Team Paradigm 6 System Definition Review

1. Team Paradigm 6System Definition Review Farah Abdullah Stephen Adams Noor Emir Anuar Paul Davis Zherui Guo Steve McCabe Zack Means Mizuki Wada AskarYessirkepov

2. Presentation Overview • Engine / Propulsion • Engine Concept • Engine Sizing • Constraint Analysis • W0/S, T/W0 estimates • Compliance Matrix • Sizing Code • Current Status • Validation of Code • TOGW Estimates • Stability and Control Estimates • Location of c.g. • Static Margin Estimates • Tail Sizing Approach • Summary and Next Steps • Missions Review • Mission Statement • Design Mission and Typical Operating Mission • Compliance Matrix • Concept Generation & Selection • Overview • Initial Concepts • Selected Concepts • Cabin Layout Configuration and Dimension • Process of Cabin Layout • Seats Selection • Layout Concepts • QFD and Trend Study • Advanced Technologies • Technologies Under Consideration • Technologies’ Impacts

3. Mission Statement • Implement advanced technologies to design a future large commercial airliner (200 passenger minimum) that simultaneously addresses all of the N+2 goals for noise, emissions and fuel burn as set forth by NASA. • Use market driven parameters to design a realistic and desirable aircraft.

4. Design Mission Cruise 4 Divert to alternate • Max design range : 6500nm • Covers weather issues • Max capacity : 250 passengers • Max cruise Mach : 0.85 • Cruise Altitude : 35000ft 10 3 Loiter (25min.) 9 5 Loiter (25 min.) Climb 11 8 2nd Climb Missed approach 1 2 13 6 7 12 Taxi and take off Land and taxi Land and taxi Dubai New York Designed Range 6000nm 200nm 1-7 : Basic Mission 7-13: Reserve Segment • Satisfy FAA requirement of min. 45 min additional cruise for night time flights

5. Typical Operating Mission Cruise 4 Divert to alternate • Mission Range: 2400nm • Max capacity : 300 passengers • Max cruise Mach : 0.85 • Cruise Altitude : 30000ft 10 3 Loiter (25min.) 9 5 Loiter (25 min.) Climb 11 8 2nd Climb Missed approach 1 2 13 6 7 12 Taxi and take off Land and taxi Land and taxi Seattle Miami Designed Range 2400nm 100nm 1-7 : Basic Mission 7-13: Reserve Segment • High Capacity Medium Haul Aircraft 5

6. Compliance Matrix http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_gallery/files/tech_data/AC/AC_A320_01092010.pdf http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/stats.main?id=103

7. Concept Generation & Selection Overview of Process Initial Concepts Selected Concepts

8. Outline of Concept Generation

9. Morphological Matrix

10. Concept Generation • Brainstorming Ideas

11. Pugh’s Method

12. Pugh’s Method • Results were not conclusive • Need to do more top level analysis to shortlist candidate concepts • Concentrate on NASA ERA N+2 goals in detail

13. 2nd Round Pugh’s Method

14. Selected Concepts • Using Pugh’s Method, the best two concepts were selected for detailed analysis

15. Concept 1

16. Concept 1 – Cabin Layout Business Class Seating Economy Class Seating Wing Box LD2

17. Concept 2

18. Cabin Layout Configuration & Dimension Process of Cabin Layout Seats selection Layout Concepts QFD and Trend Study

19. Process of Cabin Layout

20. Cabin Layout Requirements • Maximum 250 passengers • 2 class (40 business & 210 economy) • 2 crews for business • 7 crews for economy

21. Seats selection Airline Coach Seat Sizes (Economy) Economy Business <http://www.extend-its.com/seatsize.htm>

22. Layout Concepts Fuselage width=W Fuselage length=L • 1 aisle 2 - 3 2 - 2 W:137in. (3.48m) L: 2384in. (60.57m) W:117in. (2.97m) L: 2876in. (73.04m) • 2 aisles 2 – 5 - 2 2 – 4 - 2 2 – 3 - 2 2 – 2 - 2 W:178in. (4.52m) L: 2068in. (52.52m) W:198in. (5.03m) L: 1862in. (47.31m) W:259in. (6.58m) L: 1483in. (37.68m) W:219in. (5.56m) L: 1739in. (44.16m)

23. Trend Study and Comparison

24. Final Cabin Layout and Dimensions • Concept1 Pitch=31in. (Economy) (pitch=50in. for business) Width=193in. (5.03m) ≈1456.69in. (37m) (total fuselage=1862in. (47.31m)

25. Final Cabin Layout and Dimensions • Concept2: Initial layout • 2 separated business class • 4 divided compartments for economy class • Further study is needed to optimize the cabin layout

26. Advanced Technologies Technologies Under Consideration Technologies’ Impacts

27. Noise reduction • Propulsion Airframe Aeroacoustics • Leading Edge High-Lift device modification • Perforated Landing Gear Fairings • Airframe Noise Shielding • Ultra-high bypass geared turbofan engine

28. Fuel burn and NOx reduction • Active Engine Control • Laminar Flow Control • Gas Foil Bearings • All-Composite Fuselage • Ultra-high bypass geared turbofan engine

30. Engine / Propulsion Engine Concept Engine Sizing

31. Engine/Propulsion • Engine under consideration: • Geared Turbofan • Less noise • Less NOx emissions • Less SFC • Direct-drive lighter than Geared

32. Engine Specifications Table: Turbofan engines currently in market Table: Geared turbofan experiment

33. Sizing • Using equations from Raymer • “Rubber” engine • Tsls = [W0*(T/W0)]/neng • Sizing factor • SF=Tsls/(Tsls)base • L=Lbase(SF)0.4 • D=Dbase(SF)0.5 • W=Wbase(SF)1.1 • SFC=(SFC)base(SF)-0.1 • Same with emissions

34. Tech. Factors • Different Fuels • Chevron Nozzle • Fuel Flow Control • Engine types • Direct Drive Vs. Geared • Unducted Turbofan • Turboprop

35. Constraint Diagrams Performance Constraints W0/S, T/W0 estimates Trade Studies Compliance Matrix

36. Major Performance Constraints From Compliance Matrix • Noise Level • Fuel Economy • Takeoff Ground Roll • Landing Ground Roll • NOx Emissions • Service Ceiling/Cruise Mach • Passenger Count > 200

37. Constraint Diagram Parameters • top of climb (1g steady, level flight, M = 0.8 @ h=40K, service ceiling) • sustained subsonic 2g manuever, 250kts @ h =10Ktakeoff • ground roll 6000 ft @ h = 5K, +15° hot day • landing braking ground roll 2000 ft @ h = 5K, +15° hot day • second segment climb gradient above h = 5K, +15° hot day

38. Initial Estimates for U-Tail • Clmax(TO) = 1.7 • Clmax (Landing) = 2.25 (Single Fowler, no slat) • Service Ceiling = 40000 ft • Take-off Ground Roll = 6000 ft • Landing Braking Ground Roll = 2000 ft • Mach Number = 0.8 • Aspect Ratio = 8 • Reverse Thrust coefficient = 0.25

39. Initial Constraint Diagram – U-Tail Tube & Wing

40. U-Tail Trade Study

41. Updated Estimates for U-Tail • Clmax(TO) = 1.7 • Clmax (Landing) = 2.5 (Single slotted Fowler + Slat) • Service Ceiling = 40000 ft • Take-off Ground Roll = 6000 ft • Landing Braking Ground Roll = 2000 ft • Mach Number = 0.8 • Aspect Ratio = 9 • Reverse Thrust coefficient = 0.25

42. Updated Constraint Diagram – U-Tail Tube & Wing

43. Estimates for BWB • Clmax(TO) = 1.7 • Clmax (Landing) = 2.0 (Slats) • Service Ceiling = 40000 ft • Take-off Ground Roll = 4500 ft • Landing Braking Ground Roll = 2000 ft • Mach Number = 0.85 • Aspect Ratio = 6 • Reverse Thrust coefficient = 0.25

44. Constraint Diagram – Blended Wing Body

45. Sizing Code Current Status Validation of Code TOGW Estimates P6CAF-IncAR P6BWB-ScalAR

46. Current Status • Completed: • Drag components – Parasite drag, Induced drag • Lift components – Wing, Tail • Field length functions – Takeoff/Landing • Propulsion – Rubber engine sizing • LTO, Cruise, Loiter weight fraction calculations • Component weight sizing • NOx, dB emissions estimation based on historical data

47. Major Assumptions • NOx emission estimation based on CAEP 6 best fit curve • Noise levels based on best fit from current engine data • Horizontal tail scaled from wing

48. Implemented Technologies

49. Comparison with 767-200ER

50. Comparison with A330-200