AE6343 Aircraft Design Project #1 – 2017

Aircraft Constraint Analysis

This document provides the project description for Project 1 of the Aircraft Design I (Fixed Wing Design I) course listed as
AE 6343. Please read this information carefully and refer any questions to the class assistants.

Objective
This project is an exercise where students can apply the sizing and synthesis theory presented during lecture and pertaining to
Chapter 2 of the course material. Students must integrate the different methods and approaches taught and provide an initial
mission sizing and constraint analysis assessment in the context of conceptual design. This exercise should furthermore provide
a deeper understanding of the mathematical models used for these tasks and associate them to the underlying physical principles
and relationships.

Project Description
General
Using all the class material provided relevant to sizing & synthesis, each student must study the energy-based constraint analysis
method as well as the weight fraction approach to the mission sizing analysis. An analysis tool capable of fully implementing
sizing & synthesis calculations must be created and validated against existing data. You must benchmark your tool against the
known performance of a reference aircraft, provided in this project description. You must then use your tool to generate a
conceptual design to meet a set of requirements specified in a provided Request for Proposal. This project will be conducted in
teams of two. Teams will be assigned by the instructor and teaching assistants and will consist of both on campus and distance
learning students.

Deliverables
Report
Each team will work together to produce a single report for their project. The project report must be submitted no later than
11:55 pm on Friday October 20th on T-Square by each member of the team. Late submissions will be penalized. This
report must be written in Microsoft Word ® using the template provided in the class website, or similar, and the formatting
guidelines specified therein. The contents of the report must address all of the requirements, questions, and issues described in
the sections below. Your report quality should adhere to "best commercial practices," which will be expected for all assignments
from this point on. It must be concise, written with a professional tone and avoiding wordiness and grammatical / spelling
mistakes. All sources must be adequately cited. See honor code statement. Images must be in color and all plots must be
legible (labels, axes, units, etc). The report should not exceed 25 pages of content including images (does NOT include cover
page, list of figures, references, or extra credit). The report section names do NOT need to follow the names given to each of
the requirements as shown in the section below. Items in appendices will not be graded unless specifically noted in these
guidelines.

Cover Page and Honor Code Statement

Each report should have a cover page with the title of the assignment, “Instructor: Prof. Dimitri N. Mavris”, name of both
students, date the assignment is due, and the following signed statement: "I certify that I have abided by the honor code of the
Georgia Institute of Technology and followed the collaboration guidelines as specified in the project description for this
assignment." You can put an electronic signature on the honor code page.

Distance Learning Students: You can just type your name on the signature line, or use an electronic image of your signature
if available.
Sizing & Synthesis Tool
The tool that your team creates must be submitted electronically no later than 11:55 pm on Friday October 20th on T-square
by each member of the team. To do so label your files as follows: “Team_#_FWD_P1”. Label an electronic version of your
report in a similar manner. These files can be submitted as an attachment using T-Square. Look under the “Assignments” tab
on the T-Square site for AE 6343. Alternatively, and only if this first option does NOT work, you can email your file to the
class assistants.

It is STRONGLY recommended that this tool be generated as a spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel ®. If you wish to use an
alternative program you must check with the teaching assistants before you proceed to generate the tool.

Requirements
Report Introduction
You must provide a brief introduction to your report explaining what the purpose of your efforts is, what information is
contained in the report and what final results or conclusions you are attempting to get across to the reader. This section should
also introduce the concept under study and briefly summarize the mission and requirements.

Formulation of Sizing and Synthesis Approach

After describing the requirements you must explain how you will proceed with the sizing & synthesis assessment. Explain what
theory you will use for this purpose and particularly what elements of that theory you will implement for the problem at hand.
For example, if you are going to use historical data for the calculation of the wing element explain why and how that data
applies to the sizing tasks of your vehicle; or if the vehicle you are modeling has a sustained turn requirement explain how the
theory you are implementing provides a way to model that. Do NOT give extensive and in-depth description of all the sizing
& theory provided in class. Remember to reference your sources appropriately

Creating Your Sizing and Synthesis Tool

Create an analysis tool for sizing and synthesis. This tool must provide as a final result a constraint analysis plot and should
enable the user to directly identify a design point in terms of thrust to weight ratio and wing loading. It must also provide a
mission analysis for the sizing of the system indicating the converged estimated weight and weight contributions from the
different weight groups. All inputs and outputs of the tool must be clearly labeled and visible to the user. Any values that are
input as a result of assumptions must also be clearly labeled, and the correct assumption values for the system you are modeling
must be indicated. Your tool should focus on ease-of-use and reusability; the tool that is deemed the best will be released to
the entire class. Users should have the option of inputting a number or adjusting a slider bar. Colors and visuals will make your
tool easier to understand.

Documenting the Sizing & Synthesis Tool

Your report must include a complete but concise description of the sizing & synthesis tool created. Use of data-flow diagrams,
screenshots of the tool, and descriptive images is encouraged. The reader must be able to understand the architecture of the
tool, what the control inputs are and how they can be changed, what the resulting outputs are and where they are shown. It must
also show how the assumptions’ values are controlled.

Benchmarking Exercise
You will benchmark your aircraft design tool against a known aircraft design (the F-86L Sabre aircraft). Design mission and
performance constraint data will be provided in Appendix A of this project description. The following information from the
benchmarking exercise must be clearly and concisely reported.

Mission Analysis
 Clearly indicate ALL assumptions and design decisions made, and most importantly the reasoning behind them.
Justifying your choice for parameter values is a critical part of this assignment as it reveals your competence and
understanding of sizing and synthesis. Remember to reference all sources appropriately.
 Indicate the converged value of weight and weight breakdown.
 Provide a mission analysis specifying instantaneous weight, aerodynamic and propulsive characteristics, and
instantaneous T/W and W/S values for key points in the mission (e.g. start, begin of cruise, end of cruise, end of loiter,
etc.)
Constraint Analysis
 Clearly indicate ALL assumptions and design decisions made, and most importantly the reasoning behind them.
Justifying your choice for parameter values is a critical part of this assignment as it reveals your competence and
understanding of sizing and synthesis. Remember to reference all sources appropriately.
 Provide a constraints diagram corresponding to the segments of the design mission. Identify what are the limiting or
critical constraints. Analyze and explain why the constraint curves look the way they do and if they make sense with
respect to the physics they model and the conditions you have assumed.
NOTE: Your comments should focus on the performance and physics of the problem, NOT on the mathematical
structure of the curves.
 Repeat the above requirement for the minimum performance requirements
 Provide a plot with all constraints (mission segments and performance requirements) and outline the feasible design
space.

Conceptual Design Point

Having obtained a predicted takeoff gross weight, T/W, and W/S, calculate the predicted maximum required thrust at sea level
and the predicted wing area. Compare these predicted values to the known values within the Standard Aircraft Characteristics.
Extend this comparison to other characteristics that you have assumed, such as aspect ratio or lift to drag ratio. Keeping in mind
that your efforts are at the conceptual phase of design, comment on the similarities and differences between your predicted
design and the actual F-86L. Indicate the source of these differences, i.e. why these differences exist.

Design to Satisfy Request for Proposal

Following the benchmarking exercise, you will utilize your sizing and sythesis tool to develop a conceptual design to satisfy a
Request for Proposal provided in Appendix B. Similar to the benchmarking exercise, the following information must also be
reported.

Mission Analysis
 Clearly indicate ALL assumptions and design decisions made, and most importantly the reasoning behind them.
Justifying your choice for parameter values is a critical part of this assignment as it reveals your competence and
understanding of sizing and synthesis. Remember to reference all sources appropriately.
 Indicate the converged value of weight and weight breakdown.
 Provide a mission analysis specifying instantaneous weight, aerodynamic and propulsive characteristics, and
instantaneous T/W and W/S values for key points in the mission (e.g. start, begin of cruise, end of cruise, end of loiter,
etc.)

Constraint Analysis
 Clearly indicate ALL assumptions and design decisions made, and most importantly the reasoning behind them.
Justifying your choice for parameter values is a critical part of this assignment as it reveals your competence and
understanding of sizing and synthesis. Remember to reference all sources appropriately.
 Provide a constraints diagram corresponding to the segments of the design mission. Identify what are the limiting or
critical constraints. Analyze and explain why the constraint curves look the way they do and if they make sense with
respect to the physics they model and the conditions you have assumed.
NOTE: Your comments should focus on the performance and physics of the problem, NOT on the mathematical
structure of the curves.
 Repeat the above requirement for the minimum performance requirements
 Provide a plot with all constraints (mission segments and performance requirements) and outline the feasible design
space.

Conceptual Design Point

Having obtained a predicted takeoff gross weight, T/W, and W/S, calculate the predicted maximum required thrust at sea level
and the predicted wing area. For your conceptual design, provide a comparison of the predicted mission performance with the
requirements provided in the RFP. Indicate clearly which requirements your current design is or is not able to satisfy. In
addition, provide a concise commentary on the impact your specific assumptions had on the outcome of your design.
Appendix A: Benchmark Aircraft Design
This appendix describes the performance requirements, design mission, and known design data of the F-86L Sabre aircraft.
This data is to be used for the benchmarking exercise, as described in the project description.

Design Mission and Performance Constraints

Benchmark Vehicle Mission
Phase Description
1 Take-off and clear a 50ft obstacle in less than 4400 ft (sea level, 90 degree day) at maximum power (with
afterburners). A maximum rate of climb of 90 ft/sec should be assumed

2 Achieve 1200 ft/sec air speed at sea level using maximum power (with afterburners)

3 Climb to a cruise altitude of 35,400 ft. under full military power (without afterburners)

4 Perform a cruise climb from 35,400 ft to 38,700 ft for 550 nautical miles. Use a cruising speed of 458 knots and
normal power. Integrate the fuel burn from first principles (do not use the Breguet range equation).

5 Search (Loiter) at 38,700 ft at normal power for 10 minutes.

6 Climb to 47,550 ft

7 Combat at 47,550 ft at maximum power (with afterburners) for 5 minutes. A combat speed of 536 knots should be
achievable at this altitude.

8 Cruise at 37,000 ft for 550 nautical miles at a speed of 458 knots under normal power.

9 Loiter at 35,000 ft for 10 minutes under maximum endurance conditions.

10 Land in less than 5,000ft (sea level, 90 degree day) without high lift devices.

Other Requirements
o Land with a 10% fuel reserve
o Carry 1 crew member (pilot) with gear, totaling 210 lbs
o Carry 432 lbs of payload

Propulsion System Assumptions

Your engine model should approximate the performance of the J47-GE-33 engine. Thrust available at sea level for the three
relevant power settings can be seen in Table 1 below. You should apply a reasonable thrust lapse model to account for changes
in thrust with altitude. You should refer to other sources (lecture notes, Raymer, Roskam, or other) for a model of engine fuel
consumption. Remember to document all assumptions and sources.

Table 1: Sea Level Thrust of the J47-GE-33 Engine 1

Power Setting S.L. Static Thrust (Lbf)

Maximum (with Afterburner) 7650
Military (without afterburner) 5550
Normal 5100

1
Standard Aircraft Characteristics for North American F-86L Sabre, 5th Edition Addendum Nr 9, 22 September 1958, United
States Air Force
Structural Weight Assumptions
You should use an empirical based empty weight fraction approximation. Refer to other sources (lecture notes, Raymer,
Roskam, or other) for a model of empty weight fraction as a function of gross takeoff weight. Remember to document all
assumptions and sources.

Aerodynamic Assumptions
You should construct a drag polar from assumed values of zero lift drag, Oswald efficiency factor, and wing aspect ratio. Refer
to other sources (lecture notes, Raymer, Roskam, or other) for these parameters. Remember to document all assumptions and
sources.

Benchmark Results
You should be able to predict the design point (thrust to weight versus wing loading), weights breakdown (fuel, empty, payload,
and crew weight components), and wing planform area of the F-86L aircraft after applying your design tool to the interception
mission described above. Research the actual values of these design parameters from the unclassified 1958 Standard Aircraft
Characteristics document for the F-86L. You should be able to find this document using the internet. Your result will be similar,
but not exactly equal to, the true performance of this aircraft. Answer all questions and report all results outlined in the project
description
Appendix B: Request for Proposal
Advanced Pilot Training Aircraft
Background
Due to the age of the T-38C fleet and changing needs for trainer aircraft to support modern combat aircraft like the F-22, the
Air Force hopes to field an Advanced Pilot Training Aircraft (APTA) in the next 10 years. This trainer will have the capability
to train pilots in the skills they need to transition to operational aircraft. APTA must be a suitable platform to train pilots in
basic aircraft control, airmanship, formation, instrument flying, navigation, air-to-air and air-to-ground employment, and
advanced crew/cockpit resource management.
In addition to conventional pilot training there are five fighter flying training requirements that lend themselves to two-seat
instruction prior to students performing them solo. These are sustained high-g operations, air-refueling, night vision imaging
systems operations, air-to-air intercepts, and data-link operations. Currently, since there are no two-seat F-22s or F-35s, these
training tasks are accomplished in two-seat F-16s. The APTA will need to have performance and systems capabilities to allow
it to take over these training functions as the F-16 fleet retires. Note that air-refueling training capability only requires a receiver
mechanism for standard Air Force flying boom refueling. It is not required to actually transfer fuel, so no internal refueling
plumbing is required.

Statement of Objectives (Requirements)

Since this is a request for proposal, you are free to choose any aircraft configuration you like. Your design for the advanced
pilot training aircraft should meet the performance requirements listed in the attachments below. Attachment 1 provides specific
information on the design mission. Attachment 2 specifies the minimum performance requirements.

Other Required (Threshold) or Desired (Objective) Capabilities and Characteristics

1. Crew of Two (Threshold / Objective): The cockpit will be designed for two pilots seated in tandem, with the student
pilot in front. Both cockpits will have complete controls and heads-up displays. Pilots and their personal equipment
weigh 550 lbs.

2. Fuel/Fuel Tanks (Threshold / Objective): Primary design fuel is standard JP-8 or Jet-A (6.8 lb/gal = 50.87 lb/ft3) jet
engine fuel. All fuel tanks will be self-sealing. If external fuel tanks are required (this is not desirable) limit them to
conformal fuel tanks that must be retained for the entire mission.

Propulsion System Assumptions

Your engine model should approximate the performance of an existing, commercial off-the-shelf engine. You should apply a
reasonable thrust lapse model to account for changes in thrust with altitude. You should refer to other sources (lecture notes,
Raymer, Roskam, or other) for a model of engine fuel consumption. Remember to document all assumptions and sources,
including the name and sea-level performance properties of your selected engine.

Structural Weight Assumptions

You should use an empirical based empty weight fraction approximation. Refer to other sources (lecture notes, Raymer,
Roskam, or other) for a model of empty weight fraction as a function of gross takeoff weight. Remember to document all
assumptions and sources.

Aerodynamic Assumptions
You should construct a drag polar from assumed values of zero lift drag, Oswald efficiency factor, and wing aspect ratio. Refer
to other sources (lecture notes, Raymer, Roskam, or other) for these parameters. Remember to document all assumptions and
sources.
Attachment 1
Pilot Training Mission
Configuration: Clean or With Conformal External Tanks
Phase Description
1 Fuel allowance for start (35 lb/engine), warm-up/taxi (25 lb/min/engine -- plan on 30 minutes ground time), mil-
power run-up (85 lb/engine)

2 Take-off and acceleration allowance (computed at sea level, 59 deg F). Fuel to accelerate to climb speed at take-
off thrust

3 Climb from sea level to optimum cruise altitude

4 Cruise out 150 nm at best cruise Mach and Best cruise Altitude (BCM/BCA)

5 Tanker rendezvous – 100 nm at 300 knots indicated airspeed (KIAS) at 20,000 ft MSL

6 Simulated or actual air refueling (full mechanical hookup required but fuel transfer optional, depending on
whether aircraft is designed with a full air refueling system or not) – 20 minutes at 250 KIAS at 20,000 ft MSL

7 Climb from 20,000 ft MSL to BCM/BCA

8 Cruise to practice area – 100 nm at BCM/BCA

9 Descend to 15,000 ft MSL

10 Air combat maneuvering training: Fuel required to maneuver for 20 minutes at 8-9 gs at 15,000 ft

11 Descend / climb to optimum cruise altitude

12 Cruise back 150 nm at BCM/BCA

13 Descend to sea level (distance credit allowed)

14 Reserves: fuel for 30 minutes at 10,000 feet and speed for maximum endurance

Note: Base all performance calculations on standard day conditions with no wind.

Attachment 2
Minimum Performance Requirements
Criteria Requirement Threshold Requirement Objective
Sustained g at 15,000 ft MSL 8 9
Ceiling 40,000 ft 50,000 ft
Minimum Runway Length 8,000 ft 6,000 ft
Payload (Expendable) 500 lbs 1,000 lbs
Range (Unrefueled) 1,000 nmi 1,500 nmi
Cruise Speed 0.7M 0.8M
Dash Speed 0.95M 1.2M
Note, these requirements should be considered in addition to the mission analysis performed for Attachment 1. Clearly state
any assumptions used to incorporate these requirements into your design process.
Appendix C: Bonus
When creating your sizing and synthesis tool, it would be nice to think that you can use it in situations that are not only AE
6343. Try to increase the usability of your tool by making it as flexible as possible. Ideally, you should be able to create a tool
that can handle military and commercial aircraft. The hardest part of this will involve the engine-specific parameters. If you
can successfully make your tool more versatile AND write up an additional appendix (no more than 2 pages) about how you
increased the versatility of your tool and what challenges you had to overcome, then you will receive up to 10 bonus points.
Important note: in order to receive the full 10 points, you need to make sure you adequately demonstrate the versatility of your
tool (e.g., talk about the games you have played and can play) and document your method in that additional write up; the tool
should also be VERY obvious about how different aircraft can be analyzed. This should not be your primary focus; you should
wait until everything else is done before working on this. Remember, if your tool/report is unfinished, 10 bonus points will not
do anything worthwhile.

Note: this should be an extra appendix in your report – if this is not specifically mentioned as the title of an appendix (e.g.,
“Appendix A: Tool Versatility”), you will receive no bonus points.