System Definition ReviewSystem Definition ReviewAAE 451AAE 451

Andrew MizenerDiane Barney Jon Coughlin

Jared Scheid Mark GloverMichael Coffey Donald Barrett

Eric Smith Kevin Lincoln

Team GoldJet

Mission StatementMission Statement

To design a profitable, supersonic aircraft capable of Trans-Pacific travel to meet the needs of airlines and their passengers around the world.

Major Design RequirementsMajor Design Requirements

• Trans-Pacific Range:− Longer range increases available routes

• High Cruise Speed :− Makes shorter trip times and allows for more legs per

day

• Good Cruise Efficiency:– Lowers the cost of fuel and the max gross weight

Design MissionDesign Mission

• Los Angeles (LAX) – Shanghai (PDG)– Range: 5,650 nautical miles

Morphological MatrixMorphological Matrix

• To assist Pugh’s Method and Concept Selection• Listed design categories and all options

First ConceptsFirst Concepts

• Four Concepts Chosen, along with Datum• Showed immediate narrowing of possible ideas

in some categories– Two wing planforms– Two fuselage types– One landing gear style

Pugh’s MethodPugh’s Method

• Two rounds– First against the Datum– Second against one of our first designs (Concept 2)

• Second round shown– Some narrowing of categories as process went along

Condensed ConceptsCondensed Concepts

• Taking results of Pugh’s Method, two concepts emerged for further study– One based around a Double-Delta wing

• Result of min/maxing DD concepts• Three Design Choices to make

– Engine Location, Canards, and Tail Configuration

– One based around a Joined Wing

1x1 Seating Layout1x1 Seating Layout

• 1x1 Seating Configuration• Design allows for long slender body, reducing

drag• Carry-on baggage stowed next to passenger

– Allows for easier in flight access– Up to two carry-on bags can be carried due to

increased space

1x1 Top View1x1 Top View

• Length 90 feet• Lavatories positioned at the front and rear of

the cabin• Galley located forward

Lav Lav

Galley

Entry Door

1x1 Cross-Section1x1 Cross-Section

• Diameter: 10 ft• Aisle Width: 26 inches• Aisle Height: 76 inches• Seat Pitch: 40 inches

Carry On Storage

2x2 Seating Layout2x2 Seating Layout

• 2x2 Seating Configuration• Shorter fuselage length, enabling more radical

Sears-Haack shaping• Carry-on baggage stored overhead

2x2 Top View2x2 Top View

• Length 54 feet• Lavatories located aft• Galley located aft

Lav

LavGalley

Entry Door

2x2 Cross-Section2x2 Cross-Section

• Diameter: 11 feet 8 inches• Aisle Width: 26 inches• Aisle Height: 76 inches• Seat Pitch: 40 inches

Performance ConstraintsPerformance Constraints

• 5 main performance constraints identified:– Steady, Level Flight

• M = 1.8, h = 45,000 ft– Subsonic 2g Manuever,

• 250kts , h = 10,000 ft– Takeoff Ground Roll

• 5400 ft, h = 1,000 ft, +15° Hot Day – Landing Ground Roll

• 5400 ft, h = 1,000 ft, +15° Hot Day – 3% Second Segment Climb Gradient (4 engines)

• Above h = 1,000 ft, +15° Hot Day

Constraint AssumptionsConstraint Assumptions

• Cruise– Lapse Rate = 0.678 (ρ ratio)

– CD0 = 0.018

– AR = 2

– ΛLE = 45°

– dmax = 11.75 ft

– l = 180 ft

– CDw = 0.00644

• Subsonic Maneuver– CD0 & AR

– e = 0.7

• Takeoff– β = 1

– CL,max,TO = 1.2

– Field Length = 10000 ft

– sTO = 6000 ft

• Landing– αrev = 0.2

– β = 1

– CL,max,Land= 1.5

– μ = 0.2 (wet concrete/asphalt)

– Field Length = 10000 ft

– sLand = 6000 ft

• 2nd Segment Climb– CD0, AR, ΛLE– Four Engines (3% CGR)

– CL,max,TO = 1.2

– eTO = 0.525

Constraint DiagramConstraint Diagram

Current Sizing Method

• Based upon calculating the fuel fraction as described in Raymer

• Empty weight fraction based upon historical aircraft data

• Technical Factor of 0.95 for advanced materials

Results

• Design Variables– Mission Range: 5650 nmi– Aspect Ratio: 2– Wing Loading: 125 lb/ft2

– Thrust to Weight: 0.375– Maximum Mach Number:

2– Cruise Mach Number: 1.8– SFC: 0.8 /hr

• Resulting Weights– W0=341,000 lbs

– We=126,000 lbs

– Wf =206,000 lbs

• Wing Area– S=2,700 ft2

Sonic Boom Prediction

• Based upon Carlson– “Simplified Sonic-

Boom Prediction”

• Uses a series of non-linear factors based on altitude and shape

• Determines– Overpressure– Duration

Baseline Overpressure

• Cruise Condition– M=1.8– Alt = 45,000 ft

• Results– Overpressure: 1.66

lb/ft2

– Duration: 0.155 seconds

Double Delta ConfigurationDouble Delta Configuration

• Double Delta Wing Planform• Raked Wingtips• Low wing• Blended Wing/

Circular Fuselage• Tricycle Landing

Gear• 2x2 Cabin• Canard, Tail,

Engine Locationto be optimized

DD with no canards and Conventional Tail

Rough DD with Canards and No Tail

Joined Wing ConfigurationJoined Wing Configuration

• Joined Wing Planform• Canards• Engines podded and aft

on fuselage• Circular Fuselage• Tricycle Landing Gear• 1x1 Cabin

Next StepsNext Steps

• Preliminary analysis• Main concept selection• Detailed analysis• Final layout/configuration selection

Concept Analysis

• Double Delta– Engine placement

• Drag effects• Ground clearance

– Maintenance cost– Landing gear

size/weight• Noise shielding

– Canards vs. horizontal tail• Drag varying with

surface size• Canard issues at take-

off• Airport compatibility

– Fuselage/wing blending

• Joined Wing– Wing structure

• Complexity• Fuel storage• Weight savings• Aerodynamic

performance

Analysis TopicsAnalysis Topics

• Aerodynamics– Cross-sectional area

plot– Wave drag– Induced drag– Boom forming

• Structures– Strength analysis– Weight and weight

distribution

• Propulsion– Engine model– Engine choice

• Cost Model• Systems

– Airport gate compatibility

– Ground clearance

• Control– Stability– Static Margin– CG travel

• Optimization– Detailed sizing– Carpet plots

Questions?