/b’ is the ratio of the fuselage diameter to
wing span ratio.
• The value k’ is dependent on the LE radius and
taper ratio and has values in the range

•If the airfoil section was chosen so that the drag

bucket encompasses the range throughout
 disturbances caused by the wing attachments to
the fuselage, wing-mounted external store
such as fuel tanks, and surface
imperfections such as hinge gaps at
movable surfaces.
• The base drag coefficient, CD0 , is given by:

where

C f = Viscous drag coefficient (skin friction coeff)

= Form factor = Interference factor ,
Swet = Wetted surface area of the wing
S = Wing area
BASE DRAG ESTIMATION (contd)  The Interference Factor is intended to
 The wetted surface area Swet is the area of the estimate the increase in base drag due to
wing exposed to outside air. interference effects caused by the fuselage or
•For infinitely thin wing sections, the wetted area wing attachments.
would be twice the wing planform area (S) •These include nacelles or external stores
• Therefore, as an approximation: mounted on n or near the wing, and filleted
For thin airfoils wing attachments.

For thicker airfoils

 The Skin Friction Coefficient ( C ) is given by
f

• Once CL and CD are determined, the lift-to-drag

is given by L CL

 The Form Factor ( ) is given by: D CD

x cm location of maximum thickness point

 7. Wing Planform Geometric Relations for
Trapezoidal Shape :
Wing span = , S = Wing area

Aspect ratio =

Root chord = , Taper ratio=

Tip chord =

Mean Aerodynamic Chord (mac)

The normalized spanwise location of the ‘mac’

from the center span of the wing

Starting with the LE sweep angle, the sweep angle at any ( x/c ) location on the wing
8. Spreadsheet for Wing Design
• A sample spreadsheet for wing design for the
Super Sonic Business Jet (SSBJ) is shown in Fig.
•In the spreadsheet the input parameters are
placed at two areas marked, “Design Parameters”
and “Airfoil Data”. The design calculations and plots are done as shown in the spreads
• The important airfoil data that are required for
wing design calculations are:
Case Study: SSBJ Wing Design

• The other design parameters and the Flight

Condition data include:
 Fuselage Design
• Th
1. Introduction
e
fus
ela
ge
ha
sa
nu
mb
er
of
fun Aero Spacelines B-377PG “Pregnant Guppy”
cti
on
s
tha
t
var
y
de
pe
ndi
ng
on
the
typ
e •T
h
a e
n s
d e
m i
i n
s cl
s u
i d
o e
n a
c
o c
f o
m
t m
h o
e d
a
a
ti
i
n
r
g
c
t
r
h
a
e
f
c
t
r Othe
e r
w cons
, ider
atio
p ns
a are
s fuel
s stor
e age,
n the
g struc
e ture
r for
s wing
, attac
b hme
a nts,
g and
g acco
a mm
g oda
e tions
for
o retra
r ctabl
e
o
 l era
a tio
n ns
d in
i the
n des
g ign
of
g the
e fus
a ela
r ge
. are
•T :
h i) Volume considerations,
e ii) Aerodynamic considerations, and
iii) Drag estimation.
m • B-377PG “Pregnant Guppy”
a •Was
i designe
n d to
c transpo
o rt
n outsize
s d cargo
i for the
d NASA
 A ela
p ge
o wa
l s
l mo
o re
tha
P n
r 20
o fee
g t in
r dia
a me
m ter
. to
•T acc
h om
e mo
dat
u e
p por
p tio
e ns
r of
the
f
Sat
u
urn
s
V

r
o
c
k
e
t
.
 Fuselage Design (contd)
2. Volume Considerations
2.1 Passenger/Cargo Requirements
• The size and shape of subsonic commercial
aircraft are generally determined by the
number of passengers, seating arrangements
and cargo requirements.
• Typical dimensions for the passenger
compartments are shown in Table.
•These dimensions are generally based on the
assumption that an average passenger
weighs 180 lbs.

Cargo container
 Fuselage Design (contd)
2.2 Crew Requirements
•The size of the crew compartment will vary
depending on the aircraft.
• For long rage civil/military aircraft, the
crew compartment should be designed to
accommodate from 2 to 4 crew members.
• Recommended length for crew compartment:
150 inches – 4 crew • The over-nose angle overnos ) is defined as the
( e

130 inches – 3 crew angle between a horizontal line through the

100 inches – 2 crew pilot’s eye, down to the point of the highest
visual obstruction.
•An important factor that impacts the shape of
the forward section of the fuselage is the
requirement that the pilot must have an
unobstructed forward view.
•This is especially important for the landing phase
for all aircraft, and during the combat phase of
fighter aircraft. (Concorde and Tu-144)

Concorde Tu-144
2.3. Fuel Storage Requirements fuel.
•In long-range aircraft, a large percentage of the •The volume required to hold this fuel can be
weight at take-off is due to the weight of the allocated to the fuselage or wing or to both.
 Fuselage Design (contd)
• The decision on where to store the fuel depends
•The volume needed to accommodate the fuel is
on a number of factors:
based on the maximum fuel at take-off and the
i) Location of the center of mass with respect to density of the fuel. The specific volumes for
the center of lift, thus affecting the static different aviation fuels are given in Table.
stability
 In order to maintain static stability in the
pitch direction, the center of mass must
always be forward of the center of lift.
 As a result, if any fuel is stored in the fuselage,
it should be located at or slightly forward of
the wing attachment point.
ii) The vulnerability of crew and passengers in the
event of an uncontrolled landing, and  Three types of fuel tanks:
iii) The vulnerability of the fuel in combat aircraft i) Discrete Type:
caused by enemy fire.  Used for small general aviation aircraft.
 They are fuel containers that mount in
the aircraft.
 In the wing, these are mounted at the inboard
span portion, near the leading edge.
 In the fuselage, they are placed behind the
engine and above the pilot’s feet.
Fuel Storage Requirements (contd) • Bladder Type Fuel Tanks:
 Fuselage Design (contd)
 These are thick rubber bags that are placed into
• As a general rule, 85% of the volume
cavities in the wing or the fuselage.
measured to the external skin of the wing, and
 An advantage is that they can be made of 92% measured to the external skin of the
self-healing rubber. This improves aircraft fuselage, is available with integral tanks.
survivability in the case of uncontrolled landing
or enemy fire.
 The disadvantage is the thickness of the rubber
bladder walls reduces the available volume of
the cavity.
 As a general rule, 77% of the cavity volume in
the wing, and 83% of the cavity volume in
the fuselage, is available with bladder tanks.
 Integral Tanks:
 These are cavities inside the airframe
structure that are sealed to form fuel tanks.
 Examples are the wing box areas formed
between wing spars and the area
between bulkheads in the fuselage.
 Integral tanks are more prone to leaking
compared to other two types, they should
not be located near air inlet ducts or engines.
2.4. Internal Engines and Air Inlets •This is a common practice with combat aircraft
• Engines can be mounted internal to the fuselage and general aviation aircraft.
 Fuselage Design (contd)
•Some long-range commercial passenger aircraft
•In subsonic aircraft this is accomplished using a
also have internal engines (B-727, L-1011)
subsonic diffuser.
•To accommodate internal engines, the volume to
• In supersonic aircraft, this is done through area
enclose them must be accounted for in the
changes at the inlet that result in the
fuselage design.
formation of one or more compressive shocks.
•In the conceptual design stage, the best approach
•At the sizing or conceptual design stage, it can
is to rely on suitable comparison aircraft.
be assumed, based on empirical data, that the
• For internally mounted jet engines, the air diameter of the air inlet can be the same as
delivery system is an integral element. that of the engine compressor face.
The type and geometry of the inlet will determine
•Further, the length of the air inlet can be 60% of
the pressure loss and uniformity of the air
the engine length.
supplied to the engine.
 The types of Air Inlets depend on the
operating Mach number.
•The objective of the air inlet system for turbojet
and turbofan engines is to reduce the Mach
number of the air at the compressor face to
between 0.4 and 0.5.
2.5 WING ATTACHMENTS •For structural reasons, the wing is constructed as
•The manner in which the main wing attaches as integral unit.
to the fuselage is an important element in • The portion of the wing that passes through the
the fuselage design. fuselage is referred to as the wing carry-through.
 Fuselage Design (contd)
•The root-span portion of the wing has the largest
•As a result, the wing carry-through occupies
thickness in order to the large bending moment
a large volume where it passes through the
in the wing.
fuselage.
•A sketch of a typical fuselage wing carry-through
is shown in the Fig.
• Since the details of the main wing are known at
this stage of design, the volume requirements
for the carry-through structure can be directly
applied to the design of the fuselage.
2.6 LANDING GEAR PLACEMENT
• The size of the landing gear wheels can
• In most aircraft, the fuselage needs to be estimated as follows:
accommodate all or some parts of the landing Main Wheel Diameter or Width = A main B

gear when it is retracted. landing gear arrangements. W

• Therefore, the placement and volume •The largest portion of the landing gear for which
requirements of the landing gear need to space has to be allotted in the fuselage is the
be considered in the design of the fuselage. landing gear wheels.
•The size and location of the landing gear will •Typically, the tires on the main landing gear carry
vary depending on the type of the aircraft. approximately 90% of the aircraft weight. The
•A good first estimate can come by examining other 10% is carried by the nose gear.
suitable comparison aircraft that have a
comparable take-off weight.
• Fig. shows an illustration of some of different
 Fuselage Design (contd)
Weight on each of the main landing gear ,
0.9W
W  N TO
main wheels

•The size of the nose wheel can be assumed to

be 60% of the main wheel.
 Fuselage Design (contd)
• With
2.6 ARMAMENT PLACEMENT
combat
aircraft,
the
number
and size
of bombs
and
armament
are
generally
decided in
the initial
design
proposal
when the
mission
requireme
nts are
set.
• Therefo
re,
while
designi
ng the
f
u • If the
s weapons
e are carried
l externally,
a they add
g considera
e ble
, amount of
aerodyna
t mic drag.
h
e • So, the
weapons
a are partially
r or fully
r recessed in
a the
n underside of
g the wing or
e fuselage.
m • In some
e cases, the
n weapons
t may be
s located
inside the
f
u
s
e
l
a
g
e
,

i
n

w
e
a
p
o
n
s

b
a
y
.
 Fuselage Design (contd)
FUSELAGE FINENESS RATIO (contd) • The rise in wave drag as ( d/l ) increases is
 SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT
particularly severe.
• For a supersonic aircraft.
• For a blunt body approaching a sphere ( d/l =1),
overall drag = viscous drag + supersonic wave drag
the overall drag is predominantly wave (bow
CD0  CF  CD shock) drag.
W

•The percentage that each contributes to the • For supersonic flight the optimum fineness ratio
total drag , as a function of fineness ratio, is value is, d/l =0.07 or (l/d=14).
shown in Fig.
•In contrast to subsonic aircraft, minimizing the
aerodynamic drag is the design driver for long-
range supersonic aircraft, and their fuselage
designs use the optimum fineness ratio.
• In practice, fineness ratios in the range
0.1  d l    8 d   10 
0.125 l
are used since supersonic aircraft may sometimes
need to operate at subsonic speeds also.
• Fineness ratios for typical supersonic passenger
aircraft are shown in the Table.
•In general for supersonic flight, the overall drag
coefficient on a slender body is 2-3 times higher
than for subsonic flight.
FUSELAGE SHAPES
•Within the design constraints imposed by the
volume requirements, the fuselage shape
should be aerodynamic, with smooth and
gradual dimension changes and blended curves.
•Large divergence angles should be avoided as
they can cause the flow over the fuselage to
separate.
• This would lead to a higher base drag of the
fuselage and a reduction in cruise
efficiency.
• Particular care should be taken in the design of
the aft-part of the fuselage.
•The aft body usually has an upward slope to
allow ground clearance during pitch-up in
the “rotation” portion of take-off.
•As a general rule, the total divergence angle
should be less than 24 degrees.
•If this is divided around the fuselage, the local
angle should be less than 12 degrees, as
Schematic drawings showing the divergence angle
shown in Fig. limits for different types of aft-fuselage designs
DRAG ESTIMATION • For elliptic cross-section with constant
• The drag force due to viscous drag is given by dimensions ( h and w ) and length L, the total
Ff  qSC f surface area is given as
where q is dynamic pressure (based on cruise  Aside  Atop 
 ( hL )  (
S 
wL)  or S  

condition), S is the surface area and C  2   

  2
f is the  
friction coefficient. where, Aside and Ato are the areas of the
p

•On subsonic aircraft, minimizing the surface respective side and top projected views of the
or wetted area is one of the most powerful fuselage.
considerations in reducing the drag. •The friction coefficient,C f , for different flow types
• For elliptic cross sections, the total surface area is given as:
is given by L

S   P( x ) dx
where, 0 where, U0 = velocity at the outer edge of the
 h( x )  w( x
) boundary layer, and =kinematic viscosity, at a

P( x )   given flight condition.
2




 h( x )  local w( x )  width
height, local
•The area integral can be approximated by dividing
the fuselage shape into N piecewise-linear I
X-portions with constant dimensions. •The term is a Mach number
N correction that approaches 1.0 for low Mach
S   Pi xi numbers.
i 1
DRAG ESTIMATION (contd) • The effective Reynolds number should be used
 Effective Reynolds Number: only if  Rex
Reeffective
•Surface roughness affects the Reynolds number
• The friction force on an elemental
at which the flow becomes turbulent and
streamwise segment of the fuselage is a
increases the friction coefficient (C f ).
function of the streamwise location, x , and is
•The effect of roughness on boundary layers can given by
be expressed in terms of an effective Reynolds
number, which is a function of roughness height
( k ) with respect to the boundary layer thickness. • The total viscous drag force can be estimated
• Using empirical data from flat plate using the approximation
experiments, it has been shown that,
(N = No. of fuselage segments)

 Friction Coefficient at Nose ( C f ):

nose
• In the area of the nose of the aircraft up to the
near-constant diameter fuselage section, the
•Values of roughness height, k , for different favourable pressure gradient results in a
aircraft surface conditions are given in the slightly higher friction coefficient compared to
Table: the flat plate equivalent, and an estimate of is
given by:
• The pressure gradient on the nose virtually
assures that the boundary layer is laminar.
Therefore,
C f flatplate  C flaminar
DRAG ESTIMATION (contd) •
 FORM FACTOR
•As with the estimation of the base drag
coefficient on the main wing, the estimate of the
friction drag coefficient of the fuselage makes use
of a form factor.
• The form factor for the fuselage is given by:

where, f = l/d ( inverse

fineness ratio )

 INTERFERENCE FACTOR
• In most cases, the fuselage has a negligible
interference factor.
• Therefore, is appropriate for the fuselage.
 Finally, the total viscous drag on the fuselage
is given by:

where S is the fuselage surface (wetted) area.

QUANTITATIVE FUSELAGE SHAPES
• The C P values are easily determined from conical
• There are a number of quantitative fuselage shapes shock charts available in compressible flow handbooks.
for which drag data are available.
2. Power Series – Cylinder:
• These are useful as a starting point in laying out the • This shape is similar to the cone-cylinder except that
fuselage since their analytical form allows direct the nose section is derived from the following
integration for determining the surface area and relation,
volume. Some of these shapes are discussed.
1. Cone – Cylinder:
• In this shape, the nose of the fuselage is a right
circular cone whose base matches onto a constant where, lc = length of the nose section
r l c  = radius at the base ( x  lc )
diameter cylindrical fuselage section. rx = local radius ( at x )
wave that will form at the leading nose.

• With this shape:

i) At subsonic Mach numbers, the total drag force on
the fuselage is primarily due to viscous drag. The
viscous drag coefficients can be determined using
the relations presented in previous section.
ii)At supersonic Mach numbers, the wave drag
coefficient, CDW , is equal to the pressure
coefficient, C P , due to the conical shock
• When n=1, the above equation describes a right-
circular cone.
• A good amount of drag data are available for a
variety of values of ‘n’.
• For this family of shapes, n = 3/4 gives the
minimum wave drag.
QUANTITATIVE FUSELAGE SHAPES (contd) • Thus, if fuselage length = L
3. Von Karman Ogive: maximum diameter = D
• A schematic drawing of Von Karman fuselage then in the above equation,
shape is shown below: l  L 4, r( 0 )  D 2, x  x  L 4
where, x = streamwise position along the fuselage
starting from the most leading point ( 0  x  L )
• The downstream half of the fuselage can be made
as a mirror image of the leading half.
• The overall volume of the body is
•This is a symmetric body of revolution that is
described by the following relation:
•This shape is primarily suited to supersonic aircraft
where its drag coefficient is the lowest of the
group of shapes listed:
for

• For this shape, r(0) is the maximum radius, which

occurs at x=0 and ‘l’ is the overall length. •An example of Von Karman fuselage is
presented for the case study supersonic
•In the fuselage design, the above equation will business jet (SSBJ).
form the leading half, namely, from the leading
point to the point of largest diameter.
QUANTITATIVE FUSELAGE SHAPES (contd) • The over all volume of the fuselage is
4. Sears - Haack:
• This is a symmetric body of revolution and also
has a relatively low wave drag compared to
the other shapes. • The surface (wetted area) is

• The wave drag coefficient is given as

• The profile is described by the following relation: • Area Ruling the Fuselage:
• The wavedrag coefficients ( CDW ) in the case of Von
Karman and Sears-Haack fuselages show that the
wave drag depends on the cross-sectional area.
•The above equation describes the • This applies not only to the fuselage, but also to the
complete fuselage , from leading to fuselage and wing together.
trailing points. • As a result, the cross-section of the fuselage is often
indented in the vicinity of the wing attachment
(NOTE: In the case of Von Karman fuselage the location in order to keep a nearly constant and
form equation describes only the leading half of smooth wing-fuselage cross-section area
the fuselage) distribution along the length of the aircraft.
• This process is called “area ruling”. Area ruling
reduces the drag by 50% over a non-area ruled
design.
 Spreadsheet for Fuselage Design
•A sample of the spreadsheet for fuselage design iii) Wing surface area (S), iv) Form factor (F), and
(aerodynamic) is shown in Fig.
iv) Interference factor (Q).
•This contains the parameters for a conceptual
Super Sonic Business Jet (SSBJ) aircraft. • The drag calculations consider viscous drag
and wave drag (in the case of super sonic
• In the spreadsheet, there are two areas where aircraft)
the input parameters are placed.  Wave Drag Calculations:
These correspond to the flight regime data, and • First, the fuselage length ( l ) is divided into 10 equal
the dimension data. elements.
• The flight regime input data comprises of: • The first column shows ( x/l ) in 10% elements.
i) Cruise Mach number (M), • The equivalent locations along the fuselage ( x
ii) Cruise Altitude (H), ) are given in the second column.
iii) Velocity (V),
• Next, the parameters x  L 4 , D, P and SW are
iv) Air density (  ), calculated as shown in Columns 3 to 6.
• Here, P is the local parameter given by
v) Dynamic pressure (q),  h( x )  w( x )
vi) Viscosity ), and P( x )   
2 
(
vii) Kinematic viscosity (    ). h( x )  local height, w( x )  local width
• The dimension data come from the design
requirements for volume to enclose crew, and, SW , is the wetted surface area given by
payload, etc., and it comprises of:  Aside  Atop 
S
i) Maximum diameter ( Dmax 2
 Spreadsheet for Fuselage Design
 
) for circular shapes  
[ Equivalent diameter for non-circular shapes ] where, Aside and Atop are the areas of the respective
ii) Fineness ratio (d/l), iii) Fuselage length (l) side and top projected views of the fuselage.
 Spreadsheet for Fuselage Design (contd)
• The geometrical calculations are made for the  Equivalent Drag Coefficient
leading-half of the fuselage as the down- •Finally a drag coefficient that is equivalent to the
stream half is a mirror image of the leading drag coefficient of the main wing is calculated
half.
•The local Reynolds number, the friction using the equation
coefficient and the viscous drag ( F f ) are D0 F f  FW
C  qS
calculated, as shown in columns 7 to 9:
where, S is the area of the main wing.
•This equivalent drag coefficient is then compared
with the drag coefficient calculated for the main
wing, in order to see the relative contributions of
the wing and the fuselage to the overall drag on
the aircraft.

 Wave Drag Calculation

• For the Von Karman fuselage shape, the wave
drag coefficient, and the wave drag are
FW
calculated using the equations
FW  qAmaxCDW

 Total Drag
F F 
• The total drag is given by f W
 Case Study: Wing Design for SSBJ
• The passenger compartment was designed to seat from
12 to 15 passengers.
• The conceptual SSBJ passenger compartment data is given
in the Table.
• The diameter (d) of the fuselage was based on having
two seats that are separated by a center aisle.
d = (Widths of seat s) + fuselage wall thickness (4 inches)
d = 9 ft.
• The length of the fuselage was chosen to be, l= 126 ft,
to obtain an optimum fineness ratio of d/l=0.07, or the
inverse ratio l/d=14.
• Von Karman Ogive shape was selected for the fuselage
because it has the lowest wave drag among the well-
known and documented shapes.
• The cross-section of the fuselage is circular. So, the
perimeter is given by P   D
• All the local Reynolds numbers Rex  1000
So, the flow is assumed to be turbulent everywhere, and
the friction coefficient C f was calculated accordingly.
• Viscous drag force = 2015 lbs; Form factor F=1.056.
The form factor adds 108 lbs (5%) to viscous drag force.
• Wave drag force = 689 lbs; Total drag force = 2705 lbs.
• Equivalent drag coefficient = 0.0061. This is 4 times
smaller than the main-wing drag coefficient.
 Horizontal and Vertical Tail Design
1. TAIL ARRANGEMENTS
• A large variety of horizontal and vertical tail
designs have been used on past aircraft.
•Suitable tail configurations are selected based
on mission requirements. Some of these
designs are discussed below.
1. Conventional Tail
• A majority of commercial and general purpose
aircraft use the conventional tail
design. An example is the Boeing 777
aircraft.
•This design places the horizontal stabilizer at
or near the fuselage vertical centerline.
Advantages:
• Provides sufficient stability and control.
• Has the lowest tail weight
Disadvantages:
•Static stability requires that the CG be forward of
the center of lift.
•A relatively heavy weight of this type of tail can
force a redistribution of other weight or a
change in the position of the main wing, which
sometimes can be difficult.
 Horizontal and Vertical Tail Design (contd)
2. T - Tail
Boeing 727
• The T-tail is also a relatively popular design
(Boeing 727, Douglas YC-15, C-141 transport)
• This design places a horizontal tail high on
the end of the vertical tail.
Main Advantages:
•The vertical tail can be smaller than on a
conventional tail because the placement of
the horizontal stabilizer acts as a winglet and
increases the effective aspect ratio.
•The horizontal stabilizer can also be made smaller
because it is placed high, out of the wake of the
main wing.
Main Disadvantage:
•T-tail is heavier than the conventional tail design,
since the vertical tail structure needs to be made
stronger in order to carry the load of the
horizontal tail.
3. Cruciform Tail
• The Cruciform Tail is a compromise between
the conventional and T-tail designs.
•In this design, the horizontal tail is at the
approximate mid-span of the vertical tail.
• An example is the JetStar
aircraft. Advantages:
•It raises the horizontal stabilizer out of the wake
of the main wing, with less of a weight penalty
compared to the T-tail.
Disadvantages:
•Because the horizontal stabilizer is not at the end
of the vertical stabilizer, there is no reduction in
the vertical tail aspect-ratio requirement that
comes with the T-tail.
4. H - Tail
• The H-tail is a popular design for some combat
aircraft. An example is YA-10 aircraft.
Advantages:
•The H-tail design positions the vertical stabilizers
in the air, which is not disturbed by the fuselage.
•It reduces the required size of the horizontal
stabilizer because of the winglet effect of the
vertical tail surfaces.
•Another particular advantage is that it lowers the
required height of the vertical tail.
This is particularly important on aircraft that must
have a low clearance height or on combat aircraft
where it reduces the projected area of this
vulnerable component.
Disadvantage:
• The required added strength of the
horizontal stabilizer makes the H-tail heavier
than the conventional tail.
5. V - Tail
•A V-tail is designed to reduce the (wetted)
surface area by combining the vertical
and horizontal tail surfaces.
• Control in this case is through “ruddervators”.
•In a ruddervator control, a downward deflection
of the right elevator and an upward deflection
of the left elevator will push the tail to the left,
and thereby the nose to the right.
•Unfortunately, the same maneuver produces a
roll moment toward the left, which opposes
the turn.
• This effect is called an “adverse yaw”.
• The solution to this is an inverted V-tail.
6. Inverted V - Tail
Advantages:
•An inverted V-tail avoids the adverse yaw-
roll coupling of the V-tail.
•In this case, the elevator deflections produce a
complimentary roll moment, which enhances
a coordinated turn maneuver.
• This design also reduces spiral tendencies in the
aircraft.
Disadvantages:
•The only disadvantage of the inverted V-tail is the
need for extra ground clearance.
7. Y - Tail
•The Y-tail is similar to the V-tail except that a
vertical tail surface and vertical rudder are
used for directional control.
•The Y-tail eliminates the complexity of the
“ruddervators” on the V-tail, but still retains a
lower surface area compared to the conventional
tail design.
Inverted Y-Tail
•An inverted Y-tail was used on the F-4 aircraft as
a means of keeping the horizontal surfaces out
of the wake of the main wing at high AoAs.
• Another example of an inverted Y-tail is on the
Altus I high-altitude surveillance drone.
and rudders away from the fuselage centerline, where they can be affected by the fuselage wake at high ang
9. CANARD •In contrast to an aft tail, a canard uses a positive
• Canard is a horizontal stabilizer that is located (downward) elevator to offset the moment
forward of the main wing, on the fuselage. produced by the main wing in level flight.
Types of Canard: This produces an upward lift component, which
(a) Control Canard: augments the main wing and further reduces the
•This type of canard is designed to produce very lift and lift-induced drag on the main wing.
little lift.
• An example of the aircraft that uses a
•The control canard provides the same function lifting canard is the Q-200 “Quickie”.
as the aft horizontal stabilizer by introducing a
moment that changes the AoA of the fuselage In this case, the canard has a plain elevator and
and main wing. also doubles as the main landing gear spring.
( Examples of Control Canard: Concorde, Tu-144 )
(b) Lifting Canard:
• This type of canard is designed to produce
considerable lift - up to 15-25 % of the total lift.
•As a result, it reduces the lift (burden) , and
lift-induced drag on the main wing.
• The lifting canard is designed to stall at a lower
AoA than the main wing.
As a result, the nose of the aircraft will drop
before the main wing can stall and, therefore,
make it statically stable.
 Vertical Tail Sizing
• In the conceptual design, the sizing of the • Therefore, the length lV , is an
vertical parameter, T
and horizontal tail surfaces is based on the design useful parameter in the design of the tail.
of the past aircraft.
• The area of the vertical stabilizer is given by,
S C
bW SW
VT VT
lVT
where, b and SW are the span and area of the
W
main wing, respectively, and lV is the distance
T
between the quarter-chord locations of the mean-
aerodynamic-chords (m.a.c) of the main wing and
vertical stabilizer, as show in Fig.
• Values of the coefficient,CVT , for different types
of aircraft are listed in the Table.
• At the conceptual design stage, the coefficientCVT
for the aircraft being designed, should be taken
from aircraft with similar mission requirements.
• The distance, , is in effect the moment arm
lVT
upon which the aerodynamic force generated by
 Vertical Tail Sizing
the vertical stabilizer acts on the fuselage.
•The equation for the area of the vertical stabilizer
indicates that a larger distance requires a smaller
vertical tail area.
 Aft-Horizontal Tail Sizing
• The area of the aft horizontal stabilizer is given by

SHT  CHT cW SW
l
HT
where,
cW , is the m.a.c of the main wing, and lHT
Is the distance between the quarter-chord points
of the main-wing and the horizontal stabilizer, as
shown in Fig.
• The coefficient CHT is used in scaling the
aft-horizontal stabilizer. Its values for different
types of aircraft are given in Table.
•At the stage of conceptual design, CHT , should
be taken from aircraft with similar mission
requirements.
• It is to be noted that in contrast to the vertical
stabilizer, SHT , includes the portion that runs
through the fuselage.
 Canard Sizing
• The coefficient used in scaling the canard is CC .
• The area of the canard is given by

SC  CC c S
W W
l
C

where, lC , is the distance between the quarter-

chord locations of the mean-aerodynamic-chords
(m.a.c) of the main wing and canard, as shown in
Fig.
• The values of for different aircraft are given
CC
in Table.
•The values of the sizing coefficient given in Table
are relevant only for the control canard.
•For lifting canards, the area is primarily based on
the percentage of the total lift that the canard is
designed to produce.
 Scaling for Different Tail Types
•
T-Tail Design:
•As a general rule, for T-tail designs, the vertical
and horizontal tail coefficients can be reduced
by 5% compared to a conventional tail.
H-Tail Design:
•For an H-tail design, the horizontal tail coefficient
can be reduced by 5%. Also, the vertical tail area
on each side will be one-half of the required total
area corresponding to a conventional tail.
V-Tail Design:
• For an aircraft with a front-mounted propeller
•For a V-tail design, the area should be the same
engine, these lengths are approximately 60% of
as the combined horizontal and vertical surface
the fuselage length.
areas of an equivalent conventional tail design.
• With an aircraft with wing-mounted engines,
•In addition, the dihedral angle of the two
these lengths are approximately 50-55 % of
surfaces should be the arc-tangent of the
the fuselage length.
square- root of the ratio between the required
vertical and horizontal tail areas, as shown in • For engines that are mounted on the aft
Fig. portion of the fuselage, these lengths are from
45-50 % of the fuselage length.
• The dihedral angle should be approximately 45
deg.
• The lengths, l T d
V an lHT , will vary depending on
 Scaling for Different Tail Types
Control •W i t h control canards, l , varies from 30 to 50%
C
Canards:
the type of aircraft. of the fuselage length.
 Scaling for Different Tail Types (contd)
Coefficient Scaling for Different Tail Types

Typical lengths for lVT , lHT

and lC
 Tail Planform Shape
•Once the required areas of the horizontal and
vertical tail surfaces are found, the planform
shapes are determined next.
•As with the main wing design, the planform
shape is defined by the aspect ratio, A, and the
taper ratio, 
b
A 2 where S = surface area and, b = span.
 S
• The taper ratio then defines the root-chord as
• This gives the aft-horizontal stabilizer a higher
Cr  2S critical Mach number than the main wing. This
b1   also helps to avoid the loss of elevator

• The tip-chord is then given by, C  C effectiveness due to shock formation.
t r
• If it is desired that  LE   LE , then the
HT Wing
•Historical values of the aspect ratio and taper above mentioned benefits can be obtained by
ratio of aft-horizontal and vertical tail
reducing the t cmax of horizontal stabilizer
surfaces are given in the table.
compared to the main wing.
• The leading edge sweep angle,  LE , of the aft- • The sweep angle of the vertical stabilizer,  LE  VT
horizontal stabilizer is typically set to be a few degrees more than the sweep angle of the main
 Tail Planform Shape
generally varies between 35 and 55 deg. For
wing.     supersonic aircraft, higher sweep angles may be
 LE HT
  Wing used if the leading-edge Mach number is
LE intended to be subsonic.
 Airfoil Section Type
(for Horizontal and Vertical Tails)
• The airfoil section type selected for the • As with the main D0 , is the sum of viscous
horizontal wing, C
and vertical stabilizers should be: skin friction drag, C f , flow separations.
1) symmetric airfoil section, and Again, the friction coefficient will be multiplied
2) having a low base drag coefficient,
CD0 by the form and interference factors.
•The tail surfaces do not produce lift except with The form factor for the main wing must be
the deflection of control surfaces, which are increased by 10% and applied to the tail.
the elevator and rudder for the horizontal and Values of interference factor for different tail
vertical stabilizers, respectively. arrangements is shown in the Table.
•As a result, the stabilizers should be symmetric
airfoils that are not placed at an angle of • The horizontal and vertical stabilizers
attack. should have a higher critical Mach number
than the main wing.
When the control surfaces are deflected, the
effect is equivalent to adding camber to the • This can be achieved by choosing a
slightly smaller section t cmax than the
section shape.
wing.
• Because the stabilizers are symmetric sections, • However, care should be taken to ensure that the
at 0o angle of attack, they do not produce lift or
lift-induced drag. stall angle,  s , of the tail surfaces are not reduced
too much by reducing c
max
Therefore, the only drag component is the base t
drag, CD0 . As a result, wing sections that have a
lower base drag are preferable for cruise
 Airfoil Section Type
efficiency.
 Tail Placement
•The placement of the aft-horizontal and vertical •The solution to this potential problem is to locate
stabilizers affects the stall and spin the horizontal stabilizer in one of two regions:
characteristics of an aircraft.
1. Near the mean chord line of the main wing or
STALL CONTROL:
•Stall characteristics are affected by the location 2. Above the wake of the main wing at the stall
of the horizontal stabilizer with respect to the angle of attack.
main wing. When the main wing stalls, the airflow will
•If the horizontal stabilizer is in the wake of the separate from the leading and trailing edges.
main wing at the stall angle of attack,  s , The wake of the main wing will spread with a
elevator control will be lost, and further pitch up total angle of approximately 30 deg.
may occur.
 Tail Placement (contd)
• Fig. illustrates a safe region for the • For a T-tail, all but the trailing edge of the
vertical placement of a horizontal elevator needs to be outside the wake of
stabilizer in a conventional tail. the main wing.
• Both the downstream • Having the elevator just inside the wake produces
lHT , and height
location,
above the main wing H HT, are an unsteady buffeting on the pitch control that
centerline,
normalized by the main wing m.a.c. signals the pilot of an imminent stall.
•This indicates that the best location for the
horizontal tail is below the wing
centerline.
However, a higher position, such as with
Cruciform or T-tails, is possible if they are set high
enough above the wing.
SPIN CONTROL:
• Spin characteristics are affected by the vertical tail.
•During an uncontrolled spin, the aircraft is falling vertically
and rotating about its vertical axis.
Recovery from the spin requires having a sufficient amount
of rudder control.
•As shown in Fig., for a conventional tail, the vertical
stabilizer is caught in the wake of the horizontal
stabilizer during an uncontrolled spin. This makes the
rudder ineffective.
•The solution for a conventional tail design is to move the
horizontal stabilizer either forward or aft of the vertical
stabilizer position. This is evident in the tail design of the
Boeing 777.
• Alternatively, the horizontal stabilizer can be positioned
higher on the vertical stabilizer. This is an advantage of
the Cruciform or T-tail designs.
•In either, approach, a good design should have
approximately 30% of the rudder outside of the wake of
the horizontal stabilizer during a spin for proper
recovery.
 Spreadsheet for Tail Design
INPUT DATA: •
• The top of the spreadsheet contains input that
corresponds to the main wing.
• Speed, altitude
and air properties
are also input
DESIGN:
• The tail design
spreadsheet is
divided into
two parts.
• The top part
deals with the
vertical
stabilizer. It ends
with a graphical
representation
of the plan view
of the total
stabilizer.
 For the vertical
tail design,
there are two
sets of input
p ance
a between the
r quarter-
a chord
m locations on
e the m.a.c. of
t the main
e wing and
r vertical
s stabilizer
. • The bottom part
The left deals with the
set horizontal
includes stabilizer. At the
i) the end, the plan
vertical view of one-half
tail of the surface is
coefficie shown. The other
nt half is a mirror
ii) t image.
h
e

d
i
s
t