AircraftDesign 13

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 11

13 Drag Prediction

0.1. Drag Polar


In Section 2 under Step 14 it was a requirement that the flight performance has to be
checked to complete the aircraft design process. This is only possible if the drag polar
that forms the starting point for checking the flight performance is known. The polar
creates the connection between lift and drag (Fig. 13.1). When determining the polar, the
main task is to calculate the drag: the required lift is predefined, as a rule (in cruise
flight, for example, due to the fact that lift equals the aircraft's weight).

Fig. 13.1 The polar for uncambered and cambered airfoils. The angel of attack α for
C D =f ( C L ) is also indicated on the polar

If the polar is stated as an equation, the drag coefficient is written as a function of the lift
coefficient. A polar for an uncambered airfoil as in Fig. 13.1 can be written in the
following form:
2
C D =C D 0 + k ⋅ C L .
wherein
1
k=
π ⋅ A ⋅e
with the Oswald factor e and the aspect ratio A . Here the effective aspect ratio Aeff 
according to Section 7 should be used for the aspect ratio A , in order to take account of
the influence of endplates or winglets, which increase the effective aspect ratio Aeff 
compared to the aspect ratio calculated with A=b2 /S . Irrespective of which aspect ratio
is included in the calculation, the symbol A is simply retained in the equations in this
case. The final result is
C2L
C D =C D 0 + .
π ⋅ A ⋅e
A polar for an uncambered airfoil as in Fig. 13.1 can be written in the following form:
2
C D =C D ,  min  +k ( C L −C L,  min  ) .
 In the case of an uncambered airfoil the drag is minimal if the lift is zero. This is
the case with an angle of attack of α =0 .

 In the case of a cambered airfoil the drag is minimal for a specific positive lift.
This shifts the polar upward. For airfoils with a small camber this shift is
minimal. For this reason, a polar according to equation (13.3) can be used for
simplification.

 In the case of high angles of attack close to the maximum angle of attack α C L , max 
,
the drag increases more sharply than in the parabolic form according to
4
equations (13.3) and (13.4). A formulation with a term ( C L − C L,  min  ) is able to
represent the correct drag coefficients for both low and high lift coefficients:

C D =C D,  min  +k 1 ( C L −C L ,  min ) 2+ k 2 ( C L −C L , min  )4 .


In the further course of this section only the simple description of the polar according to
equation (13.3) will be used.

0.2. Drag
The drag can be classified according to physical causes or according to the drag-inducing
elements.

1. Classification of drag according to


physical causes
The total drag can be subdivided into (compare with Equation 13.3):

1 zero-lift drag: drag without the presents of lift;

2 induced drag: drag due to lift.

In addition wave drag comes into play, caused by a Mach number M that is greater than
the critical Mach number M crit . By definition, M crit  is the flight Mach number where a
flow Mach number M =1 arises locally on the aircraft for the first time with increasing
airspeed. This can, for example, occur on top of the wing. Chapter 7 gives more
information on this phenomenon.

Very varied suggestions are made in the literature to further classify drag. One version
(see Fig. 13.2) subdivides the zero-lift drag into profile drag, interference drag, and
miscellaneous drag (trim drag and additional or parasite drag). The profile drag can in
turn be subdivided into skin-friction drag and pressure drag.

Fig. 13.2 One of several possibilities to subdivide drag

 Wave drag is caused by shock waves on the airfoil. At high Mach numbers, both
the zerolift drag and the induced drag are increased by wave drag. The wave drag
is only shown if it is calculated separately (and not as part of zero-lift drag and
induced drag).

 Skin-friction drag is caused by the shear flow in the thin boundary layer close to
the airfoil surface. - Form drag is dependent upon the boundary layer, which can
assume a large thickness especially in areas of separated flow and therefore
prevents pressure being regained in the area of the trailing edge.

 Interference drag is caused by the mutual influence of the flow around


neighboring components. The closer two components are, the greater the
interference drag.

 Trim drag is caused by the elevator or horizontal stabilizer being deflected to


retain the equilibrium around the lateral axis, and lift or negative lift being
created on the horizontal tailplane. This results in a change in the induced drag
on the horizontal tailplane and on the wing. This change in drag can be
individually recorded on the wing and on the horizontal tailplane, but is
sometimes also calculated separately and shown as trim drag.

 Additional drag (parasite drag) refers to drag components that tend to be


recorded approximately and generally. The term "additional drag" is used, for
example, with reference to drag caused by:

 flaps and slats;

 landing gear;

 cockpit windows;

 leakages in the pressurized fuselage.

2. Classification of drag according to


drag-inducing elements
In Roskam VI, for example, drag is calculated individually for the following elements:

 wing;

 fuselage;

 empennage;

 nacelle and pylon;

 flaps and slats;

 landing gear;

 cockpit windows;

 and other elements (lump-sum).

3. Literature on calculating drag


This section contains key parameters and equations for calculating a simple polar for
initial comparative studies and flight performance calculations. A selection of basic
equations from DATCOM 1978 is presented primarily for subsonic flow. It is important
to bear in mind that DATCOM 1978 was not actually created for detailed flight
performance calculations, but rather only for calculating aircraft dynamics. In DATCOM
1978 (Section 4.5.3.1) the following comment therefore appears: It should be pointed out
that the basic approach taken here is satisfactory for preliminary design stability studies
and that no attempt is made to provide methods suitable for performance estimates.

Despite this statement, DATCOM 1978 contains one of the most detailed publicly
available handbook methods for calculating drag. The DATCOM version therefore also
forms the basis for aircraft design in textbooks such as Roskam VI and Raymer 1992.
Hoerner 1965 is still a central source for answering further detailed questions on the
subject of "drag".

4. Significance of drag calculation in


aircraft design
In a similar way to forecasting mass, forecasting aircraft drag is of considerable
importance for the aircraft project. If it should transpire during flight testing that the
aircraft drag is higher than assumed, it may be the case that the specified range of the
aircraft cannot be complied with. This may lead to contractual penalties for aircraft
which have already been ordered or even to orders being cancelled. Owing to the
importance of forecasting aircraft drag, aircraft manufacturers have developed their own
detailed computer-aided procedures, which are not accessible to the public. One in-
house method that meanwhile appeared in public is Boeing 1970.

5. Procedures for calculating drag


On a somewhat extended scale compared to equation (13.3), the polar is described here
by
C2L
C D =C D , 0+ Δ C D , flap  + ΔC D ,  slat + ΔC D ,  gear  + Δ C D ,  wave  + .
π ⋅ A ⋅e
In this version

C D ,0 is the zero-lift drag of the aircraft when the slats, landing flaps and landing gear are
retracted (clean configuration). Their additional drag is taken into account separately by

Δ C D ,  flap  , ΔC D , slat  , Δ C D ,  gear  calculated according to Section 5. In addition,

Δ C D ,wave  is the drag rise due to wave drag. A typical increase in drag with the Mach
number is shown by Fig. 13.6 for four different types of aircraft. An estimation method is
derived from Fig. 13.6 with equation (13.25).

e=0.7 with extended flaps, slats and landing gear,

e=0.85 can be used for retracted flaps, slats and landing gear for simplicity's sake. If one
wishes to go further, a calculation of the Oswald factor e according to equation (13.26) is
also possible.

5.1. Zero-lift Drag


Two methods are put forward to calculate the zero-lift drag of aircraft C D ,0 :

1 Calculation of zero-lift drag from equivalent skin-fraction drag (equivalent skin-


friction method);

2 Calculation of zero-lift drag from the individual drag of components (component


build-up method).
The first version is simpler and generally less precise, as details of the flow phenomena
are not incorporated in the method.

6. Calculating the zero-lift drag


coefficient C from the equivalent skin-
D ,0

friction drag coefficient C fe

This method uses the aircraft geometry which is now known according to the preceding
design steps to estimate the zero-lift drag D0 with the aid of an equivalent skin-friction
coefficient C f e . The skin-friction coefficient multiplied by the dynamic pressure and the
wetted area gives the zero-lift drag: D 0=q C f e S wet =q C D , 0 SW . In contrast to the
skinfriction drag coefficient C f , the equivalent skin-friction coefficient C f e also takes into
account the other forms of drag contributing to the zero-lift drag; these are form drag,
interference drag, trim drag and additional drag. The equivalent skin-friction coefficient
C f e is derived from measured values of the zero-lift drag. For this reason C f e includes all
drag contributions as mentioned.
S wet 
C D ,0=C f e ⋅
.
SW
Empirical values for C f e are contained in Table 13.1 and Table 13.2.

S wet  is the wetted area of the whole aircraft. In the case of conventional configurations
the following parts must be taken into account, as a rule:

 fuselage;

 wings;

 horizontal and vertical tailplanes;

 nacelles and pylons.

S wet =S wet , F + S wet , W +S wet  ,H + S wet , V +n E ⋅ S wet , N + n E ⋅ S wet ,  pylons  . 

In the case of unconventional configurations the wetted area of the aircraft has to be
determined with the other corresponding components of the aircraft.

Table 13.1 The equivalent skin-friction drag coefficient C f e on the basis of general
experience (Roskam I)

aircraft type C f e - subsonic

jets 0.003 … 0.004

twins 0.004 …0.007

singles 0.005 … 0.007

sailplane 0.003
The drag calculation with the equivalent skin-friction coefficient C f e is thus reduced to
the determination of the wetted areas.

Table 13.2and
 Bomber Thecivil
equivalent coefficient C f e on the basis of general
skin-friction drag0.0030
transport 
experience (Raymer 1992)
 Military cargo (high upsweep fuselage)  0.0035
 Air Force fighter  0.0035S wet 
 aircraft type  C D =C fe C -subsonic 
 Navy fighter  0.0040
0
Sr e f f e
 Clean supersonic cruise aircraft  0.0025
 Light aircraft - single engine  0.0055
The wetted area of fuselages
 Light aircraft - twin engine  with a cylindrical
0.0045middle section is as follows for λ F ≥ 4.5
according to Torenbeek 1988:
 Prop seaplane  0.0065 2 /3
 Jet seaplane  S wet , F=π ⋅d F ⋅ l F0.0040
⋅ 1− (
2
λF
1
1+ 2
λF)( )
d F Fuselage diameter. For non-circular fuselages D F is calculated from the fuselage
circumference P with d F=P /π

λ F Fuselage fineness ratio, λ F =l F /d F . The wetted area of streamlined fuselages without


the cylindrical middle section is as follows according to Torenbeek 1988:

( )(
2/ 3

)
ln 0.3
S wet , F=π ⋅ d F ⋅l F ⋅ 0.5+0.135 ⋅ 1.015+
lF λF
1.5

l n The distance from the aircraft nose in x direction to the start of the cylindrical part of
the fuselage.

The wetted area of the wing is as follows according to Torenbeek 1988:

S wet ,W =2⋅ S exp  ⋅ ¿


Sexp  Exposed wing area (without the part of the wing area SW running through the
fuselage).

τ Ratio of relative airfoil thicknesses, wing tip/wing root, τ =¿

λ Taper, λ=c t / cr .

Equation (13.8) can also be applied to the horizontal and vertical tailplane or the canard.

Fig. 13.3 Geometry of a nacelle as used for the calculation of its wetted area. The distance
l 1 is measured from the leading edge to the position of maximum thickness of the fan
cowling

The wetted area of a nacelle is as follows according to Torenbeek 1988 with the
geometrical parameters from
S Fig. =S13.3: +S +S
wet , N wet, fan cowl.  wet, gas gen.  wet,  p l u g

[ [ ( ) ( ( ( )) )] ]
l
l1
l ⋅D
lD⋅egD
S wet, gas gen. =π ⋅l g ⋅ Dg ⋅ 1 − n ⋅ 1− n n⋅ 1− 0.18 ⋅ n
3 Dg
l D
S wet, fan cowl.  =l n ⋅ D n ⋅ 2+0.35 1 +0.8 ⋅ 1 h l +1.15 ⋅ 1− 1 ⋅5 e f
Dl g 3 Dn
lg
S wet, plug =0.7 ⋅ π ⋅l p ⋅ D p
A simple approximation formula should be found for the wetted area of the pylon
S wet, pylons  according to the geometry.

7. Calculation of the zero-lift drag


coefficient C from the individual drag
D ,0

of components
When calculating the polar from the individual drag of components (component build-
up method), the zero-lift drag is calculated separately for each component. For
simplification, the induced drag can be determined as in Section 5 with the aid of an
assumed Oswald factor e .

The zero-lift drag of each component derives from:

1 the skin friction drag coefficient C f ;

2 a form factor F F , which takes into account the pressure drag of the component;

3 an interference factor Q , which takes into account the interference drag;

4 the factor S wet  / S ref , which serves to relate the drag coefficient of the component
to the reference wing area.

Thus, the zero-lift drag would then be


n
S wet  ,c
C D 0 =∑ Cf ,c ⋅F Fc ⋅Qc ⋅ .
c=1 Sr ef
This takes account of the individual drag of all n components (referred to as " c ").
However, the zero-lift drag of some components and some effects are difficult to deal
with in the way described above. Therefore two terms are added to the above equation. It
is then
n
S wet  ,c
C D 0 =∑ Cf ,c ⋅F Fc ⋅Qc ⋅ +C D ,  misc +C D , L+P .
c=1 S ref 
C D , misc  contains the zero-lift drag of all other components, such as the landing gear.
C D ,L+ P represents all the additional drag due to leakages in the pressure cabin, e.g. at
doors, and smaller drag, e.g. caused by aerials.

Re 1.) The skin-friction coefficient C f describes the drag of a longitudinal flow along a
flat plate. In the case of laminar flow the following applies:

C f ,  laminar =1.328 / √ R e .
In the case of turbulent flow the skin-friction drag according to DATCOM 1978 (4.1.5.1-
26) and Raymer 1992 equation (12.27) is
0.455
C f ,  turbulent  =
¿¿
Equation (3.17) is illustrated in Fig. 13.4. The Reynold's number is known to be
V ⋅l
ℜ= .
v
In the case of a wing or empennage, the characteristic length l is the mean aerodynamic
chord (MAC). In the case of the fuselage, the characteristic length is the total length of
the fuselage. v is the kinematic viscosity, which is a function of aircraft altitude.

If the surface is relatively rough, the skin-friction drag C f ,  turbulent  will be higher than
calculated by equation (13.16). This effect is taken account of according to DATCOM
1978 (4.1.5.1-27) and Raymer 1992 by means of a so-called cut-off Reynold's number
(Fig. 13.5):
(k)
l 1.053
 für  M <0.9 : ℜcut-off  =38.21⋅

=44.62⋅ ( ) ⋅ M . 
1.053
l 1.16
 für  M ≥ 0.9 : ℜ cut-off 
In this l is the characteristic length and k is the surface
k roughness according to Table
13.3.

Fig. 13.4 Skin-friction coefficient for turbulent flow DATCOM 1978 (4.1.5.1-26)

Table 13.3 Surface-roughness height k from DATCOM 1978 (4.1.5.1-A)

Type of Surface k [ mm]

aerodynamically smooth 0,00000

polished metal 0,00127

natural sheet metal 0,00406

smooth paint 0,00635

camouflage paint 0,01016

Bild 13.5

"Cutoff Reynolds Number" from DATCOM 1978 (4.1.5.1-26)

In the case of most aircraft the flow over the total wetted surface of the fuselage is
turbulent. Laminar flow may exist on the front 10 % to 20 % of the wing. A carefully
designed composite aircraft, such as the Piaggio GP 180, may exhibit laminar flow over
50 % of the wing and over 20 % to 35 % of the fuselage. Raymer 1992 suggests estimating
the proportion of laminar flow k laminar  for the aircraft in question, in order to thus
calculate a mean skin-friction drag

C f =k laminar  ⋅C f ,  laminar + ( 1− k laminar  ) ⋅C f ,  turbulent  .

Re 2.) The form factor F F is designated F F W for wings and F F H or F F V for


empennages. According to DATCOM 1978 (4.1.5.1) - in a notation pursuant to Raymer
1992 - the form factor is
[ ( ) ( ) ]⋅ [ 1.34 ⋅ M
4
0.6 t t
F F= 1+
xt c
+100
c
0.18
⋅ ( cos ⁡φ m )
0.28
]
x t is the position of maximum thickness according to Fig. 7.2. φ m is the sweep angle of
the %-line of maximum relative thickness.

According to DATCOM 1978 (4.2.3.1) the form factor for the fuselage is calculated
according to
60 ( lF /d F )
F F F =1+ + .
( l F /d F ) 400
3

According to RAYMER 1992 the form factor for nacelles is calculated from
0.35
F F N =1+ .
( lN / d N )
l N and d N are the length and the diameter of the nacelle respectively.

Re 3.) The interference factor Q is selected according to Table 13.4.

No interference factor is given for the fuselage, because the interference of the
components of a conventional aircraft design exists with the fuselage. On the other hand,
the fuselage does not exhibit any interference with itself! Table 13.4 Interference factor Q

Interference factor with


Property Interference factor Q
respect to …

engine mounted directly


on the wing or fuselage
distance of engine to wing
nacelle
respectively fuselage is
1.5
smaller than engine
diameter d N

distance of engine to wing


respectively fuselage is
greater than engine
1.3
diameter d N

high-wing, mid-wing or
low-wing position with
aerodynamically
optimized wing-fuselage
wing
fairing low-wing position
1.0
without aerodynamically
optimized wing-fuselage
fairing

- 1.10 …

fuselage conventional empenage 1.40

hailplane H-tail 1.0


V-tail 1.08

7.1. Wave drag


In this section an attempt is to be made to estimate the wave drag Δ C D ,wave . As the flow
configurations approaching sonic speed cannot be ascertained by using simple methods,
we shall work on the basis of measured wave drag Δ C D ,wave  and try to generalize these
measurements somewhat. A glance at Fig. 13.6 shows that the drag increase can be
expressed by an equation in the following form:

( )
b
M
Δ C D ,  wave =a ⋅ −1
M crit 
M crit  is the critical Mach number of the (project) aircraft to be examined. For a and b the
values from Table 13.5 have to be inserted. Parameters a and b have been ascertained
mathematically, with the aim of reproducing the curve from Fig. 13.6 as precisely as
possible. To do this, the critical Mach number M crit  was read off directly from Fig. 13.6. It
is connected to M D D in a certain way - by definition the Mach number where the wave
drag reaches a value of 0.002 or 20 drag counts. Table 13.5 Parameters used to calculate
wave drag

aircraft MDD M crit  a b

C-130H 0.64 0.48 0.0198 2.17

C-5A 0.79 0.55 0.1002 4.77

B727 0.88 0.70 0.1498 3.20

F-106 0.99 0.90 0.8250 2.61

Fig. 13.6 Drag rise due to wave drag for selected aircraft (Roskam II)

Fig. 13.6 contains data for the following aircraft:

C-130H Lockheed C-130H Hercules. Military transport, turboprop, mмто  =79000 k g,


V C R=167 m/ s.

C-5A Lockheed C-5A Galaxy. Military transport, jet, m мто  =349000 k g, V C R=232 m/s .

727 Boeing 727-200. Passenger aircraft, jet, mMTO  =95000 k g , V C R=254 m/s , M =0.82
.

F-106 Convair F-106A Delta Dart, the primary all-weather interceptor aircraft for the
United States Air Force from the 1960s through the 1980s. Delta wing with NACA 0004-
65 mod airfoil at root and tip. The fuselage was designed according to area ruling. The
practical procedure for estimating Δ C D ,wave  would therefore be as follows:
1 Select one of the four stated aircraft that looks as similar as possible to the project
aircraft;

2 Determine M crit  of the project aircraft or estimate M crit  of the project aircraft
from difference or ratio of M crit  and M D D with the aid of Table 13.5. Note: M D D of
the project aircraft is known from the wing design;

3 Take parameters a and b from Table 13.6;

4 Estimate Δ C D ,wave  with the aid of equation (13.25) as a function of the Mach
number.

7.2. Induced drag and Oswald factor


The Oswald factor e is required by equation (13.3) to calculate induced drag.
2
CL
C D =C D0 +C D i=C D 0 +
π ⋅ A ⋅e
According to Howe 2000 (equation 6.14a), the Oswald factor e can be estimated for the
subsonic range and for transonic flows (M <0.95) for aircraft with a wing aspect ratio of
A>5 from
1
e=
( 1+0.12 M 6 ) ¿ ¿
In this equation

M is the flight Mach number

A is the (effective) aspect ratio

t /c is the relative airfoil thickness


φ 25 is the wing sweep of the 25 % line

N e is the number of engines on the wing (if none, then N e =0 ).

f ( λ)=0.005¿
In this equation λ is the wing taper. A typical value for f (λ) is 0.0062.

You might also like