See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/337657660

Preliminary Structural Design of Light Sport Aircraft (LSA)

Thesis · January 2019

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11933.05608

CITATIONS READS

0 13,037

2 authors:

Ahmad Akmal Abdul Rahman Zamri Omar

Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
11 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS 27 PUBLICATIONS 83 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ahmad Akmal Abdul Rahman on 01 December 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 UNIVERSITI TUN HUSSEIN ONN MALAYSIA
STATUS CONFIRMATION FOR UNDERGRADUATE
PRELIMINARY STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF LIGHT SPORT AIRCRAFT
ACADEMIC SESSION: 2017/2018
I, AHMAD AKMAL BIN ABDUL RAHMAN, agree to allow this Undergraduate
Project Report to be kept at the Library under the following terms:
1. This Undergraduate Project Report is the property of the Universiti Tun Hussein
Onn Malaysia.
2. The library has the right to make copies for educational purposes only.
3. The library is allowed to make copies of this report for educational exchange
between higher educational institutions.
4. ** Please Mark (√)

CONFIDENTIAL (Contains information of high security or of

great importance to Malaysia as STIPULATED
under the OFFICIAL SECRET ACT 1972)
RESTRICTED (Contains restricted information as determined
by the Organization/institution where research
was conducted)
√ FREE ACCESS

Approved by

(WRITER’S SIGNATURE) (SUPERVISOR’S SIGNATURE)

Permanent Address:
LOT 6149, LORONG 9,
DESA PUJUT BANDAR BARU PERMYJAYA,
98000, MIRI,
SARAWAK
Date: 6th January 2019 Date: ______________________
NOTE:
** If this Undergraduate Project Report is classified as CONFIDENTIAL or
RESTRICTED, please attach the letter from the relevant
authority/organization stating reasons and duration for such
classifications.
 PRELIMINARY STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF LIGHT SPORT AIRCRAFT

AHMAD AKMAL BIN ABDUL RAHMAN

A thesis submitted in
fulfilment of the requirement for the award of the
Degree Bachelor of Aeronautical Engineering Technology (Professional Piloting)
with Honours

Faculty of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering

Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia

JANUARY 2019
 ii

I hereby declare that the work in this project report is my own except for quotations
and summaries which have been duly acknowledged

Student : ……………………………………………………
AHMAD AKMAL BIN ABDUL RAHMAN
Date : 6th January 2019

Supervisor : ……………………………………………………
ASSOC. PROF. DR ZAMRI BIN OMAR

Co Supervisor : ……………………………………………………
 iii

Dedicated specially to both of my parents, Mr. Abdul Rahman Lai and Mrs. Sapiah
Binti Joll, my entire family, students of Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia and
our proud nation, Malaysia.
 iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

In the Name of Allah, The Most Gracious and The Ever Compassionate.
Praise and Glory only be to Allah SWT. Prayers and peace be onto Prophet
Muhammad PBUH, his whole family, his companions RA and those who be with them
until hereafter. As for after, this piece of writing namely ‘Preliminary Structural
Design of a Light Sport Aircraft’ is specially dedicate to instil a part of knowledge and
analysis on structural design of a light sport aircraft especially for students who are
undertaking Aeronautical Engineering Technology study in Universiti Tun Hussein
Onn Malaysia.
First and foremost, I would like to give my upmost thanks and gratefulness
towards my Bachelor Degree Project supervisor, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Zamri Bin Omar that
without his help, I would not succeed in finishing this analysis and overall writing. His
wide knowledge especially in aircraft design and student friendly character managed
to help me upon completing this writing. May Allah grant him the upmost rewards.
Moreover, to my friends and anyone who contributed whether directly or
indirectly in helping me to finish my thesis, always backing me up when I am down in
the process of finishing this piece, I would like to give out much love and thanks to all
of them.
In a nutshell, I hope that this piece of writing of mine will benefit others and
myself. May Allah give more knowledge for anyone who had and read this thesis.
Amiin.

Ahmad Akmal Bin Abdul Rahman

UTHM, Parit Raja, Johor Darul Takzim.
 v

ABSTRACT

Light Sport Aircraft (LSA). It is a simple, ultra-light yet fascinating type of aircraft
dedicated towards air recreation and sports purposes. Apart from that, this small but
meaningful aircraft also being used as an aerial photography long before drone
existence and can help one to spray their croplands aerially. Thus, an initiative to
understand more about Light Sport Aircraft especially in tertiary education institutions
such as UTHM had driven the idea to design one and eventually manufacture it in the
near future. This writing is nonetheless a continuity of previous study on a Light Sport
Aircraft design made by Hazreen Hazman who had completed the conceptual design
phase through his thesis, “Pembangunan Rekabentuk Penjelmaan bagi Pesawat
Microlight”. In this study, it is actually the preliminary round of design as by the name
itself. By using a sophisticated aeronautical engineering analysis software namely
FAR23 Loads, the main input and design are gathered from previous study aside
getting some other vital data from LSA in the market especially the Skywalker II
Microlight aircraft. At the end of this study, the LSA is found to have a Maximum
Take-off Weight of 1134 lbs or approximately 515 kg and an empty weight of 677 lbs.
𝐶
Furthermore, results also shows that the 𝐶 𝑖 ratio to be at its maximum at the wing root
𝐿

by value of 1.13 where it shows the root will stall first – a desirable stall condition. In
this study, other loading parameter of aircraft such as Envelope of Useful Loads,
Aircraft Operation Limits, Aerodynamic Coefficients and V-n diagram are given in
form of graphs and illustrations for better understanding of the LSA loadings
behaviour. Therefore, the understanding on LSA structural loadings and its conceptual
design phase had been achieved and shown through this study.
 vi

ABSTRAK

Pesawat Ringan Sukan (LSA). Ia adalah sejenis pesawat ultra-ringan, di mana

rekabentuknya mudah lagi menarik, didedikasikan sebagai pesawat rekreasi mahupun
sukan. Disamping itu, pesawat ini turut dimanfaatkan bagi kegunaan fotografi udara
sebelum wujudnya dron serta mampu membantu seseorang untuk menyembur baja ke
atas tanaman mereka. Oleh sebab itu, terwujud satu inisiatif bagi memahami secara
mendalam berkenaan pesawat ringan ini oleh institusi pengajian tinggi terutamanya
UTHM dimana ianya telah memacu idea untuk merekabentuk pesawat ini serta
memfabrikasinya dalam masa yang terdekat. Penulisan ini hanyalah kesinambungan
daripada kajian lepas mengenai rekabentuk pesawat ini oleh Hazreen Hazman yang
telah melengkapkan fasa rekabentuk konsep melalui tesisnya, “Pembangunan
Rekabentuk Penjelmaan bagi Pesawat Microlight”. Kajian ini merupakan fasa
rekabentuk penjelmaan seperti dinyatakan melalui tajuknya. Melalui penggunaan
perisisan analisis kejurutraan aeronautik yang mapan iaitu FAR23 Loads, input utama
serta data rekabentuknya diambil daripada kajian lepas selain dari mengambil data
penting yang lain daripada beberapa LSA yang berada di pasaran terutamanya pesawat
mikro-ringan Skaywalker II. Pada penghujung kajian ini, pesawat ringan ini didapati
memiliki Berat Terbang Maksimum (MTOW) 1134 lbs atau 515 kg serta Berat Kosong
Pesawat (WE) ialah 677 lbs. Tambahan pula, keputusan kajian turut menunjukkan
𝐶𝑖
nisbah maksimum pada pangkal sayap pesawat dengan nilai 1.13 yang mana
𝐶𝐿

mengisyaratkan bahawa sayap tersebut akan menjadi pegun di pangkal sayapnya

dahulu – suatu kondisi pegun yang diinginkan Di dalam kajian ini juga, beberapa
parameter beban seperti Lingkungan Beban Berguna, Had Operasi Pesawat, Pekali
Aerodinamik serta rajah V-n telah disediakan di dalam bentuk graf serta rajah bagi
pemahaman mendalam mengenai tingkahlaku beban LSA. Oleh yang demikan,
pemahaman menganai beban struktur LSA serta proses rekabentuk penjelmaan telah
digarap serta ditunjukkan melalui kajian ini.
 vii

CONTENTS

TITLE
DECLARATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
ABSTRACT v
ABSTRAK vi
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF FIGURES xii
LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS xv
LIST OF APPENDICES xvii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background Study 1

1.2 Problem Statement 3

1.3 Aim 4

1.4 Objectives 4

1.5 Scope of Study 4

1.6 Significant of study 5

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 6

2.1 Aircraft Design 6

2.1.1 Conceptual Design Phase 8

2.1.2 Preliminary Design Phase 8

2.1.3 Detailed Design Phase 9

2.1.4 Aircraft Design Certification Basis 10

2.2 Light Sport Aircraft (LSA) 11

2.3 Major Forces on Aircraft 15

 viii

2.3.1 Lift 15

2.3.2 Thrust 16

2.3.3 Weight 17

2.3.4 Drag 17

2.4 Loads on Aircraft. 17

2.5 Major Aircraft Stress 20

2.6 Aircraft Structure Material 22

2.7 Aircraft Design Baseline 23

2.7.1 Design Baseline: Main Parts of Aircraft 25

2.8 Aircraft Load Factors 39

2.8.1 V-n Diagrams 39

2.8.2 Shrenk’s Approximation Method 40

2.9 Previous Study: Hazreen Hazman’s Design 42

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 45
3.1 Overall Study Flow Chart 45

3.2 FAR23 Loads 47

3.2.1 Weight Estimation Module 49

3.2.2 Weight and CG Module 51

3.2.3 Envelope of Loads Module 55

3.2.4 Geometry Module 57

3.2.5 Structural Speed Module 61

3.2.6 Mach Limitations Module 65

3.2.7 Aerodynamics Coefficients Module 66

3.2.8 Flight Loads Module 73

3.2.9 Project Scope 78

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 79

4.1 Preliminary Design Weight Estimation 79

4.1.1 Weight Estimation module 79

 ix

4.1.2 Weight and CG Module 81

4.1.3 Envelope of Loads Module 82

4.2 Geometry Module 85

4.3 Structural Speed Module 91

4.4 Mach Limitations Module 92

4.5 Aerodynamics Coefficient Module 95

4.5.1 Aerodynamics Coefficient: Cruise Configuration 95

4.5.2 Aerodynamics Coefficient: Landing Configuration 101

4.5.3 Aerodynamics Coefficient: Enroute Configuration 106

4.5.4 Aerodynamics Coefficients Graphs 106

4.6 Flight Loads Module 111

CHAPTER 5 CONCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 124

5.1 Conclusion 124

5.1.1 Preliminary Structural Design 125

5.1.2 Structural Layout Strength Analyzation 125

5.1.3 Expected Loads 126

5.2 Recommendations 126

REFERENCE 128
APPENDIX 133
 x

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1: Certification for several aircraft categories used in USA and Europe. 10
Table 2.2: The advantages and disadvantages of a Light Sport Aircraft 12
Table 2.3: Performance table of Light Sport Aircraft available in current market 13
Table 2.4: Classes of loads that an aircraft usually encounter during its operation 19
Table 2.5: Comparison of ratio of We to MTOW for LSA in current market 24
Table 2.6: Advantages and disadvantages high wing configuration 30
Table 2.9: Control surfaces on a common aircraft 35
Table 2.8: Hazreen Hazman’s Light Sport Aircraft design breakdown. 42
Table 3.1: Input of our study on Light Sport Aircraft using FAR23 Loads 49
Table 3.2: Input of Weight and CG Module of FAR23 Loads software 52
Table 3.3: Input data of Geometry Module (LSA Wing) 58
Table 3.4: Input data of Geometry Module (LSA Flap) 59
Table 3.5: Structural Speed Module input for our Light Sport Aircraft 61
Table 3.6: Input data for Mach Limitations Module of our study 65
Table 3.7: Input for Additive Lift Distribution calculation tab. 69
Table 3.8: Inputs of Basic Lift Distribution tab for Light Sport Aircrft. 70
Table 3.9: Input data of Stall CL calculations tab for Light Sport Aircraft 70
Table 3.10: Input of Spanwise Coefficient distribution tab 71
Table 3.11: Inputs of Airplane Less Tail Load Calculation 72
Table 3.12: Input data of aircraft general information and geometry 75
Table 3.13: Input data of aircraft structural speed 75
Table 3.14: Input data of aircraft altitude and its aero coefficient 75
Table 3.15: Input data for Aerodynamics Coefficient - Cruise and Landing 76
Table 4.1: Weight Estimation Module Output data for FAR23 software 80
Table 4.2: Output for Weight & CG Module of FAR23 software 81
Table 4.3: Envelope of Loads Module output for our LSA 83
Table 4.4: Geometry Output Module for Wings and its components 85
 xi

Table 4.5: The output of aileron aft and forward hinge line 88
Table 4.6: Output data of Structural Speed Module for our LSA 92
Table 4.7: Output data for Mach Limitations Module of FAR 23 Loads 93
Table 4.8: Output of Cruise configuration submodule – Wing Geometry 96
Table 4.9: Additive Lift Distribution along LSA’s wing spanwise 97
Table 4.10: Maximum Lift Coefficient, CLMAX for each element of wing 97
Table 4.11: Wing Lift Coefficient, CL along spanwise of LSA wing 98
Table 4.12: Values of CDI, CD and CM along spanwise of LSA wing 99
Table 4.13: Overall Aerodynamics Coefficient of wing at cruise configuration 100
Table 4.14: Airplane Less Tail Aero Coefficient output 100
Table 4.15: Maximum Lift Coefficient, CLMAXS for each focused area 102
Table 4.16: CL distribution along spanwise- Landing Configuration 103
Table 4.17: Wing aerodynamics coefficients for each wing part at landing 103
Table 4.18: Overall Aerodynamics Coefficient - Landing configuration 104
Table 4.19: Airplane Less Tail Aero Coefficient - Landing configuration 105
Table 4.23: Cruise Configuration data for Flight Loads Module, Altitude 0 ft 111
Table 4.24: Landing Configuration data for Flight Loads Module, Altitude 0 ft 111
Table 4.25: Flight Loads Module output - Cruise configuration, CGcr Max 1 112
Table 4.26: Flight Loads Module output - Cruise configuration, CGcr Max 2 114
Table 4.27: Flight Loads Module output - Cruise configuration, CGcr Avg 115
Table 4.28: Flight Loads Module output - Cruise configuration, CGcr Min 117
Table 4.29: Flight Loads Module output - Landing configuration, CGcr Max 1 118
Table 4.30: Flight Loads Module output - Landing configuration, CGcr Max 2 120
Table 4.31: Flight Loads Module output - Landing configuration, CGcr Avg 121
Table 4.32: Flight Loads Module output - Landing configuration, CGcr Min 122
 xii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1: The popular aircraft design phases as proposed by Torenbeek 7

Figure 2.2: A typical modern fishbone diagram of aircraft design process 7
Figure 2.3: Major forces acting on aircraft during straight-and-level flight 15
Figure 2.4: Illustration of centre of pressure on an aerofoil of an aircraft wing 16
Figure 2.5: Illustration of lift generated that govern by Bernoulli’s principle 16
Figure 2.6: The main task of loads and their useage in aircraft development 18
Figure 2.7: Cut section of an aircraft fuselage with longerons and stingers 20
Figure 2.8: Five major stresses that act on airframe of an aircraft 21
Figure 2.9: Bending in wings of B-52 aircraft when in operation. 21
Figure 2.10: Current materials being used in Boeing 787 Dreamliner 22
Figure 2.11: Graph of We to MTOW of existing LSA in market 24
Figure 2.12: The basic main components of a general aircraft 25
Figure 2.13: Schneider ASW-20 sailplane with a tadpole fuselage shape. 27
Figure 2.14: A display of low-wing configuration placement on Boeing 737 28
Figure 2.15: An ASTRA IAI Westwind II aircraft with mid-wing configuration 29
Figure 2.16: The SA-160 Light Sport Aircraft with a high wing configuration. 30
Figure 2.17: An amphibian aircraft with parasol wing configuration 31
Figure 2.18: Empennage of an aircraft with its control surfaces 31
Figure 2.19: The common and uncommon design of empennage existed. 32
Figure 2.20: Various aircraft engines that usually being installed on aircraft 33
Figure 2.21: The types of undercarriage being used in aircraft worldwide 33
Figure 2.22: The cross-section of a wing that illustrates aerofoil 36
Figure 2.23: The complete geometry illustration of an aerofoil. 36
Figure 2.24: A YAK-18T aircraft that uses Clark Y aerofoil as its wing root 38
Figure 2.25: Clark Y aerofoil of different lengths 38
Figure 2.26: A typical V-n diagram or flight envelope of aircraft 40
Figure 2.27: Planform geometry for Shrenk’s Approximation Method 41
 xiii

Figure 2.28: Overall view of Hazreen Hazman’s Light Sport Aircraft design 43
Figure 2.29: Close up views of Hazreen Hazman’s Light Sport Aircraft design 44
Figure 3.1: Study overall flow chart 46
Figure 3.2: FAR23 Loads main menu with all integrated modules in it 47
Figure 3.3: FAR23 Loads overall flow chart for all available modules 48
Figure 3.4: Interface of Weight Estimation Module of FAR23 Loads 49
Figure 3.5: Flow chart for Weight Estimation Module of FAR23 Loads 50
Figure 3.6: Interface of Weight and CG Module of FAR23 Loads 51
Figure 3.7: Flow chart of Weight and CG Module of FAR23 Loads 54
Figure 3.8: The interface of Envelope of Loads Module for FAR23 Loads 55
Figure 3.9: The flow chart of Envelope of Loads Module for FAR23 Loads 56
Figure 3.10: The main interface of Geomerty Module for FAR23 Loads 57
Figure 3.11: The components interface of Geometry Module for FAR23 Loads 57
Figure 3.12: Illustration of chord-wise elements division into 100 elements 58
Figure 3.13: The flow chart of Geometry Module for FAR23 Loads 60
Figure 3.14: Structural Speed Module main interface 61
Figure 3.15: The flow chart of Structural Speed Module for FAR23 Loads 63
Figure 3.16: Continuation of Structural Speed Module flow chart 64
Figure 3.17: Mach Limitations Module input interface window 65
Figure 3.18: Main Interface window for Aerodynamics Coefficients Module 66
Figure 3.19: Aerodynamics Coefficient Submodule interface window 66
Figure 3.20: The flow chart for Aerodynamics Coefficient of FAR23 Loads 68
Figure 3.21: Main interface of Flight Loads module of FAR23 Loads 73
Figure 3.22: Flow chart of Flight Loads module for FAR23 Loads 77
Figure 3.23: Overall usage of FAR23 Loads software for this study 78
Figure 4.1: Useful Loads Envelope and Structural Limits diagram 84
Figure 4.2: Wing geometry drawing using coordinates given (Right Wing) 86
Figure 4.3: Right Wing Aileron drawing using given coordinates 87
Figure 4.4: Flap of Right Wing of the LSA 88
Figure 4.5: The aft hinge line geometry drawing of LSA aileron (Right Aileron) 89
Figure 4.6: The forward hinge line geometry drawing of aileron (Right Aileron) 90
Figure 4.7: The complete geometry of LSA’s wing and its components. 91
Figure 4.8: Light Sport Aircraft Operating Limits in terms of its speed (KEAS) 94
Figure 4.9: Graph of LSA CLW versus α 107
 xiv

Figure 4.10: Graph of LSA CD (A/P) versus CLW 108

Figure 4.11: Graph of LSA CM (W+F+LG) versus α 109
Figure 4.12: V-n diagram - Cruise configuration, CGcr Max 1 113
Figure 4.13: V-n diagram - Cruise configuration, CGcr Max 2 115
Figure 4.14: V-n diagram - Cruise configuration, CGcr Avg 116
Figure 4.15: V-n diagram - Cruise configuration, CGcr Min 118
Figure 4.16: V-n diagram - Landing configuration, CGcr Max 1 119
Figure 4.17: V-n diagram - Landing configuration, CGcr Max 2 120
Figure 4.18: V-n diagram - Landing configuration, CGcr Avg 122
Figure 4.19: V-n diagram - Landing configuration, CGcr Min 123
 xv

LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

∆ - Differences of values
CD - Drag Coefficient
CL - Lift Coefficient
CM - Pitching Moment Coefficient
S - Wing span
𝛼 - Angle of attack
AD - Anno Domini
ATPL - Airline Transport Piloting License
CAD - Computer Aided Design
CASA - Civil Aviation Safety Authority
CG - Centre of Gravity
CPL - Commercial Pilot License
EASA - European Aviation Safety Agency
FAA - Federal Aviation Authority
FAR - Federal Aviation Regulation
GA - General Aviation
In - Inches
IR - Instruments Rating
KEAS - Knots Equivalent Air Speed
KIAS - Knots Indicated Air Speed
Kts - Knots
Lbs - Pound
LSA - Light Sport Aircraft
MAC - Mean Aerodynamic Chord
Max. - Maximum
MD - Dive Mach Number
 xvi

Min. - Minimum
MNE - Mach Never Exceed
MTOW - Maximum Take-off Weight
NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration
No. - Numero (Number)
PPL - Private Piloting License
PSM - Projek Sarjana Muda (Bachelor Degree Project)
USA - United States of America
UTHM - Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
VA - Maneuvering Speed
VD - Dive Speed
VF - Flutter Clearence Speed
VNE - Never Exceed Speed
WE - Empty Weight
Wt. - Weight
 xvii

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX TITLE PAGE

A FAR23 Loads Output (Geometry Drawings) 133
 1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, readers will expect to read about the background and problems that
lead to study. Furthermore, this chapter will also show the objectives, aim, scope or
limitations and significant that is applied throughout the entire study on Light Sport
Aircraft structural design.

1.1 Background Study

Aircraft. A highly technological transport that ever made by man to ease their
transportation across the world, roaring gracefully through the skies. From the Wright
brothers’ era, till this very day, the aircraft had gone through series of evolution
ranging from small aircraft to larger ones such as Boeing 777X to the latest Airbus 350
XWB either for military purposes or even civil aircraft. But, there is a small area of
aircraft that seldom covered by aircraft enthusiast which is the light sport aircraft
(LSA) area.
The aircraft family history dates back from as early as 3000 BC till 2000 BC
during the Mayan, Egyptian, Greek up till the Babylonian periods where those stated
civilization had depicted the idea of flying machines and the ability of human to be
airborne but these are usually only myths, legends and from their holy scriptures[1].
When Prophet Muhammad PBUH in 609 CE, came with the Quran which has a verse
from Allah SWT that said, “Do they not observe the birds above them, spreading out
their wings and folding them in? None upholds them except Allah the Most
Gracious. Truly (Allah) the Most Gracious: Truly it is He (Allah) that watches over
 2

all things.” (Surah Al-Mulk: 19), initiated a Muslim scholar in 9th century, Abas Ibn
Firnas to find his own way to let humans be airborne into the air by creating wings like
birds use to fly. He had tested them but only to find that he only can fly in a short
period of time and this invention eventually leads to the study of ornithopter that
inspired the West in creating heavier-than-air machines later on.
In later years, the West improvised the idea on Ibn Firnas’s ornithopter when
Roger Bacon, 1260 AD, stated in his article, “On The Marvelous Power of Art and
Nature”, that one of the two ways to fly a man is by using the Ibn Firnas’s
ornithopter[2]. Then, 600 years after the demise of Abas Ibn Firnas, the famous
Renaissance Era inventor, Leonardo Da Vinci sketched out several of his own flying
machine and in the 19th century, there are several attempts by other aviation enthusiast
to bring Da Vinci,s sketches to life[3]. The idea of gliding flying machine are further
studied and expanded until the invention of first airplane by the Wright Brothers in
1902. On cold December 1902, the Wright Brother has successfully flown a real life
heavier-than-air machine by combining the idea of gliding wings with the propulsive
power of a piston-powered engine that flown 260 metres above ground for several
second before they plumped back towards the ground[4]. After this successful and
significant attempt for mankind, several evolution are being made towards the idea of
the proposed flying machines by improving the materials used, power required to take
off, stability and control of the aircraft. From the year 1915-1955, the airplanes are
subjected to be built as military purposes due to the events of World War I and World
War II[5]. After these wars ended, the previously military oriented aircrafts are slowly
emerging into civil aviation aircraft to ease the transportation of people across the
world and since then the aviation sector is still expanding.
Due to the advancement of the aviation sector, people are further looking into
aircraft as recreational purposes that will help one to cover his free time with
recreational flights. Thus, the idea of microlight came in mind of aviation inventors.
The idea of microlight actually found out during the year 1960s, when NASA were
looking for ways to safely lands the space shuttles on earth safely from outer space.
Then, between years 1945 till 1958, came a Langley engineer named Francis M.
Rogallo had been researching about a flexible kite to help NASA to solve the above
case but his idea was not into account of NASA during that time[5]. Fortunately, some
 3

aviation enthusiasts were keen to hear about Rogallo’s idea of foldable delta wing and
thus the Hang Glider was born.
The idea of Hang Glider was further expanded by other home-build aircraft
inventor and the first modern type of microlight that we see today, flew on early 1970s
till 1980s after the drive of aviation enthusiast to have their very own affordable
powered flight[5]. After the advancement of the microlight sector, this unsung sector
is further divided into two groups which are ultralight aircraft and Light Sport Aircraft
to give the authorities the power to further controlling the production and airworthiness
rule for this ever expanding home-build aircraft. Therefore, a clear understanding and
comprehensive knowledge about the structural design especially in the sector of Light
Sport Aircraft is vital so that it can be operated and flown safely by its users.
In designing an aircraft, there are three phases’ namely conceptual, preliminary
and detailed designs. The first part of the design phase – conceptual design had been
obtained from previous works of Hazreen Hazman through his Bachelor’s Degree
Project thesis and this study will cover the preliminary phase of his Light Sport Aircraft
design where it will be also analysed to prepare it for detailed design phase in future
times. Furthermore, advancement in aircraft design and analysis software enables us
to virtually build the aircraft and subject our design to plausible loads and analyse them
before it can be built and operated. Through this phase, we can also check whether the
given design is within safety loading limits of a Light Sport Aircraft that currently in
the market where we can suggest any needed optimization on the design for future
further works.

1.2 Problem Statement

After a conceptual design is being made, a preliminary design phase must be made. In
the phase of aircraft preliminary design, a thorough structural analysis must be made
so that that loading of the aircraft is within the limits that it can withstand. Load
estimation on aircraft is crucial so that the aircraft will not face structural failures
during operation or too heavy to be operated due to inaccurate estimation. It is hoped
after a preliminary phase design is acted upon the design of LSA conceptual design
 4

obtained from Hazreen Hazman[6], this aircraft can undergo detailed design and lastly
can be manufactured.

1.3 Aim

Any successful study will list out their aims before the study is carried out where in
this study, we want to analyse the loadings on Hazreen Hazman’s Light Sport Aircraft
design and suggest the improvements that can be made towards the design to prepare
it for its detailed design phase.

1.4 Objectives

There are several objectives that we will achieve upon the completion of this
Bachelor’s Degree Project such as follow:

1. To develop a preliminary structural design of a Light Sport Aircraft

2. To analyse the structural layout strength of a Light Sport Aircraft
3. To simulate the loads expected to act on the Light Sport Aircraft structure using
Aeronautical Engineering software such as FAR.23 Loads.

1.5 Scope of Study

There are several scopes that will limit the study of the stated title for this Bachelor’s
Degree Project such as:

1. The conceptual design and structure database of the stated Light Sport Aircraft
is already available which is taken from previous Bachelor’s Degree Project
student, Hazreen Hazman, from his thesis, “Pembangunan Rekabentuk
Penjelmaan Bagi Pesawat Microlight”.
2. The loads model that will be generated will consider all possible loads for all
flight regimes (maneuvers) in the general aviation field.
 5

3. The software and tools used to analyse the structural layout is mainly using
FAR.23 Loads software.

1.6 Significant of study

This study on Light Sport Aircraft structural design will benefit the following party:

1. Aircraft inventor and designer around Malaysia: The preliminary design

can help give insight on critical areas to be focus during preliminary design of
aircraft so that it is within loading limits.
2. Learning Institution (Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia): This study
will help any new users of FAR.23 Loads software to have idea of FAR.23
Loads software outcome in helping preliminary design process of an aircraft.
3. UTHM’s Aeronautical Engineering Technology students: This study will
help one to continue for the next design phase - detailed design and enable one
to fabricate and manufacture UTHM’s first LSA that designed through several
Bachelor Degree Project in future times.
 6

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

In this chapter, it will enlighten readers with aircraft structural design, backgrounds
and main components of Light Sport Aircraft. This chapter will also discuss on subject
of aerofoils, loadings on aircraft weight and balance and any related theoretical
formula behind the aircraft design.

2.1 Aircraft Design

The word ‘design’ according to Cambridge dictionary refers to certain drawing or set
of drawings that show how a product or object such as building, stationary or even
aircraft planned to be made, looked and work after being manufactured[7].
As for aircraft design, whether we want to build either wide body, medium,
small, heavy, light or even ultralight aircraft such as a Light Sport Aircraft (LSA), they
will need to undergo vital design processes or phases where it comprises of three main
phases namely conceptual, preliminary and detailed design. These three main design
phases are being introduced by Torenbeek in his classical writing back in 1986 as
shown in Figure 2.1 below.
 7

Figure 2.1: The popular aircraft design phases as proposed by Torenbeek[8]

Although the three main aircraft design phases such as above are accepted
worldwide, some improvements had been made to ensure smoother work flow and
shows more details together with expected timeline. The design process brought by
Torenbeek are being improved as shown in Figure 2.2 where a fishbone diagram is
used to further breakdown the main phases into detailed sub-phases apart from
introducing new phases to the design process.

Figure 2.2: A typical modern fishbone diagram of aircraft design process[9]

 8

2.1.1 Conceptual Design Phase

The first move after required basic outcome of an aircraft design from a client is being
gathered, it is called the conceptual design phase. In this phase, a rough sketches of
the aircraft is being made while meeting with the requirements of the client including
its fuselage shape, wing location, empty weight, engine size and more. Furthermore,
according to Snorri Gudmundsson in his book, this phase will define the aircraft
characteristics such as[9]:
1. Type of being propulsion used – Piston, Turboprop, Turbojet, Turbofan or
Turboshaft
2. Purpose of aircraft – Ultralight, Light Aircraft, Commercial, Military or others
3. Technology of aircraft – Its avionics, materials and engines
4. The look of aircraft (rough design of aircraft)
5. Occupant comfort requirements – Fuselage cavity, pressurization, galleys and
others
6. Ergonomics of both crew and passengers
7. Aircraft’s aerodynamics and auxiliary lifting surfaces
8. Certification basis of aircraft – Light Sport Aircraft, FAR.23, Part 25, Military
9. Ways of manufacturing the aircraft
10. Aircraft’s maintainability in the future
11. Initial overall cost estimation
12. Prediction of aircraft’s marketability

2.1.2 Preliminary Design Phase

This phase is carried out after all characteristics presented in conceptual design phase
had been made and a rough aircraft sketch had been made. This phase is crucial where
normally it is a go or no go situation where negative outcome will result in major
changes up to cancellation of project while positive outcome will result in further
continuation of project until the aircraft is being manufactured.
 9

There are particular errands to be carried out during this very phase namely[9]:
1. Detailed development of aircraft’s geometry
2. Major load paths layout
3. Weight estimation of designed aircraft
4. Detailed aircraft’s mission
5. Aircraft’s performance
6. Aircraft’s control and stability
7. Analysis of aircraft’s aerodynamics trait
8. Analysis of aircraft’s mission capacity
9. Refinement of aircraft’s design
10. Maintainability of aircraft is defined
11. Prior aircraft’s production cost estimation

During this phase, designers with the help of engineers will build prototype
whether real or virtual to analyse the overall strength of aircraft’s structures when
subjected to predicted loads during operation to observe any defects and faults before
continuing to the last phase, detailed design phase[10]. This phase is crucial where
normally it is a go or no go situation where negative outcome will result in major
changes up to cancellation of project while positive outcome will result in further
continuation of project until the aircraft is being manufactured[9].

2.1.3 Detailed Design Phase

The last phase of designing an aircraft before being manufactured and sent to open
market is the detailed design phase. In this phase, it is a no turning point situation
where the designed aircraft will be turned into fully operative aircraft. Although it is
the last phase before fabrication, there are tasks to be done such as[9]:
1. Detailed aircraft’s structural, mechanical, avionics and ergonomics design
2. Further study of aircraft’s selected technologies
3. Vendor, contractors and manufacturers negotiations
4. Design of one-time usage tooling such as fixtures and jigs
5. Aircraft’s manufacturing mock-up
 10

6. Planning on aircraft’s maintenance procedures

7. Equipment and material logistics used during aircraft manufacturing

2.1.4 Aircraft Design Certification Basis

In the world of aircraft, aircraft that are not intended to be used for airlines or military
purposes, are called General Aviation aircraft or known as GA aircraft according to
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for United States of America (USA) and
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) for European countries. Therefore, as for
Light Sport Aircraft (LSA) it is also considered to be in the family of GA aircraft as it
does not serve either for airlines nor military purposes.
All aircraft in the world including LSA are strictly regulated and bounded by
certification based on system of aircraft certification it possessed for each country. As
for GA aircraft, it is certified under Table 2.1 will show us the certification basis for
several classes of aircraft but it only focused on certification system used in USA and
Europe.

Table 2.1: Certification for several aircraft categories used in USA and Europe[9].

Aircraft Category Implemented Regulations (Regulator)

General Aviation 14 CFR Part 23 (FAA)
(other than Commercial or Military usage) CS-23 (EASA)
Commercial Aviation 14 CFR Part 25 (FAA)
CS-25 (EASA)
Sailplanes/Gliders 14 CFR 21.17(b) (FAA)
CS-22 (EASA)
Airships 14 CFR 21.12(b) (FAA)
CS-30 and CS-31 HA (EASA)
Non-conventional Aircraft 14 CFR 21.17(b) (FAA)
CS-22 (EASA)
Light Sport Aircraft Consensus (FAA)
CS-LSA (EASA)
 11

Based on the table above, we can see that, for Light Sport Aircraft category, especially
in USA, FAA will grant the LSA manufacturer consensus where FAA will tell the
manufacturer to comply with relevant regulations before an airworthiness certificate
will be awarded. In USA, another body namely American Society for Testing and
Material (ASTM) is the one who initiate and perpetuate consensus standards for LSA
in the entire country.
Note that, aircraft are usually design to fit variety of purpose but mostly
depends on fulfilling a clear-cut mission as prescribe by the client and certain aircraft
are designed to serve more than one mission - a multi-role aircraft for economic
reasons. Furthermore, in designing certain type of aircraft, there are certain restrictions
or limitations that must be abide by respective designers. As for our design, we are
focusing on the Light Sport Aircraft design dimension and restriction provided by
European Aviation Safety Agency or EASA as in Malaysia we are adhering to the
regulations provided.

2.2 Light Sport Aircraft (LSA)

The Light sport aircraft is actually came from the family of microlight aircraft or
known as ultralight aircraft. On 29th July 2013 the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) had amend that a Light Sport Aircraft must meet the following
specifications[11]:

a) Maximum take-off mass (MTOM) not more than 600kg (land operated LSA)
and 650kg (water operated LSA)
b) Stalling speed not more than 83 km/h (45 knots)
c) Maximum seating of not more than 2 people (including pilot)
d) Single non-turbine or electric propulsion engine with propeller
e) Have a non-pressurized cabin

The above stated specifications are also adapted by Civil Aviation Safety
Authority (CASA) as stated in their Advisory Circular entitled “Light Sport Aircraft
 12

Certificate of Airworthiness”[12] but for usage in the United States, the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) adds the following for LSA where it must have[13]:

a) Fixed landing gear (except for seaplanes and gliders)

b) Fixed-pitch propeller or ground adjustable
Moreover, to know more about a light sport aircraft, this aircraft may be further
divided into four categories such as Standard Light Aircraft, S-LSA, E-LSA and E-
AB. The explanations about each and every existing category are as follow[14]:

a) Standard Light Sport Aircraft: This type of Light Sport Aircraft is the already
been existing since its appearance, meet the LSA requirements by any rules
and can be flown by sport pilots
b) S-LSA: This is a special edition factory-built Light Sport Aircraft that is
individually designed for LSA standards, meet American Society for Testing
and Materials (ASTM) consent and only to be maintained by a mechanic with
FAA-LSA maintenance rating.
c) E-LSA: This LSA is an experimental kits being sold around and can be built at
home by civilians according to manufacturer’s instructions and standards.
d) E-AB Light Sport Aircraft: A fully home-build LSA and classified as personal
use and acts as experimental amateur built. This type of LSA cannot be used
as flight training or rented unless certified by the authorities.

Furthermore, in reviewing the Light Sport Aircraft, it is the best to know its
advantages and disadvantages as shown in Table 2.2 to give use a clear picture about
the Light Sport Aircraft as follow[14]:

Table 2.2: The advantages and disadvantages of a Light Sport Aircraft[14]

Disadvantages Advantages

i. The Light Sport Aircraft has a i. The LSA is cheap to buy and
small interior and less leg room has low maintenance costs
and this does not have provide expenditure.
comfort to big sized pilot or ii. It is easy and simple to be
passenger of LSA. flown in the sky.
 13

ii. Limited baggage space and has iii. One can complete his/her
smaller weight allowances on Light Sport Aircraft pilot
board of LSA. training with fewer hours of
iii. The Light Sport Aircraft also flight compared to other
has slow flight speed and only license such as PPL, CPR-IR
can fly in short range and period and ATPL. Thus, the
of time. licensing cost is also cheaper.
iv. LSA pilots are bounded to day iv. A Light Sport Aircraft student
Visual Flight Rules (VFR) when pilot usually does not need
flying at non-towered airfields. medical certification (in most
v. There are several significant risk cases).
associated with advanced or/and v. The LSA sector is a new and
experimental Light Sport still expanding market, where
Aircraft when it is being flown it will be a good loophole for
mid-air. business.

Moreover, the Light Sport Aircraft can serve certain purposes in completing
certain tasks especially that can only be done through usage of airborne transportation.
The usage of LSA are being collected by the writer himself through some observation
as follow:

a) Private Piloting License (PPL) holder training aircraft.

b) Aero-recreation and sports usage.
c) Agricultural aerial spraying.
d) Land surveying and measurement purposes.
e) Aerial photograph and mapping of a land.
f) Aero-tourism – attraction for a certain place for special viewing via air.

In the current market, there are several Light Sport Aircraft being produced by
different companies such as Quicksilver, Cessna, Piper and many more where their
difference of performance can be viewed through Table 2.3 below:

Table 2.3: Performance table of Light Sport Aircraft available in current market[15]

Aircraft WE MTOW S VS VMAX STO SLG

[N] [N] [m2] [knots] [knots] [m] [m]
P92 ECHO 2757 4446.77 13.20 38.34 113.39 110 100
80
 14

DF 2000 2747 4430.65 12.00 35.64 118.79 80 140

TL 96 STAR 2747 4430.65 12.10 43.20 135 90 100
AVIO 2649 4415 9.31 39.96 166.63 100 160
J-JABIRU
JET FOX 97 2845 4445.31 14.62 37.80 94.49 100 120
ALLEGRO 2727 4398.39 11.40 39.42 118.79 150 100
2000
YUMA 2766 4390.48 13.44 29.70 94.49 40 55
(STOL)
SAVANNAH 2668 4446.67 12.84 27 86.39 50 50
(STOL)
ZENAIR XL 2647.8 4413 12.3 32 140 100 180
ZODIAC 0
AEROPRAK 3248.9 5884 12.62 41.58 98.81 100 100
T 22LS 4
PIPISTREL 2696.8 4633.64 10.5 39.96 119.87 140 160
UL ALPHA 3
BREEZER 3236.1 5874.18 8.73 45 136 185 185
600L 9
SPORTSTA 3291.6 5871.65 10.47 38 146 188.98 399.29
R LSA 8
IKARUS 2603.6 4413 12.5 41 121 205 205
C42 7
CTLS-LSA 3623.5 5884 9.98 47 127 310 200
6

𝑊𝐸
These performance will be needed in estimating the for the weight
𝑀𝑇𝑂𝑊
estimation of any aircraft we want to design, in this case a Light Sport Aircraft (LSA).
𝑀𝑇𝑂𝑊
Furthermore, we also want to calculate the wing loading or to be compared to
𝑆
our designed LSA later on.
 15

2.3 Major Forces on Aircraft

The fundamental factors to be considered in aircraft design are the airframe strength,
weight and material reliability. The airframe of an aircraft must be light in weight yet
strong in strength so that the empty weight of the aircraft will not be heavy and can
support more additional weight to be operated in a much longer time. The materials to
be used in manufacturing the aircraft must be reliable so that it will minimize the
probability of threatening and abrupt failures during aircraft operation. In this section,
we will try to get more idea on the strength of the aircraft structure as it is a part of
research scope.
Before going deeper into understanding loads and stresses acting on an aircraft
that will lead to the idea of aircraft strength, we firstly must recognise the major forces
on aircraft such as lift, thrust, weight and drag. This is illustrated through Figure 2.3
where these major forces occur when the aircraft is in steady unaccelerated flight or
called straight-and-level flight[16].

Figure 2.3: Major forces acting on aircraft during straight-and-level flight[15]

The elaboration on four major forces action on an aircraft are provided in subsection
per below before focusing into discussion of loads and stress acting upon an aircraft.

2.3.1 Lift

Lift is the ‘magic’ essence in making all aircraft can be operated while airborne safely
in the air. It is a kind of force that generated by the act of air going through an aerofoil
 16

of the aircraft – usually the wings. This force is generated at the centre of pressure[17]
at the wings that govern by Bernoulli’s principle as shown in Figure 2.4.

Figure 2.4: Illustration of centre of pressure on an aerofoil of an aircraft wing[18]

To understand more about how lift force is generated, we can refer to the
illustration given in Figure 2.5. The figure clearly shows that the lift is produced when
a low pressure area is created at upper section of the aerofoil due to increased air
velocity compared to the lower section of aerofoil with lower air velocity that created
a high pressure area thus creating an upward force, pushing the aerofoil upwards and
voila, lift is produced!

Figure 2.5: Illustration of lift generated that govern by Bernoulli’s principle[19]

2.3.2 Thrust

Thrust is a forward force produced via the engine or powerplant of the aircraft[16].
This forces act parallel to the longitudinal axis of the aircraft and oppose the drag of
this flying machine. In order for the aircraft to move forward, the thrust must be bigger
than drag force of the aircraft
 17

2.3.3 Weight

Weight is a force that act downwards and perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the
aircraft[16]. It is the force that generated by the gravity pull of the earth on the aircraft
towards the centre of the earth. The weight of an aircraft is calculated by adding the
weight of aircraft empty weight, crew, payloads (passenger and cargo) and fuel of
aircraft[17]. In a straight-and-level flight, where the flight neither ascend nor descend,
the weight usually equals to the lift force of the aircraft.

2.3.4 Drag

Last but not least, one of the major forces acted on an aircraft the drag force. Drag is a
force that acts backward and impede the motion of the aircraft induced by thrust. In a
steady unaccelerated flight, the drag force will have to be equally the same with thrust
of the aircraft. Furthermore, this force belongs to the aerodynamic forces family same
as the lift. Therefore, these two forces (lift and drag) are as alike as peas in a pod, share
a common characteristic where their magnitude depends on various factors such as the
shape of aircraft, viscosity of the air and the aircraft’s velocity[17].

2.4 Loads on Aircraft.

After discussing thorough about major forces on aircraft, we now focus on loads acting
on aircraft. Aircraft loads are the loadings that act upon the aircraft structural
components (wing, tail, control surfaces and fuselage) and it is the science to resolve
the loads that the structure of the aircraft must withstand[5]. For an aircraft, loads are
something that keep accompanying it and sometimes bring troublesome from its birth
to cradle. Therefore, a comprehensive and deep understanding how loads act on
airframe of an aircraft is a vital part in designing an aircraft. There are several loads
that normally act on an aircraft such as Aerodynamic loads, Inertial loads and
Operational loads.
The Aerodynamic loads or known as airloads are the loads that the aircraft
endures during steady flight, manoeuvres and if there are gusts applied on it. It also
 18

refers to the moments and forces caused by dynamic pressure subjected on the aircraft
that comprised of wing torsion, wing bending, lift and drag forces. The magnitude of
loads that encountered by the aircraft mainly depends on its weight, load factor and
geometry of aircraft with the total allowable magnitude has been set by the authorities
for example 14 CFR Part 23 and 25 regulations.
The Inertial loads refer to the forces and moments that is caused by the
airplane acceleration or also known as the acceleration loads. This acceleration loads
are initiated by the manoeuvre (any disturbance of straight and level flight)[20] of the
aircraft during its flight where manoeuvring of an aircraft always involve acceleration.
This load can be depicted in an analogy of the act of our body when inside an elevator,
going up and down with ourselves experiencing the inertial loads. Therefore, the same
concept applies in an aircraft where the structural experts said the apparent weight of
certain aircraft is increased by a factor (n) due to the gravity (g) and this situation can
be seen through a V-n diagram.
Operational loads or known as ground loads are the loads experienced by the
aircraft other than inertial and aerodynamic loads. These loads act on the aircraft
during taxiing, landing, towing and hoisting. This type of load (operational) is much
smaller compared to the other two loads stated above.
Note that, these loads will vary and keep changing when there are major
changes in role of aircraft, payloads or usage of aircraft that will influence the acts of
loads on the aircraft’s airframe or some of its components[21]. In Figure 2.4, one can
see on how loads are developed initially and how they are being used throughout the
process from designing up to aircraft usage.

Figure 2.6: The main task of loads and their use in stages of aircraft development[21]
 19

Furthermore, these loads can be further classed into two main classes’ namely
static and dynamic loads that must be considered during designing an aircraft. Static
loads are loads with negligible inertial effects. In other words, the loads are applied
slowly on the airframe (very low strain rate) that the deformation on structure will take
much time[22]. In other hand, dynamic loads are time dependent loads that will cause
the airframe to vibrate violently if loads are applied on it[23]. This dynamic load is
bigger than static loads and must be calculated so that the structure will not fail easily.
In Table 2.4, it shows the complete loads classed in either static or dynamic loads that
usually encountered by an aircraft.

Table 2.4: Classes of loads that an aircraft usually encounter during its operation[21]

Static Loads
Loads Occurrence Example
Internal & Local  Aerodynamic Pressure on wings and outer surfaces
 System and Bay pressures on fuselage
 Hydrostatic pressure in fuel tanks
 Intake duct pressure during steady state flight
 Engine Thrust and Local Acceleration
Ground Handling  Take-off and landing
 Taxiing (especially during braking and turning)
 Towing, pivoting and other ground movements
During Flight  Symmetric and asymmetric manoeuvres
 Flat and deep spins
 Stall
 Gusts during flight
Dynamic Loads
Examples  Vibrations and Acoustic noise
 Wings and surfaces buffet
 Flutter
 Dynamic gusts
 Landing gear shimmy
 Engine hammershock conditions
 20

This understanding on loads also important to prolong the fatigue life of the
airframe. Fatigue is a condition where the strength of the material’s structure declining
due to repeated loading on the structure during usage of aircraft – usually caused by
combination of static and dynamic loads effect on the airframe[24]. Therefore, it is the
responsibility and role of a structural engineer of an aircraft to design the structure to
be only carry the loads it’s likely to encounter during operation. This is important so
that the engineer will not overdesign a certain aircraft where its strength is much
greater than operational loads and this will cost the manufacturer a fortune if they are
overdesigned.

2.5 Major Aircraft Stress

In designing an aircraft, after considering the forces and loads that acted upon the
airframe, we also must know what their output which are called stresses are. The
stresses will occur on the fuselage skins, wings, horizontal and vertical tail and
undercarriage of the aircraft before being transferred to the fuselage structure or frame
via longerons and stringers as portrayed in Figure 2.7.

Figure 2.7: Cut section of an aircraft fuselage showing the longeron and stringer[25]

The structure of aircraft is made up from several materials such as aluminium,

alloys, and composites that are subjected to many stresses when they are loaded in
certain ways especially during operation. The type of stress that acts upon the structure
of the aircraft are tension, compression, shear, torsion and bending [26]as shown in
Figure 2.8 below.
 21

Figure 2.8: Five major stresses that act on airframe of an aircraft[27]

The tension stress or known as tensile stress is caused by pure tension (pulling
or stretching of structure at its ends) that is further distributed across its cross-sectional
element at X-X.
The compression or bearing stress is when the forces acted is moving towards
each other i.e. squeezing the structure by its ends and it is the reverse of tensile stress.
The shear stress is the stress that being exert when two fastened pieces tends
to separate and it acts tangentially to the surface of contact.
The torsion is the twisting force that produces torque when acted on the aircraft
structure while bending is a stress that combines compression and tension of structures
in the same time.
Bending is a combination stress between compression and tension where in
aircraft, the part that usually subjected to bending are the wing spars when in operation
as shown in Figure 2.9. The figure shows, when bending in upward motion an aircraft
wing from its end, the upper section will undergo compression while the lower section
will face tension (stretches)

Figure 2.9: Bending in wings of B-52 aircraft when in operation.[28]

 22

2.6 Aircraft Structure Material

To manufacture an aircraft, one must know what kind of materials suits the best for
the type of aircraft. Besides, in discussing about the structural layout of an aircraft and
its strength, it is important that we know about the material that is being used so that
we can know the material’s load limit. There are several factors that influence the
selection of materials that being used in building the structure of an aircraft mainly
material fatigue, toughness, stiffness and resistance to corrosion but overall lightness
of the material is commonly look upon by structure and material engineers.
In older times, wood and fabric are being used primarily for an aircraft as the
technology during that time hinders one to use other materials Nowadays, with the
advancement of materials technology, the main groups of materials that usually
selected to be the part of aircraft structure are wood, steel, titanium alloys, aluminium
alloys and the state of the art material; the fibre reinforced composites are being
used[29]. This is clearly shown in Figure 2.10 of materials being used in current
construction of a Boeing-787 Dreamliner.

Figure 2.10: Current materials being used in Boeing 787 Dreamliner[30]

In fabricating a Light Sport Aircraft, manufacturer usually prefer to use

aluminium alloys to build the airframe of the aircraft. This strong and high strength
yet light weight material is used in the fuselage, wings and spars of all flight fleet
(commercial or military). For aluminium alloys, the aviation industry has depended on
three family of this alloy which are[31]:
 23

(a) Nickel free duralumin;

(b) Derivatives of Y alloy,
(c) Aluminium-zinc-magnesium group.

2.7 Aircraft Design Baseline

In this thesis, it will focus more on preliminary design of a Light Sport Aircraft as
stated repeatedly in previous chapter - Chapter 1. But, it is not a wrong to revise back
what is the process before it. Usually, during the conceptual design of an aircraft, the
baseline characters of the aircraft will be translated in form of rough sketches or
drawing where this can be achieved by the use of computer aided design (CAD)
software available such as AutoCAD, SOLIDWORKS, CATIA, Google SketchUp and
many more.
In Hazreen Hazman’s thesis, he focus on the first step of aircraft design which
is the conceptual design where he begins with the baseline or initialization of major
characteristic of the desired aircraft, in this case a Light Sport Aircraft. In baseline
sizing for conceptual design phase, there are some estimation or facts based
assumption must be made of several vital design traits of the aircraft. The
characteristics of aircraft that must be estimated by the designer are[32]:

1. Design weights that comprised of take-off and landing weight, payload weight,
fuel weight and the aircraft’s empty weight.
2. Total number of engines to be installed and its calculated thrust produced
3. Wing Loading of the aircraft.
𝑊
𝐸
The design of aircraft kicks off with the estimation of 𝑀𝑇𝑂𝑊 . It is seen that

most aircraft design all around the world are just going through an evolution proses
rather than revolutionary design being made[4]. In short, the design of aircraft usually
will not differ much from their predecessors, where their ratio of WE to MTOW will
also not deviate much according to historical statistic gathered from same type of
aircraft. In Table 2.5, we will see the ratio of WE to MTOW for existing LSA while
Figure 2.12 will show us the consistency of the ratio of overall design that existed in
the current market
 24

Table 2.5: Comparison of ratio of We to MTOW for LSA in current market

Current LSA WE [N] MTOW [N] 𝑾𝑬

𝑴𝑻𝑶𝑾
P92 ECHO 80 2757 4446.77 0.62
DF 2000 2747 4430.65 0.62
TL 96 STAR 2747 4430.65 0.62
AVIO 2649 4415 0.60
J-JABIRU
JET FOX 97 2845 4445.31 0.64
ALLEGRO 2000 2727 4398.39 0.62
YUMA (STOL) 2766 4390.48 0.63
SAVANNAH (STOL) 2668 4446.67 0.60
ZENAIR XL ZODIAC 2647.80 4413 0.60
AEROPRAKT 22LS 3248.94 5884 0.55
PIPISTREL UL ALPHA 2696.83 4633.64 0.58
BREEZER 600L 3236.19 5874.18 0.55
SPORTSTAR LSA 3291.68 5871.65 0.56
IKARUS C42 2603.67 4413 0.59
CTLS-LSA 3623.56 5884 0.62

Figure 2.11: Graph of We to MTOW ratio versus MTOW of existed LSA in market
 25

From the graph, we can see that the average ratio of WE/MTOW is to be 0.61.
Therefore, the ratio of 0.61 will be chosen for the ratio in design of our aircraft.

2.7.1 Design Baseline: Main Parts of Aircraft

In understanding aircraft design baseline, the configuration of major

components of the aircraft also play significant role in defining the overall aircraft
structure strength and endurance. In the aviation world, although many aircraft differ
from its purposes i.e. civil, commercial, leisure, cargo and so on, its main parts are
generally the same - fuselage, wing, tail, aircraft engine, landing gears and control
surfaces as depicted in Figure 2.13. All of the stated components have their own role
in serving the aircraft so that it will be more comfortable and controllable as discussed
further in next subchapters.

Figure 2.12: The basic main components of a general aircraft[33]

2.7.1.1 Aircraft Fuselage

The fuselage is the most visible main part of an aircraft because it is the body of the
aircraft where it includes cockpit, passenger seating and baggage or cargo area. This
main part is also where all other main parts of the aircraft such as wings, landing gear,
engines, control surfaces and tail are attached together as one whole aircraft.
Although the fuselage of an aircraft will contribute much to the drag of the aircraft
during operation but it also contributes to a small increment in the lift force of the
 26

aircraft. There are several factors to be considered when designing the structure of an
aircraft’s fuselage which are[9]:

a) Ample internal spacing to each passenger if the aircraft is meant to carry

passengers and acts as transportation (commercial aircraft).
b) Lavatories and galleys must be provided to passengers on large airplanes with
the ratio of (at least) one lavatory per 50 people and one galley for 100
passengers.
c) The cockpit where the pilot and co-pilot seated must be ergonomically friendly
as the essential instruments and controls are in reach of the crew member that
ease to be used.
d) Strength requirements and windscreen layout of the forward part of fuselage.
e) The layout of emergency exits that comply with the evacuation period stated
by authorities.
f) The compartments that will keep the baggage must be easily accessible by
ground crews.
g) The layout of electrical, control and other vital systems of the aircraft so that it
will not disturb critical structural members and perforate through them.

In discussing about the fuselage, there are mainly three fundamental shapes
known applied to today’s aircraft namely frustum, tubular and tadpole shaped
fuselages[9].

2.7.1.1.1 Frustum Fuselage

This fuselage is trapezoidal prism or frustum shaped where it is well detectable by a

tapered box-like presentation – a low cost production type of fuselage because it can
be built from folded sheet metals riveted to frames which produce a light but stiff
structure. This type of fuselage structure is best for low cost, rigid, roomy yet strong
fuselages of aircraft and the issue of drag can be neglected. The companies that usually
use this type of fuselage are Piper, Beechcraft, Cessna, Diamond or companies that
built aircrafts for pilot training whether single or twin engine.
 27

2.7.1.1.2 Tabular Fuselage

The tubular fuselage or cigar shaped fuselage are the common fuselage shape that is
used in the commercial aircraft field. This form of fuselage is an optimal design for
small and large passenger aircrafts weather they are pressurized or not. One of the
reasons the tabular shaped fuselage is popular towards commercial aircraft
manufacturer is due to its stable static pressure distribution along its fuselage station
when in operation of subsonic flight.

2.7.1.1.3 Tadpole Fuselage

It is called as for due to its tail (empennage) and forward portion features the shape of
a tadpole. This fuselage is seldom chose by manufacturer because they are quite
expensive to be produced especially when it is made from aluminium. This type of
fuselage are largely been used in sailplanes as seen in Figure 2.13 and quite a number
of present-day propeller aircrafts do apply them too.

Figure 2.13: Schneider ASW-20 sailplane with a tadpole fuselage shape.[35]

2.7.1.2 Aircraft Wings

The wing is the influential component of an aircraft where without them the aircraft
could not be airborne. The main role of the wing is to generate enough lift force to take
the whole aircraft body to fly in the skies while maintaining the stability of the aircraft
 28

which is the key to the safety of the flight[36]. There are several known wing design
such as low wing, mid wing, high wing and parasol wing.

2.7.1.2.1 Low Wing Configuration

There are several advantages in using this configuration of wing which are when
compared to high wing configuration, its take-off performance is better. Furthermore,
the weight of the aircraft is lighter than airplanes with high wing design and it induced
lesser drag. The low-wing configuration also as photographed in Figure 2.14 provides
an attractive view of the airplane design for normal non-professional viewer. This type
of configuration also gives an advantage to the pilot where it provides a better viewing
due to the pilot’s sight area is above the section of the wing.

Figure 2.14: A display of low-wing configuration placement on Boeing 737[37]

Although it has many advantages, there are still some drawbacks of low-wing
configuration such as the wing will generate less lift since the wing are separated into
two compared to high wing, the take-off distance of the aircraft will also be longer and
the aircraft will have lower airworthiness due to higher stall speed. Moreover, the
aircraft with low-wing configuration will have low landing performance as it will need
a longer distance to land while as for fighter/military pilots, this type of configuration
will distract the pilot’s lower view.
 29

2.7.1.2.2 Mid-Wing Configuration

The mid-wing configuration is seldom used by present aircrafts due to its

disadvantages that manufacturer do not want to take the risk such as the structure of
the aircraft will be heavier due to wing root support at the crossing with the fuselage
and the manufacturing cost will be pricy compared to other wing configurations (high-
wing and low-wing)
Although there are disadvantages, there are still advantages of this
configuration which the mid-wing has less interference drag than the other two wings
and it is more attractive in the sense of the outward design of the aircraft. Figure 2.15
will help to show us how the mid-wing is placed on an aircraft.

Figure 2.15: An ASTRA IAI Westwind II aircraft with mid-wing configuration[38]

2.7.1.2.3 High Wing Configuration

After looking upon the low-wing and mid-wing configuration, we now discuss about
the advantages and disadvantages of a high-wing which can be viewed as said in Table
2.6 below while Figure 2.16 portray an example of aircraft that uses high-wing
configuration.
 30

Figure 2.16: The SA-160 Light Sport Aircraft with a high wing configuration[39].

Table 2.6: Advantages and disadvantages high wing configuration[40]

Disadvantages Advantages
i. Have an increase in aircraft drag i. Ease the loading and
ii. Increase in take-off run due to unloading of cargo loads
the lower ground effect into the aircraft.
(influence its wing pressure ii. Generally generates more lift
distribution). iii. Contour and aerodynamic
iii. Induced drag is higher as the lift shape of aircraft can be
produced is more smoothly shaped
iv. The overall structural weight of iv. More payloads space
the aircraft with this v. Provide more installation area
configuration is higher than for aircraft engine
low-wing aircraft. vi. Provide a better lower area
viewing for the pilot.

2.7.1.2.4 Parasol Wing Configuration

This wing configuration (Parasol Wing) is mostly applied in amphibian (water

operated aircraft) and Hang Gliders as shown in Figure 2.17. The aspect of this
configuration is nearly the same as the high-wing configuration as stated above. The
disadvantages of this wing configuration are that this wing will have more drag and
being heavier than other configurations.
 31

Figure 2.17: The Flyfox I, an amphibian aircraft with parasol wing configuration[41]

2.7.1.3 Aircraft Tail

The aircraft tail or known as empennage is another important part of an aircraft where
it will help to control in stabilizing the movement of the aircraft when in yawing or
pitching. The empennage can be divided into two parts - vertical tail and horizontal
tail.
Based on Figure 2.18, we can see that at the vertical tail, there is a control
surface called rudder which controls the yawing of the aircraft during operation and
movement of aircraft during on the ground. While at the horizontal tail, there is a
control surface named elevator that controls the pitching movement of the aircraft.
This elevator will make the aircraft either in pitch up or nose down manoeuvres.

Figure 2.18: Empennage of an aircraft with its control surfaces[42]

In designing the aircraft’s tail, there are several common configuration of the
empennage that usually being used in the world of aviation. The configurations are
 32

cruciform tail, conventional tail, T-tail, V-tail, H-tail, Y-tail and many more as
depicted in Figure 2.19 below.

Figure 2.19: The common and uncommon design of empennage existed[43].

2.7.1.4 Aircraft Engines

Aircraft engine can also be referred as aircraft power plant that are usually internal
combustion engines where the fuel is being burnt internally (inside the engine) not
externally as if a boiler engine[20]. The main fuels of aircraft are usually Avgas
(gasoline) or Avtur (kerosene).
The propulsion systems of general aircraft are usually can be reciprocating
engine or known as piston engine, turbojet engine, turbofan engine and turboprop
engine as depicted in Figure 2.20. All of these engines will generate thrust but for
piston engine and turboprop, they will generate shaft power to drive the propeller
where the propeller will later generate the thrust needed for the aircraft to move.
 33

Figure 2.20: Various aircraft engines that usually being installed on aircraft[44], [45]

2.7.1.5 Aircraft Undercarriage

The undercarriage of an aircraft or widely known as landing gears are the component
that supports the whole body of the aircraft during movement on ground for example,
taxiing, take-off and ground roll. The landing gears also act as a cushion when the
aircraft is landing. There are three basic arrangement of landing gears namely tricycle
landing gear, tandem landing gear and tail wheel landing gear as portrayed in Figure
2.21 below. The next subchapters will uncover more about differences between three
popular undercarriage configuration namely tricycle, tandem and tail wheel.

Figure 2.21: The types of undercarriage being used in current aircraft worldwide[46]
 34

2.7.1.5.1 Tricycle Undercarriage Configuration

This type of landing gear is largely used on nowadays small and even big aircraft
because it provides forceful brakes application without nosing over toward ground
when braking and this landing gear configuration also provides better vision from the
cockpit especially when landing and ground movements. This type of landing gear
configuration also prevents ground looping of aircraft since the aircraft’s centre of
gravity is ahead of the main landing gear which will make force acted on the aircraft’s
centre of gravity is keeping the aircraft moving forward rather than looping.

2.7.1.5.2 Tandem Undercarriage Configuration

This configuration is the same as bicycle wheel configuration where the main landing
gear and tail landing gear is aligned on the same longitudinal axis of the aircraft. It is
seen that not many aircraft adores this type of landing gear configuration but sailplanes
usually comply with this arrangement[47].

2.7.1.5.3 Tail Wheel Undercarriage Configuration

The other name for tail-wheel landing gear configuration is conventional gear due to
usage of this landing gear configuration by early aircraft. This type of configuration
kept the main gear ahead of the centre of gravity while the tail will need support from
a third wheel instead. This tail-wheel landing gear arrangement will give advantage to
aviator with non-paved runways to easily take-off due to the increased clearance of the
forward fuselage. Besides, this landing gear configuration also can be called as tail-
dragger landing gear configuration.
 35

2.7.1.6 Aircraft Control Surfaces

Control surfaces are one of the major components of an aircraft. They play a role in
when the aircraft is airborne where they will accommodate the manoeuvres of the
aircraft. There are several control surfaces normally found on an aircraft such as
aileron, rudder, elevator, flap and slats. The further explanations about these control
surfaces are expressed in Table 2.9 below:

Table 2.7: Control surfaces on a common aircraft

Control Location Control the Controlled

Surfaces Movement of via
Aileron At the Wings of Rolling Control stick in
aircraft cockpit
(most outwards)
Rudder At the Vertical Yawing Rudder pedal in
Stabilizer (at cockpit
empennage)
Elevator At the Horizontal Pitching Control stick in
Stabilizer cockpit
(at empennage) (push and pull)
Flaps and At the Wings of Increase the Toggle switch in
Slats aircraft generation of lift cockpit
(most inwards) during takeoff
and landing

2.7.1.7 Aircraft Aerofoil

Although aerofoil is not one of the main component that is easily be visible on an
aircraft, but it is very significant in producing lift for the aircraft to fly. Aerofoil may
be defined as any surface of aircraft especially on the wings, propellers and all control
surfaces that produces aerodynamic forces when air move through it which it
 36

moves[48]. In Figure 2.22 shows a drawing of an aerofoil of an aircraft wing cross-

section.

Figure 2.22: The cross-section of a wing that illustrates aerofoil[49]

2.7.1.7.1 Aerofoil Nomenclature

An aerofoil has its own nomenclature or geometry as presented in Figure 2.23. This
is the elaboration on each geometry for better understanding before proceeding this
discussion.

Figure 2.23: The complete geometry illustration of an aerofoil.[50]

Firstly, the upper part of the aerofoil is called as the ‘suction surface’ where
the airflow is in high velocity and creates a low static pressure region. As for the lower
part, it is called the ‘pressure surface’ where here the air velocity is much slower and
it creates a higher static pressured region compared to the upper surface. Thus, the
pressure difference between these two surfaces will help in generating lift force of the
aerofoil[50].
 37

The front part of the aerofoil is called leading edge where the airflow will first
hit while the rearward is called the trailing edge where air will leave the aerofoil.
Camber line is the line that connects the middle points between the upper and
lower surface of aerofoil[50]. Chord line in the other hand, is a straight line that joins
the both ends of the aerofoil- leading and trailing edge[51]. Thus, camber refers to the
maximum distance between the camber line and the chord line as depicted above.
Finally, the depicted angle of attack is the angle between the chord line of
aerofoil as its reference line with the approaching airflow going through the aerofoil
at that particular time.

2.7.1.7.2 Aerofoil for Light Sport Aircraft

In designing an aircraft, especially in preliminary phase of design, it is a must to search

for a suitable aerofoil to be used on the aircraft. The designers of aircraft usually seek
the following traits in the characteristics of any 2D aerofoil before deciding to be used
in their aircraft design. The traits they always look for are[52]:

1. The lift or CLmax of the aerofoil must be as high as possible. This trait is gained
through the CLmax graph of the aerofoil wind tunnel test results.
2. The stalling effect should be gradual and not abrupt after passing the C Lmax
point. This characteristics is too being referred to the same graph as above.
3. There should be rapid increase in lift generation on the aerofoil. This
information is gained through the lift-curve slope (dCL / dα) where α is the
angle of attack in degrees.
4. The aerofoil chosen must be low in drag where it help in retaining flow
laminarization as much as possible.
5. Designers also much prefer the aerofoil to have low Cm values in order to
reduce trim drag during aircraft operation.

In designing a LSA, there is one preferred aerofoil to be used for this type of
aircraft namely Clark Y aerofoil as shown in Figure 2.24 that is used in current aircraft.
 38

Figure 2.24: A YAK-18T aircraft that uses Clark Y aerofoil as its wing root[53]

There are several advantages for using Clark Y aerofoil in building up a Light Sport
Aircraft as follow[54]:

1. This aerofoil have high chamber where its large volume gives potential great
strength with big spar
2. It has lower drag compared to other aerofoil and give massive lift especially
towards Light Sport Aircraft.
3. This aerofoil is easily to be constructed because it has a flat bottom as shown
through Figure 2.25- does not need any advance tools to build it.

Figure 2.25: Clark Y aerofoil of different lengths (It has a flat bottom).[55]
 39

2.8 Aircraft Load Factors

The load factor is the magnitude of severity of manoeuvres or the turbulence (gusty
air) where additional loads are appoint which will either increase or decrease the net
loads on the structure of the aircraft[5]. The load factor equation are shown as in
Equation 2-1 till Equation 2-3 below;

𝑊
𝐿 = Fi = ( ) Az
𝑔 (2-1)

𝐴𝑧
∆𝐿 + 𝐿 = 𝑊 (1 + ) (2-2)
𝑔
𝐴𝑧 ∆𝐿
Load factor, n = 1 + =1+ (2-3)
𝑔 𝑊

Where Fi is the inertia force, Az is the acceleration caused by additional forces

and ∆𝐿 is the increment of lift due to gust or intentional manoeuvre. Furthermore, it is
known that the limit of manoeuvring load factor of aircraft is depending on the purpose
of the aircraft being built. For instance, a military aircraft will have higher
manoeuvring load factor so that it can withstand due to its fierce and vigorous
execution during operation. The actual values of designed manoeuvring load factor are
determined based on statistical data of previous aircraft experiments.

2.8.1 V-n Diagrams

The V-n diagram or known as manoeuvring or flight envelope that is shown through
Figure 2.26, is a diagram that illustrates the criteria in FAR 25.333 that stated the
required aircraft strength must met each combination of airspeed and load factor (n)
within the boundaries of its own flight envelope. The further descriptions of a V-n
diagram or flight envelope are as follow[56].

i. The right-hand boundary depends on the designed aircraft dive or flap placard
airspeeds.
 40

ii. The left-hand boundary depends on the maximum positive and negative static
normal force traits of the aircraft.
iii. The upper and lower boundaries are defined by the manoeuvre load factor
design requirements of the aircraft
iv. When the aircraft is at altitudes where it may be limited by buffet
considerations, the positive boundary may be defined by the lift coefficient,
CL, at which the manoeuvring efficiency is bounded by heavy buffet.

Figure 2.26: A typical V-n diagram or flight envelope of aircraft[57]

2.8.2 Shrenk’s Approximation Method

In discussing further about aircraft loads and structural strength, an aircraft structure
analyst usually make use of an approximation method called Shrenk’s Approximation
Method. This method is to help determine the overall spanwise lift distribution of a
preliminary design phase for moderated to high aspect ratio of wings and low sweep
angle of fixed wings aircraft. This method suggest that the resultant load distribution
is an arithmetic of load distribution on actual planform shape and an elliptical
distribution of same span and area of wings[58].
 41

Figure 2.27: Planform geometry for Shrenk’s Approximation Method[58]

The elliptical load distribution is illustrated through Figure 2.27 where a is the
maximum ordinate of the ellipse at its centreline, the area of semi-ellipse is presented
𝜋𝑎𝑏
as where b is the span of the wing surface and a in the presented equation is the
4
half of the minor axis. Therefore, the complete Shrenk’s Approximation Method is
being portrayed through Equation 2-4 up to Equation 2-8[59].

𝑆 (2-4)
𝑆emi-span wing area = area of elliptic quadrant =
2
𝑆 1 𝜋 (2-5)
The area is, = [( ) (2a)(b)]
2 4 4
4 .𝑆
Therefore, 𝑎 = (2-6)
𝜋.𝑏

𝑦2 𝐶𝑦
For a ellipse, 2 = =1 (2-7)
𝑏 𝑎2
(2 )

4𝑆 2𝑦 (2-8)
Therefore, 𝐶𝑦 = √1 − ( )2
𝜋𝑏 𝑏
 42

Thus, to convert the above equation into load distribution calculation, we will put Wy
(N/m) in place of Cy and put L (N) in place of S where it will become as Equation 2-
9 as follow[59].

4𝐿 2𝑦 (2-9)
Therefore, 𝑊𝑦 = √1 − ( )2
𝜋𝑏 𝑏

2.9 Previous Study: Hazreen Hazman’s Design

As stated at the beginning of this writing, we will observe and analyse a Light Sport
Aircraft structural design provided by previous study of UTHM’s student named
Hazreen Hazman through his available thesis. The breakdown of his LSA design is
shown through Table 2.8 as follow.

Table 2.8: Hazreen Hazman’s Light Sport Aircraft design breakdown[6].

LSA parts Parameters Chosen Design

Wing Design Mono-plane
Placement High wing
Landing Gears Type Tricycle
Empennage Type Conventional
Fuselage Type Open fuselage, no doors,
unpressurised
Seating Type Tandem, Only 2 people
Control Surfaces On the Wings Flaperon
(Aileron & Flpas)
At the Empennage Rudder (Vertical Tail)
Elevator (Horizontal Tail)

For a better viewing, the drawing of this Light Sport Aircraft also provided through
Figure 2.28 until Figure 2.29 that had been developed by Hazreen Hazman through
SOLIDWORKS, a CAD software.
 43

Figure 2.28: Overall view of Hazreen Hazman’s Light Sport Aircraft using SOLIDWORKS[6]
 44

Figure 2.29: Close up views of the Light Sport Aircraft (Front, Side and Top)[6]
 45

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, one can find the discussion on methods used throughout and upon
completion of this study. Methodology is a crucial part of study discussion that will
set the direction and pace of this study together with its guideline and approach in
executing this study.
This chapter will also reveal the procedures and needed input to be used in
FAR23 loads software so that this study is ensured to complete upon given time.
Furthermore, this chapter will also provide flow charts regarding the overall study,
FAR23 loads software and its modules used in the study.

3.1 Overall Study Flow Chart

This subchapter will provide the breakdown of overall study processes until
completion of this thesis writing. The said breakdown in form of a flow chart is shown
through Figure 3.1 as follow.
 46
Start

Determine the background of

Introduction study, problems, objectives, aim

and scope of study

Review and obtain any related

Literature Review literatures regarding study and
look at previous study

FAR23 Initial Attempt First attempt in trying the FAR23

software using example data

Initial Result
Compare and contrast results

Obtain Additional Data

Continuation using real data

Continuation of FAR23 Loads obtained from literature review
and observed LSA design

Final Results

Data Analysis & Discussion

Thesis Writing
Colour legend
PSM 1

End PSM 2

Figure 3.1: Study overall flow chart

 47

3.2 FAR23 Loads

The ability of certain software to perform an engineering analysis is a software that

has its own standards and quality. In this study, the one and only software being used
to carry out our structural layout analysis of a provided design of Light Sport Aircraft
is the FAR23 Loads.
The FAR.23 Loads software is a software by McGettrick Structural
Engineering, Inc. that provides procedures of loads calculations on an airplane that
complies with CFR 14, Chapter 1, Subchapter C, Part 23, Subpart C, about the
structures of utility, acrobatic, commuter and normal category airplanes[60]. The
calculated loads of analysed aircraft using this software are determined via:

a. The aircraft’s three view (3-D) drawing.

b. The chosen maximum take-off weight.
c. The chosen category and load factor of the aircraft.

The loads are then will be calculated according to the FAA regulations and standards.
The examples of modules included in this software are Weight estimation, Envelope
of Loads, Weight & CG, Geometry, Mach Limitations, Select Critical Loads and so
on as being elaborated throughout the subchapters following it.
To know this software better, Figure 3.2 illustrate the software’s interface or
known as ‘main menu’ while Figure 3.3 provided below shows the overall flow chart
and modules integrated in it.

Figure 3.2: FAR23 Loads main menu with all integrated modules in it[61]
 48

Figure 3.3: FAR23 Loads overall flow chart for all available modules[62]
 49

3.2.1 Weight Estimation Module

This is the first module where it will calculate and help its user to estimate the weight
of aircraft and its major components and parts. Although it is the first module one will
face, but it is optional to run this module. Figure 3.4 will show the interface of this
module and Table 3.1 as provided shows the input data to be run for this study.
Moreover, the flow chart of this module is presented through Figure 3.5 as below.

Figure 3.4: Interface of Weight Estimation Module of FAR23 Loads[61]

Table 3.1: Input of our study on Light Sport Aircraft using FAR23 Loads

Weight Estimation Module

Name and model of airplane Preliminary Structural Design of a Light
Sport Aircraft
Number of engine(s) 1
Maximum Continuous Power of 65 HP
Engine
Number of seat(s) 2
Hours at Cruise Power 3
Maximum Baggage Weight 0
Is Airplane pressurized? No, unpressurized
Type of engine Reciprocal engine (2-cycle)
 50

Figure 3.5: Flow chart for Weight Estimation Module of FAR23 Loads software[62]
 51

3.2.2 Weight and CG Module

This module will calculate the weight, centre of gravity and inertia of the aircraft in
respect to both aircraft coordinates and also its principal axes. All units used in this
module and others are in imperial units as the company that develop this software
originated from the United States of America (USA) and the name itself, FAR23 are
from Federal Aviation Association (FAA) regulations called Federal Aviation
Regulations (FAR) specifically part 23 where it covers the airworthiness regulations
for four aircraft types i.e. normal, utility, acrobatic, commuter and aircraft with less
than 9 passengers or MTOW < 12,500 lbs. The interface of this module is shown in
Figure 3.6.

Figure 3.6: Interface of Weight and CG Module of FAR23 Loads[61]

As we can see from the figure given, the inputs required are coordinates of
aircraft major parts- where small parts do not affect the overall inertia and can be
neglected, weight of corresponding components and their moment of inertia. The
location or coordinates of the aircraft’s components can be obtained through a three-
view drawing of the aircraft where in our study it is already provided by Hazreen
Hazman through his SOLIDWORKS drawings as provided before.
The data base for this module is set default to 100 parts or items but it is divided
into 3 sections as follow:
 52

1. Item number 1 until 50 are reserved for empty weight items

2. Item number 51 up to 60 are minimum weight components
3. Item number 61 through 100 are considered as discretionary items

Therefore, through Table 3.2 as provided below, we can see the input for our
study on Hazreen Hazman’s Light Sport Aircraft while Figure 3.7 below shows the
module’s flow chart.

Table 3.2: Input of Weight and CG Module of FAR23 Loads software

Item Part Weight X Y Z Ixx Iyy Izz

No. (Lbs) (Inch) (Lb-in2)
1 Right 1.544 112.5 -119 45.45 3308 3351 43
Aileron
2 Left 1.544 112.5 118.7 45.46 3308 3351 43
Aileron
3 Right 37.868 56.693 -1.58 46.02 136853 157263 20430
Wing
4 Left Wing 37.868 56.693 1.575 46.02 136853 157263 20430
5 Vertical 1.069 140.686 0.00 10.99 265 134 399
Tail
6 LSA 0.67 181.496 0.00 17.62 158 28 186
Rudder
7 Right 0.495 160.582 -1.26 46.44 47 77 30
Horizontal
Tail
8 Left 0.495 160.582 1.26 46.44 47 77 30
Horizontal
Tail
9 LSA 0.85 180.512 0.00 47.74 257 287 30
Elevator
10 Right 8.109 92.8 -25.6 -11.9 123 97 160
Main Gear
 53

11 Left Main 8.109 92.8 25.62 -11.9 123 97 160

Gear
12 Nose Gear 7.725 13.287 0.00 -11.9 85 71 149
13 Centre of 37.633 56.729 0.00 0.00 13870 34269 36785
Fuselage
14 3-blades 10.881 118.504 0.00 46.78 1443 728 728
Propeller
15 Rotax-582 62.5 106.423 0.00 47.12 3328 5775 6324
Engine
16 Empty 5.144 79.923 0.00 46.66 172 226 267
Fuel Tank
END OF EMPTY WEIGHT ITEMS
51 Pilot & 170 49.330 0.00 1.058 157 219 159
seat
51 Fuel 30 16.275 79.923 0.00 46.66 172 226 267
minutes
END OF MINIMUM WEIGHT ITEMS
61 Co-pilot @ 170 83.976 0.00 1.058 157 219 159
1 person
62 Full Tank 98.245 79.923 0.00 46.66 172 226 267
of Fuel
END OF DISCRETIONARY WEIGHT ITEMS
 54

Figure 3.7: Flow chart of Weight and CG Module of FAR23 Loads software[62]
 55

3.2.3 Envelope of Loads Module

In this module, the software will calculate the useful loads of the aircraft where the
aircraft’s minimum weight and all possible loads are being calculated so an envelope
of aircraft useful load can be plotted by the user. The input for this module s the same
as ‘Weight and CG Module’ and to view the inputs, please refer to Table 3.2 provided
in subchapter 3.2.2 above. Note that when opening the module, all the input blank
spaces are already filled and it is yellow in colour as an indicator the input data is
already there, obtained from the previous module(s).
Figure 3.8 and Figure 3.9 will show us the interface for this module and its
flow chart respectively as shown below here.

Figure 3.8: The interface of Envelope of Loads Module for FAR23 Loads[61]
 56

Figure 3.9: The flow chart of Envelope of Loads Module for FAR23 Loads[62]
 57

3.2.4 Geometry Module

The geometry module is a module to develop the geometry of aircraft’s surfaces such
as wings, aileron, flaps, horizontal stabilizers, vertical stabilizers, rudder and elevator.
This module is vital for further aerodynamics and loadings analysis throughout the
program software. The interface of this module can be seen through Figure 3.10 as
follow.

Figure 3.10: The main interface of Geomerty Module for FAR23 Loads[61]

For any surfaces or components added, the user have to provide their
corresponding coordinate of their leading edge and trailing edge as shown in Figure
3.11 and our desired number of chord-wise elements division- default is 100 division
as illustrated in Figure 3.12.

Figure 3.11: The components interface of Geometry Module for FAR23 Loads[61]
 58

Figure 3.12: Illustration of chord-wise elements division into 100 parts/elements

The Table 3.3 and Table 3.4will show us the input of our study for this module
and the flow chart for the whole module is shown through Figure 3.13 as below. Note
that the input shown here is only two of the components which is the wing and the flap
of the aircraft and should one wish to review more of the module input, please refer to
Appendix A.

Table 3.3: Input data of Geometry Module (LSA Wing)

Coordinates of Leading Edge

Point Number Fuselage Station (X-axis) Wing Station (Y-axis)
1 56.693 1.575
2 56.693 186.614
 59

3 57.031 187.421
4 57.333 189.209
5 58.114 191.183
6 59.295 192.907
7 60.602 194.199
8 61.975 195.101
9 63.642 195.839
10 65.277 196.262
11 65.945 196.333
12 66.535 196.359
13 66.543 197.047
Coordinates of Trailing Edge
1 111.122 1.575
2 111.122 197.047

Table 3.4: Input data of Geometry Module (LSA Flap)

Coordinates of Leading Edge

Point Number Fuselage Station (X-axis) Wing Station (Y-axis)
1 112.5 40.945
2 112.5 118.702
Coordinates of Trailing Edge
1 122.933 40.945
2 123.143 41.217
3 123.308 41.274
4 123.433 41.339
5 123.568 41.445
6 123.657 41.542
7 123.739 41.663
8 123.825 41.841
9 123.859 42.01
10 123.859 42.146
11 123.859 118.702
 60

Figure 3.13: The flow chart of Geometry Module for FAR23 Loads software[62]
 61

3.2.5 Structural Speed Module

This module is part where manoeuvring load factors and design structural speeds are
calculated. The module will calculate the minimum required structural design speed
and load factors in accordance to FAR part 23 and also checks the margins between
minimum required speed and greater than minimum speeds.
This module allow the user to put into their desired speeds of either cruise,
dive, flutter clearance and manoeuvre together with desired loads i.e. positive N and
negative N if any, before being verified and adjusted by the program to follow FAR23
regulations. If there is no desired speeds or load factors, it is advisable to put in value
1 to indicate that we want the program to run its calculation without any desired speeds
and load factors. The interface for this module is shown below through Figure 3.14
and our current input for this study is portrayed in Table 3.5.

Figure 3.14: Structural Speed Module main interface[61]

Table 3.5: Structural Speed Module input for our Light Sport Aircraft

General Input of Aircraft

Input Needed Values/Input Data
Aircraft Category Normal
Wing Area (ft2) 147.354
 62

Take-off Weight (Lbs) 677.024

Maximum Level Speed (kts) 54
Stall Speed, Flaps Retracted (kts) 38
Stall Speed, Flaps Extended (kts) 32

Chosen Speeds and Load Factors

Cruise speed, VC (kts) 43
Dive Speed, VD (kts) 1
Manoeuvre Speed, VA (kts) 1
Flutter Clearance Speed, VF (kts) 1
Positive Load Factor, +N 1
Negative Load Factor, -N 1

Apart from these info given, Figure 3.15 and Figure 3.16 will show the flow chart for
this module, Structural Speed Module as follow.
 63

Figure 3.15: The flow chart of Structural Speed Module for FAR23 Loads [62]
 64

END
Figure 3.16: Continuation of Structural Speed Module flow chart[62]
 65

3.2.6 Mach Limitations Module

The Mach Limitations Module is a continuation module from Structural Speeds

Module where the output of that module is used in this module hereon. This very
module will help the user to calculate and determine the Mach number limitations for
the aircraft that will be used in the flight envelope or V-n diagram.
The equivalent airspeed at different altitude for a constant Mach number is
being calculated in the module, starts from the shoulder altitude until its ceiling
service. The increment between altitudes depends on the aircraft’s rate of climb as
being set by the user initially. The interface of this module is shown in Figure 3.17
and the corresponding input is provided through Table 3.6. For additional information,
the output of this module can be illustrated in form of Aircraft Operating Limit diagram
as shown in Chapter 4 later.

Figure 3.17: Mach Limitations Module input interface window[61]

Table 3.6: Input data for Mach Limitations Module of our study

Mach Limitation Input Data

Mach number during cruise, MC 0.089
Mach number during dive, MD 0.124
Shoulder Altitude (ft) 10,000
Ceiling Service (ft) 15,000
Increment of Altitude (ft/min) 984
 66

3.2.7 Aerodynamics Coefficients Module

This module will help to calculate the aerodynamics coefficient i.e. lift coefficient
(CL), drag coefficient (CD) and pitching moment coefficient (CM) of the aircraft for
three configuration – cruise, enroute and landing. These aero coefficients are a vital
part in the next module, Flight Loads where in turn will help us to develop data of V-
n diagarm or the fligt envelope. The main interface window of this module can be seen
through Figure 3.18 as below here.

Figure 3.18: Main Interface window for Aerodynamics Coefficients Module[61]

In the main module as shown above, we can see that there are three submodules
which are known as cruise, landing and enroute, where they are the observed
configuration of the aircraft. In each submodules interface, the input needed are shown
as in Figure 3.19 below.

Figure 3.19: Aerodynamics Coefficient Submodule interface window[61]

 67

Based on Figure 3.19, one can see that the submodule is divided further into 8
entry tabs as follow:

1. WGC: Wing Geometry Calculations

2. ALD: Additive Lift Distribution
3. BLD: Basic Lift Distribution
4. SCC: Stall CL Calculations
5. SCD: Spanwise Coefficient Distribution
6. ALT: Airplane Less Tail
7. TAU: Correction Factor TAU
8. SBA: Sweep Back Angle Correction
The elaboration and inputs of our study on each and every tabs are as follow. Note that
the input example provided is just for Cruise Configuration submodule. To view other
inputs, please refer to Appendix A as provided at the end of this thesis. The flow chart
of this module is provided in Figure 3.20.
 68

Figure 3.20: The flow chart for Aerodynamics Coefficient of FAR23 Loads [62]
 69

3.2.7.1 Wing Geometry Calculations

In this tab, the user have to insert the wing geometry of the aircraft. Fortunately, the
inputs are already inserted automatically by the program from the Geometry Module
output where all the input spaces will be yellow in colour indicating being updated
from previous module. Therefore, to view the input, please refer to Table 3.3 in
subchapter 3.2.4 above or appendices provided in Appendix A.

3.2.7.2 Additive Lift Distribution

Through this tab, the user needs to insert certain inputs related to calculation of
additive lift distribution on the aircraft’s wings such as slope of wing’s aerofoil lift
curve with its corresponding observed wing stations. Note that this information is later
converted into aircraft loading values via Shrenk’s Approximation method as
discussed in subchapter 2.8.8 as shown above. The input for our study of Light Sport
Aircraft is being portrayed through Table 3.7
Table 3.7: Input for Additive Lift Distribution calculation tab.

Point No. Wing Station (Inch) Slope of lift curve (per degree)
1 1.575 0.0768
2 192.907 0.0768
3 194.199 0.0768
4 195.101 0.0768
5 197.047 0.0768

3.2.7.3 Basic Lift Distribution

In this tab, users are required to enter the input of selected wing stations to be observed
and their corresponding angle from water line in degrees. If there is no twisting angle
for the wings, the angle will be the same and if there is no discontinuity between flaps
and aileron i.e. flaps fully retracted, place value 0 and if flaps extended, place the point
 70

of discontinuity in inches. The input used in this study is shown through Table below
here.

Table 3.8: Inputs of Basic Lift Distribution tab for Light Sport Aircrft.

Point No. Wing Station (Inch) Angle from Waterline (o)

1 1.575 6.00
2 192.907 6.00
3 194.199 6.00
4 195.101 6.00
5 197.047 6.00
Enter Wing Station discontinuity between flaps and aileron = 0 (No discontinuity)

3.2.7.4 Stall CL Calculations

In this Stall CL calculations tab, one should prepare to insert related inputs such as
corresponding Reynolds number for each desired points along the spanwise of the
wing together with its CLMAX and chord values as portrayed in Table 3.9 below.

Table 3.9: Input data of Stall CL calculations tab for Light Sport Aircraft

Wing Station CLMAX1 Reynolds CLMAX2 Reynolds Chord

(In) Number Number Length
(1) (2) (In)
1.575 1.012 200,000 1.524 1,000,000 53.107
192.907 1.012 200,000 1.524 1,000,000 52.122
194.199 1.012 200,000 1.524 1,000,000 50.941
195.101 1.012 200,000 1.524 1,000,000 49.634
197.047 1.012 200,000 1.524 1,000,000 43.701
 71

3.2.7.5 Spanwise Coefficient Distribution

In this Spanwise Coefficent Distibution calculation tab, the user needs to insert related
inputs such as TAU factor, desired distributed CL of the wing, wing stations together
with their drag coefficient (CD) and its pitching moment coefficient (CM) according to
its aerofoil drag polar graphs as shown in Table 3.10 below for our study.

Table 3.10: Input of Spanwise Coefficient distribution tab for Light Sport Aircraft

Selected wing stations and their Drag Coefficient (CD)

Point No. Wing Station (Inch) CD of wing at station
1 1.575 0.009
2 192.907 0.009
3 194.199 0.009
4 195.101 0.009
5 197.047 0.009
Selected wing stations and their Pitching Moment Coefficient (CM)
Point No. Wing Station (Inch) CM of wing at station
1 1.575 -0.0775
2 192.907 -0.0775
3 194.199 -0.0775
4 195.101 -0.0775
5 197.047 -0.0775
TAU Factor of wings = 0.096
Taper Ratio of wings = 0.823
Tip-span to semi-span Ratio of wings = 0.053

Based on the table shown, the TAU factor is a correction factor which take
account of the wing planform deviation from an ellipse in calculating the wing’s slope
of lift curve. Next, Tapper ratio is the ratio of the wing chord at wing tip to the chord
at the wing root. Last but not least, the tip ratio or known as Tip-span to semi-span
Ratio is the spanwise width of the rounded tip divided by the semi-span of the wing.
Usually, an unrounded or square shaped tip has a ratio = 0.
 72

3.2.7.6 Airplane Less Tail Load Calculations

This tab, Airplane Less Tail Load Calculations, additional data for the fuselage are
entered together with the landing gears data as shown in Table 3.11 of our study. If
the gears are extended during certain configuration, another tab known as Landing
Gear Calculations will appear and the input must be inserted to carry out the
calculations of this tab. For the landing gear calculations, the landing gear drag
coefficient is needed where one should know that:

 Single Strut Landing Gear CD = 0.29

 Single Strut with faired wheel cover CD = 0.25
 Truss Landing Gear CD = 0.54
 Truss with faired wheel cover CD = 0.35

Table 3.11: Inputs of Airplane Less Tail Load Calculation for Light Sport Aircraft

Aircraft Fuselage Data

Input needed Value
Fuselage width (ft) 3.888
Length of fuselage (ft) 7.735
% of Wing root location to the 76.083
fuselage
Wind tunnel adjustment factor 1.00
Fuselage frontal area (ft2) 9.168
Angle of fuselage centreline to 0.00
waterline (o)
Total area of tails 11.083
Minimum CL range for CL curve -0.259
Maximum CL range for CL curve 1.033
Increment in CL calculation 0.1
Landing Gears Data
Frontal Area of nose gear (ft2) 1.926
 73

Fuselage Station of nose gear (In) 13.586

Waterline of nose gear axle (In) 16.889
CD of nose gear 0.29
Total frontal area of main gears (ft2) 4.056
Fuselage Station of main gears (In) 92.569
Waterline of main gears axles (In) 16.889
CD of main gears 0.29
Approximate waterline of aircraft’s CG (In) = 61.653

3.2.8 Flight Loads Module

In this module, it uses and obtained needed input gathered form previous modules such
as Envelope of Loads, Geometry Module (Wings), Structural Speeds and also
Aerodynamics Coefficients module. The input window for this module is shown in
Figure 3.21 below.

Figure 3.21: Main interface of Flight Loads module of FAR23 Loads software[61]
 74

Based on the figure above, the user can see that the input are further divided into 7 till
9 inputs in corresponds with the configuration of the aircraft. Usually, aircraft without
enroute configuration such as drive brakes will not have item numbered 8 and 9 as
follow.
1. General: This contains the input of aircraft general information
2. Speed & Alt: This tab contains the information about aircraft speeds and
altitude (updated from Structural Speeds output)
3. Enroute Info: It is selected is the aircraft have dive brakes. If YES, item 8 and
9 will appear.
4. Cruise Coef: This tab will ask the user to provide information about
aerodynamics coefficients during cruise configuration (updated from
Aerodynamics Coefficient output)
5. Cruise CG: This contains the information about the aircraft cruise CG location
and weight.
6. Landing Coef: This tab will ask the user to provide information about
aerodynamics coefficients during aircraft landing configuration (updated from
Aerodynamics Coefficient output)
7. Landing CG: This contains the information about the aircraft landing CG
weight and location.
8. Enroute Coef (if any): This tab will ask the user to provide information about
aerodynamics coefficients during Enroute configuration (updated from
Aerodynamics Coefficient output)
9. Enroute CG (if any): This contains the information about the aircraft CG
location and weight when in Enroute configuration.

In the input table, one will see there are 4 centre of gravity provided namely CGr Max
1, CGr Max 2, CGr Avg and CGr Min where the explanation of these four centre of
gravity (CG) are as follow:
 CCr Max 1: The position of CG is at the most aft of original CG position
(+0.6%) and the maximum aircraft weight, output of ‘Weight & CG’ module.
 CCr Max 2: The position of CG is at the forward of original CG position (-
11%) and the maximum aircraft weight, output of ‘Weight & CG’ module.
 75

 CCr Avg: The position of CG is at the forward of original CG position (-17%)

and the average aircraft weight in pounds (lbs)
 CCr Min: The position of CG is at forward of original CG position (-6%) and
the minimum aircraft weight from output of ‘Envelope of Loads’ module in lbs

The following tables, Table 3.12 until Table 3.15 and figure, Figure 3.22 will show
us the input for our study and the module flow chart respectively

Table 3.12: Input data of aircraft general information and geometry

MAC XT25 XT50 XW ZW S Category Max Wt.

(inches) (%) (%) (Inches) (Inches) (Inches) (Lbs)
54.291 169.23 177.24 70.404 45.772 147.354 Normal 659
Incidence of waterline to HT chord (o) 0.00
Area of Horizontal Tail, HT (ft2) 13.318
Area of Elevator (ft2) 6.151
Aspect ratio of wings 7.319
Aspect ratio of HT 1.775
Lift curve slope of HT (per radians) 2.954
Sweep angle of HT (o) 0.00

Table 3.13: Input data of aircraft structural speed

VA VC VD VF VPF MC MD +N
(knots)
48.6 48.6 68.04 57.6 48.6 0.089 0.124 3.8

Table 3.14: Input data of aircraft altitude and its aero coefficient

Aerodynamics Coefficient and CG

Aero Coefficient of Mach Number at 0.1
altitude
Ignore pitch due to drag? NO
 76

Table 3.15: Input data for Aerodynamics Coefficient during cruise and landing

Cruise Configuration Aerodynamics Data

Stall CL (CLS) 1.77
Negative Stall CL (-CLS) -0.259
Angle waterline to zero lift line, AWO (o) 6
Wings CL 0.380909 0.063485 0
Wings CD 0.0292 0 0.044664
Wings CM 0.009041 0.016041 0
Centre of Gravity (CG) data for Cruise Configuration
Name of CG Weight (lbs) X-axis Z-axis
CGcr Max 1 677.024 73.00 19.00
CGcr Max 2 677.024 64.865 19.00
CGcr Avg 543 60.015 18.00
CGcr Min 408.779 68.342 24.192
Landing Configuration Aerodynamics Data
Stall CL (CLS) 1.38
Negative Stall CL (-CLS) -0.98
Angle waterline to zero lift line, AWO (o) 13
Wings CL 0.825303 0.063485 0
Wings CD 0.04914 0 0.044664
Wings CM 0.161329 0.016041 0
Centre of Gravity (CG) data for Landing Configuration
Name of CG Weight (lbs) X-axis Z-axis
CGcr Max 1 677.024 73.00 19.00
CGcr Max 2 677.024 64.865 19.00
CGcr Avg 543 60.015 18.00
CGcr Min 408.779 68.342 24.192
 77

Figure 3.22: Flow chart of Flight Loads module for FAR23 Loads software[62]
 78

3.2.9 Project Scope

For our study, not all of the modules as shown in figure 3.3 will be used due to our
project scope that limits it. Therefore, Figure 3.23 provided below shows the complete
flow of FAR23 Loads module used in this study.

Start

Weight Estimation Weight & CG Geometry

Module Module Module

Aerodynamic
Envelope of Loads
Coefficients
Module
Module

Structural
Useful Loads Speeds Module
Envelope

Flight Loads
Module Mach
Limitations
V-n diagram
Module

End Aircraft Operating

Limits

Figure 3.23: Overall usage of FAR23 Loads software for this study
 79

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter is the core of this writing where it will show and explain all output gained
from Hazreen Hazman’s Light Sport Aircraft structural design analysis using FAR23
software. The results will include all data input and its outcome for all module used in
this research. The results will be in table form and some might be illustrated in graphs
if needed.

4.1 Preliminary Design Weight Estimation

It is commonly known that every design process especially in designing an aircraft,

the process starts with weight and centre of gravity (CG) estimations. This estimations
involved many equations as reflected in Chapter 2, subchapter Weight and Aircraft
Balance of this thesis. Therefore, in FAR23 software, it too starts with aircraft’s weight
estimation through three of its initial calculation module namely ‘Weight Estimation
‘Weight & CG’ and ‘Envelope of Loads’ where their outputs will be further analysed
in the following subchapters.

4.1.1 Weight Estimation module

Although the Weight Estimation can be run independently, this module is usually the
initial module to be activated before going into more module of the software as the
first step in any design process is to estimate the designed aircraft empty weight,
MTOW, empty to MTOW ratio and related estimations. The inputs of this module
 80

already being explained in Chapter 3, Methodology on Weight Estimation Module.

The Table 4.1 shows the output of the Light Sport Aircraft as calculated by the FAR23
software. Note that these are only the initial weight estimations of the aircraft before
it will be detailed in the upcoming modules.

Table 4.1: Weight Estimation Module Output data for FAR23 software

Estimated Weight Data for

Preliminary Structural Design of A Light Sport Aircraft (LSA)
Output
Maximum Take-off Weight (Lbs) 1134
Useful Load (Lbs) 442
Empty Weight (Lbs) 691
WE/MTOW 0.61
Structure Weights (All in Lbs)
Wing Weight 117
Fuselage Weight 111
Tail Weight 26
Nacelle Weight 16
Landing Gear Weight 64
Control Surfaces Weight 17
Total 353
Powerplant Weights (All in Lbs)
Engine Installed Weight 49
Propeller Weight 19
Fuel System Weight 5
Exhaust Weight 7
Other Weight 8
Total 71
Systems Weights (All in Lbs)
Instruments and Navigation Equipment Weights 4
Pneumatics Weight 1
Electrical Weight 27
 81

Electronics Weight 0
Furnishings and Equipment Weights 50
Environmental and Anti-ice Weight 3
Miscellaneous & Other Weights 0
Total 87
Optional & Miscellaneous Weights (Lbs) 179
Aircraft Empty Weight (Lbs) 691
Pilot Weight (Lbs) 170
One Passenger Weight (Lbs) 170
Baggage Weight (Lbs) 0
Fuel Weight (Lbs) 102
Useful Load 442

Based on Table 4.1, we can see that the Maximum Take-off Weight (MTOW)
is estimated to be 1134 lbs or approximately 514.3737 kg which complies with EASA-
LSA specification as stated cannot be more than 600kg for land operated LSA.
Moreover, we can get that the calculated ratio of aircraft’s empty weight to MTOW
(WE/MTOW) is 0.61 that coincide with the chosen value beforehand.

4.1.2 Weight and CG Module

The ‘Weight & CG’ Module will help us to calculate the aircraft’s overall weight,
centre of gravity (CG) and inertia of the aircraft for any loading configuration as
discussed in the previous chapter. The output of this module is depicted in Table 4.2
as shown below.

Table 4.2: Output for Weight & CG Module of FAR23 software

Light Sport Aircraft’s Centre of Gravity, Weight and Inertia

Fuselage Station (Inch) 72.575
Waterline (Inch) 18.979
Aircraft’s Empty Weight (Lbs) 677.024
 82

Inertia with respect to Aircraft Coordinates

Ixx (slug-ft2) Iyy (slug-ft2) Izz (slug-ft2) Ixz (slug-ft2)
153.140 222.532 98.026 26.823
Ixx (lbs-in2) Iyy (lbs-in2) Izz (lbs-in2) Ixz (lbs-in2)
709418.759 1030876.780 454103.464 124256.602
Inertia with respect to Principal Axes
Ix (P) (slug-ft2) Iy (P) (slug-ft2) Iz (P) (slug-ft2)
164.039 222.532 87.127
Ix (P) (lbs-in2) Iy (P) (lbs-in2) Iz (P) (lbs-in2)
759907.619 1030876.780 403614.604

Based on the Table 4.2, we can see that the calculated centre of gravity (CG)
for the aircraft is seen to be at 72.575 and 18.979 where it is referred to the X-axis and
Z-axis respectively in respect to the aircraft reference point - most front of the aircraft
(aircraft’s nose), is somewhere at aft on the wings of the LSA. The table also reveals
that the aircraft detailed aircraft empty weight is to be 677.024 lbs. This value has
reduced from the previous empty weight - 691 lbs as depicted in previous module.
Besides, we can also see the calculated inertia with respect to both aircraft
coordinates and its principle axes. For the inertia magnitude in respect with aircraft
coordinates we get Ixx = 709418.759, Iyy = 1030876.780, Izz = 454103.464 and Ixz
= 124256.602. While the inertia with respect to principal axes are Ix = 759907.619, Iy
= 1030876.780 and Iz = 403614.604. Note that all of the inertia magnitude are in
pounds per square inch (lbs-in2).

4.1.3 Envelope of Loads Module

Envelope of Loads Module is the third module in the software but the last component
of the first step in preliminary design phase where it will gives us the useful loads of
the analysed aircraft, in this case our LSA. It will also include the weight and CG of
the airplane given its loading conditions. Through Table 4.3, we will see the output of
this module and the useful loads envelope will be illustrated through Figure 4.1
 83

Table 4.3: Envelope of Loads Module output for our LSA

Envelope of Discretionary Loads for

Preliminary Structural Design of Light Sport Aircraft
Discretionary Weight Component X bar (Inch) Z bar (Inch) Weight (Lbs)
Minimum Weight 66.067 19.779 408.779
Full Tank Fuel 68.752 24.988 507.024
Co-Pilot @ 1 Pax 72.575 18.979 677.024
Minimum Weight 66.067 19.779 408.779
Co-Pilot @ 1 Pax 71.328 14.28 578.779
Full Tank Fuel 72.575 18.979 677.024

These data can be represented in a form of useful envelope for our Light Sport
Aircraft together with its structural limits as depicted in the figure below.
 84

Useful Load Envelope and Structural limits

700

650

600

550
Weight (Lbs)

500

450

400

350

300

250

200
59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75
Fuselage Station (Inches)

Loads Limit Aircarft Envelope

Figure 4.1: Useful Loads Envelope and Structural Limits diagram for Light Sport Aircraft
 85

Based on the useful loads envelope provided via Figure 4.1, one can see that the
designed light sport aircraft envelope is within its loads limits where it tells us that this
aircraft can be operated safely in its loading limits without any structural failure if the
loading of payloads and fuel is according to the recommended weight as shown
through Table 4.3. The aircraft is guaranteed to be safe as long as the aircraft envelope
does not go beyond its loads limit.

4.2 Geometry Module

In previous chapter, we know that the input of this module is in form of the coordinates
of each surface geometry such as wings, horizontal tail and vertical tail together with
their control components. The Table 4.4 below will show one of the example of
Geometry Module output together with is drawing represented by using the
coordinates given.

Table 4.4: Geometry Output Module for Wings and its control components

Wing Geometry Output

Area/Side Average Avg. Chord Avg. Chord Aspect Ratio
Chord (Inch) Leading Edge Leading Edge
(X-axis) (Y-axis)
10610 54.291 56.831 99.044 7.319
Aileron Geometry Output
Area/Side Average Avg. Chord Avg. Chord Aspect Ratio
Chord (Inch) Leading Edge Leading Edge
(X-axis) (Y-axis)
855 10.940 112.500 157.489 90.832
Flaps Geometry Output
Area/Side Average Avg. Chord Avg. Chord Aspect Ratio
Chord (Inch) Leading Edge Leading Edge
(X-axis) (Y-axis)
883 11.355 112.500 79.838 31.918
 86

All the above geometry are illustrated in Figure 4.2 Figure 4.3 and Figure 4.4
respectively as shown below.

Figure 4.2: Wing geometry drawing using coordinates given (Right Wing)
 87

Figure 4.3: Right Wing Aileron drawing using given coordinates

As for this control surface, aileron, it will further divided into aft hinge line and
forward of hinge line so that the aerodynamic loading analysis can be done on this
control surface easily. The output and drawing will be shown subsequently.
 88

Figure 4.4: Flap of Right Wing of the LSA

As mentioned above, the aileron will be further divided into aft hinge line and forward
hinge line. Table 4.5 below will show us the output of the aft and forward hinge line
for the aileron. The geometry will also be illustrated through drawings as shown in
Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.6 per below.

Table 4.5: The output of aileron aft and forward hinge line

Aileron Aft Hinge Line Output

Area/Side Average Avg. Chord Avg. Chord Aspect Ratio
Chord (Inch) Leading Edge Leading Edge
(X-axis) (Y-axis)
658 8.439 115.010 157.373 117.965
 89

Aileron Forward Hinge Line Output

Area/Side Average Avg. Chord Avg. Chord Aspect Ratio
Chord (Inch) Leading Edge Leading Edge
(X-axis) (Y-axis)
197 2.510 112.500 157.874 394.898

Figure 4.5: The aft hinge line geometry drawing of LSA aileron (Right Aileron)
 90

Figure 4.6: The forward hinge line geometry drawing of aileron (Right Aileron)

The output of this module also provides us with an overall geometry of the structure
together with its control surface components as shown through Figure 4.7. To view
all of the output and drawings of Geometry Module, please turn to Appendix A for this
given Light Sport Aircraft (LSA).
 91

Figure 4.7: The complete geometry of LSA’s wing and its components.

4.3 Structural Speed Module

In this module, it will help us to calculate the structural speeds for our designed aircraft
based on FAR 23 minimum requirements. If we provide our own structural speed or
manoeuvre loads such as cruise speed (VC), this module will help to adjust the
corrected required structural speed based on FAR 23 requirements so adjustments
towards aircraft can be made. Note that all of the speed given will be in form of Knots
Equivalent Airspeed (KEAS). Table 4.6 below portrays the output of this module.
 92

Table 4.6: Output data of Structural Speed Module for our LSA

Verified Adjusted Chosen Speed & Load Factors

Adjusted Cruise Speed, VC (Knots) 48.6
Adjusted Dive Speed, VD (Knots) 68.04
Adjusted Manoeuvre Speed, VA (Knots) 48.6
Adjusted Flutter Speed, VF (Knots) 57.6
Adjusted Positive Load Factor, +N 3.8
Adjusted Negative Load Factor, -N -1.52
Mach Limitation Speed
Shoulder Altitude (ft) 10,000
Mach Number, Cruise (MC) 0.089
Mach Number, Dive (MD) 0.124

Based on Table 4.6 above, we can know that the minimum required structural
speeds and load factors are as follow. We know that our designed cruise speed is to be
48.6 knots according to our referred LSA namely Skywalker II Microlight aircraft.
Therefore, the adjusted and verified based on FAR 23 regulations of structural speed
and load factors are VC = 48.6 kts (chosen speed), VD = 68.04 kts (calculated minimum
FAR 23 requirement), VA = 48.6 kts (adjusted speed, previous per FAR 23
requirement is 74.076 kts), +N = 3.8 (calculated minimum FAR 23 requirement) and
–N = -1.52.
Moreover, output of this module also give us the Mach Numbers of our LSA
which is used during its cruise and dive. The values are MC = 0.089 and MD = 0.124
respectively where they will be used in the next module, ‘Mach Limitations Module’.

4.4 Mach Limitations Module

This module is to calculated and determine the limits of Mach number of our aircraft
to be used in building the flight envelope diagram or known as V-n diagram later on.
From previous module, we have that the Mach numbers for cruise and dive are MC =
0.089 and MD = 0.124 respectively. Thus, Table 4.7 will show us the output for this
module.
 93

Table 4.7: Output data for Mach Limitations Module of FAR 23 Loads software

Mach Limitations Data Output (For Flight Limit Diagram)

Mach Never Exceed, MNE 0.1116
Mach Flutter Clearance, MFC 0.1488
Altitude (ft) V (MC) V (MNE) V (MD) V (MFC)
Knots Equivalent Airspeed (KEAS)

10000 48.758 61.139 67.933 81.519

10984 47.832 59.978 66.642 79.970
11968 46.917 58.830 65.367 78.440
12952 46.012 57.696 64.107 76.928
13936 45.119 56.576 62.862 75.434
14920 44.236 55.469 61.632 73.959
15000 44.165 55.380 61.533 73.840

Based on Table 4.7, to avoid going beyond the Mach Never Exceed and its Flutter
Clearance Mach Numbers, the LSA must be operated in the operating speed as
depicted. For example, at 10,984 ft to achieve recommended MC the aircraft must be
flown at 47.832 kts and to dive at 66.642 kts. To avoid flutter during operation, the
aircraft must be flown well below 79.97 kts and never exceed the speed of 59.978 kts
during flight. Moreover, if we see at 14,920 ft, the recommended cruising speed is
44.236 kts with a dive speed of 61.632 kts. In this altitude, the aircraft must be flown
below 73.959 kts to avoid any flutter that may damage the aircraft and do not operate
exceed 55.469 kts during flight.
These values keep changing when increase in altitude because the higher the
altitude, the lower is the local air temperature that will affect the Mach Number as M
𝑻𝑨𝑺
= and the local speed of sound (LSS) greatly depends on the local air temperature.
𝑳𝑺𝑺
Thus, to keep the aircraft from exceeding its Mach Never Exceed at 0.1116, the True
Airspeed (TAS) must be decreased as recommended above. These data can be
illustrated in form of flight limit diagram or known as aircraft operating limits diagram
as shown in Figure 4.8 below.
 94

Light Sport Aircraft Operating Limits

16000

14000

12000

10000
Altitude (Feet)

V (MC)
8000
V (MNE)
6000 V (MD)
V(MC) : Cruise Speed
V (MNE) : Maximum @ Never Exceed Speed V (MFC)
4000
V (MD) : Maximum Dive Speed
V (FC) : Flutter Clearance Speed
2000

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Air Speed (Knots)

Figure 4.8: Our Light Sport Aircraft Operating Limits in terms of its speed (KEAS)
 95

From the figure above, we can see that the maximum operating altitude or known as
ceiling service of our LSA is at 15,000 ft with its never exceed speed at 55.380 kts.
The division of observed altitude or known as altitudes of interest are every 984 ft as
our LSA rate of climb is 984 ft per minute as referred to the performance of Skywalker
II microlight aircraft.

4.5 Aerodynamics Coefficient Module

In this module, it will calculate the aerodynamic coefficient on the wings of the aircraft
for three important configurations namely cruise, landing and enroute configurations.
The aerodynamic coefficients- lift coefficient (CL), drag coefficient (CD) and moment
coefficient (CM) of the wings for this particular aircraft in the three configurations is
shown in the subchapters below.

4.5.1 Aerodynamics Coefficient: Cruise Configuration

This subchapter will show the output of Aerodynamics Coefficient Module,

submodule Cruise Configuration as shown below. The following calculations and
output of cruise configuration submodule will be further divided into 5 parts of
calculation namely wing geometry calculation, additive lift distribution, stall
calculation, wing aero coefficient distribution and airplane less tail aero coefficient.

4.5.1.1 Wing Geometry Calculation

The first part of calculation deals directly with the geometry of the wing per given in
the Geometry Module beforehand This part of calculation will determine the wing’s
total area, mean aerodynamic chord, aspect ratio, total wing span and other
calculations related to the wing geometry as shown in Table 4.8.
 96

Table 4.8: Output of Cruise configuration submodule for wing geometry calculations

Wing Geometry Calculations

Total Area (in2) 21219.005
Mean Aerodynamic Chord (in) 54.291
Y bar (in) 99.044
X-axis Leading Edge (in) 56.831
Aspect ratio 7.319
Total Wing Span (in) 394.094
Number of elements 100
Difference in spanwise, Dy 1.955

From here, we can see the detailed and approximate calculations of the LSA’s
wings geometry. Based on the Table 4.8, we find that the wing span of the aircraft is
394.094 in and the wing half-span is 197.047 in ᴝ 5.005 m. This value of wing span
is acceptable where a Light Sport Aircraft usually have a wing span of 10 m~ 13 m as
observed in the current market. In the table above, we can also see that the calculated
Mean Aerodynamic Chord is to be 54.291 in ᴝ 1.4 m and its total wing area or wing
span area is to be 21219.005 in2 ᴝ 13.7 m2 where these values are also accepted and
can be validated as correct based on current LSA available in market. The table also
reveals that the spanwise of the wing is divided into 100 parts as this had been already
set in the Geometry Module to help aerodynamic analyzation of the wing to become
easier.

4.5.1.2 Additive Lift Distribution Calculation

Next, the wing will undergo a part of calculation that deals with the slope of lift curve
of wing’s aerofoil – Clark Y aerofoil where we found that its lift curve is to be 0.0768.
The additive lift distribution is being selected at any chosen spanwise point of the wing
and for this study the interested points are at 1.575 (wing root), 192.907, 194.199,
195.101 and 197.047 (wing tip). Note that these values are gained from the computed
coordinate of the Y-axis (wing station) of the aircraft – value starts from the middle of
aircraft. The output of this part of calculation are depicted in Table 4.9 as follow.
 97

Table 4.9: Additive Lift Distribution along LSA’s wing spanwise

Element No. Y-axis CCLA1 (in) CLA1

(wing station)
1 2.552 61.488742 1.129706
2 4.507 61.48265 1.129594
49 96.379 57.111637 1.049287
50 98.334 56.918398 1.045737
51 100.288 56.719976 1.042091
99 194.115 31.193686 0.616414
100 196.070 26.704009 0.573189

Based on Table 4.9, there are 7 points being focused instead of all 100 points
i.e. 2 points from the wing root (Element 1 & 2), 3 points from centre of wing (Element
49, 50 & 51) and 2 points of wing tip (Element 99 & 100) throughout this entire sub-
chapter. The data shows that the lift from wing root to the tip is decreasing and this is
favourable as we want more lift on the root rather than tip. This is to avoid excessive
upward bending of wings and eventually leads to wing structural failure if lift is more
on the wing tip.

4.5.1.3 Stall Calculation

This part of calculation will help to calculate the maximum lift coefficient (CLMAX) for
each part along the wing spanwise and it also provide the optimum overall wing lift
coefficient (CL) before stalling in cruise configuration. The Table 4.10 below gives
out the data of maximum lift coefficient for each element spanwinse of the wing.

Table 4.10: Maximum Lift Coefficient, CLMAX for each element of wing

Element No., J. Y-axis (J) CLMAX (J)

1 2.552 1.998446
2 4.507 1.998349
49 96.379 1.993787
 98

50 98.334 1.99369
51 100.288 1.993593
99 194.115 1.978173
100 196.070 1.933189

From the table above, we can clearly see that all part of the wing (root, centre
and tip) has the maximum lift coefficient or CLMAX at 1.9 with optimum CL distribution
for our Light Sport Aircraft is to be 1.770. Thus, Table 4.11 will show us the lift
coefficient, CL distribution along the wing’s spanwise when distributed CL = 1.770.

Table 4.11: Wing Lift Coefficient, CL along spanwise of LSA wing

Element No., J. Y-axis (J) CL (J)

1 2.552 1.999579
2 4.507 1.999381
49 96.379 1.857238
50 98.334 1.850954
51 100.288 1.844501
99 194.115 1.091054
100 196.070 1.014544

𝐶𝑖
In aerodynamic theory, stall will happen at area with maximum where Ci is the
𝐶𝐿

individual section’s CL with the distributed CL as its denominator. When referring to

𝐶𝑖
Table 4.11, we can calculate the ratio at root (element 1) is 1.13, at the centre
𝐶𝐿

(element 50) is 1.05 and tip (element 100) is 0.57.

This shows us that the maximum ratio is at the root (1.13) and the minimum at
tip (0.57) where wing root will stall first. This is a desirable condition where in straight
rectangular wing planform such as our LSA, stall theoretically and ideally happens in
root first. This has a benefit as our aircraft tends to pitch nose down and eliminate the
stall with the aileron can be use during stall.
 99

4.5.1.4 Wing Aero Coefficient Distributions Calculation

After finding out the distributed CL that will cause aircraft stall, which is 1.77, this part
of calculation will determine other related aerodynamic coefficients such as induced
drag coefficient (CDI), drag coefficient (CD) and pitching moment coefficient (CM) of
our LSA’s wings. Table 4.12 provided below, will show us the aerodynamic
coefficient per part along spanwise of the wing together with its corresponding CL

Table 4.12: Values of CDI, CD and CM at each part along spanwise of LSA wing

Element No., J. CL (J) CDI CD CM

1 1.999579 0.064367 0.073457 -0.0775
2 1.999381 0.06445 0.07354 -0.0775
49 1.857238 0.119858 0.128948 -0.0775
50 1.850954 0.122096 0.131186 -0.0775
51 1.844501 0.124375 0.133465 -0.0775
99 1.091054 0.260372 0.269462 -0.0775
100 1.014544 0.259753 0.268843 -0.0775

As a general knowledge, the value of drag coefficient for an object, CD

is highly dependent on its surface area where lower value of CD indicates lesser
aerodynamic drag of the observed object. Thus, the CD values provided in Table 4.12,
seen to increase along the spanwise due to the thickness of wing from wing root to its
tip decreases and makes the values differ. While the CM values along spanwise of the
wing are the same because the aerofoil used for the wing are the same for the wing
root and wing tip.
Moreover, the coefficient of induced drag seen to be increasing when
the lift coefficient is decreasing. This situation is true as induced drag is a lift
dependent drag i.e. the higher the lift, the higher will be the induced drag and vice
versa. Thus, the increase in overall drag or Total Drag (as a function of increasing CDI)
will influence the CL to reduce from root to tip as seen above. Therefore, based on
Table 4.12, the values of CDI and CD and CM can be accepted. Besides, this calculation
 100

also finds that the overall wing aerodynamics coefficient during cruise configuration
is as shown in Table 4.13 below.

Table 4.13: Overall Aerodynamics Coefficient of wing at cruise configuration

Aerodynamics Coefficients Value

Lift Coefficient, CL 1.761087
Drag Coefficient, CD 0.147611
Moment Coefficient, CM -0.0775

4.5.1.5 Airplane Less Tail Aero Coefficients Calculation

This part of calculation is to calculate the aerodynamics coefficient of the fuselage

with its wings but without the tail, hence the name airplane less tail, of the aircraft.
The observed aero coefficients are for fuselage only (FUS), fuselage with its wing and
landing gear (F+W+LG) and the whole airplane (A/P) based on the aircraft’s wing
angle from relative wind to waterline, ARWL. The values of aerodynamics
coefficients for the wings are obtained from previous calculations based on respective
ANWRL and the output of this submodule is shown through Table 4.14.

Table 4.14: Airplane Less Tail Aero Coefficient output of a Light Sport Aircraft

ARWL Wing Wing CD for CD for Wing CM CM for

(o) CL CD F+W+LG A/P CM for F+W+LG
FUS
-10.078 -0.258 0.012054 0.02011 0.032 -0.078 -0.065 -0.15263
-8.503 -0.158 0.010206 0.02011 0.03 -0.078 -0.04 -0.12736
-6.9278 -0.059 0.009243 0.02011 0.029 -0.078 -0.015 -0.10209
-5.3526 0.04089 0.009165 0.02011 0.029 -0.078 0.01 -0.07682
-3.7774 0.14039 0.00997 0.02011 0.03 -0.078 0.036 -0.05155
-2.2022 0.23989 0.01166 0.02011 0.03 -0.078 0.061 -0.02629
-0.6271 0.33938 0.014234 0.02011 0.03 -0.078 0.086 -0.00102
0.94812 0.43888 0.017693 0.02011 0.037 -0.078 0.111 0.02425
 101

2.5233 0.53838 0.022036 0.02011 0.04 -0.078 0.137 0.049518

4.09848 0.63787 0.027263 0.02011 0.047 -0.078 0.162 0.074785
5.67366 0.73737 0.033374 0.02011 0.05 -0.078 0.187 0.100053
7.24884 0.83687 0.04037 0.02011 0.06 -0.078 0.213 0.125321
8.82402 0.93636 0.04825 0.02011 0.068 -0.078 0.238 0.150589

Based on the table above, we manage to create some equations for aerodynamic
coefficients for our LSA’s Airplane Less Tail calculation as depicted through
Equations 4-1 until 4-4 as follow

𝐶𝐷 = 0.0292 + 0.044664 (𝐶𝐿2 ) (4-1)

𝐶𝑀 = −0.087206 − 0.252678 (𝐶𝐿 ) (4-2)

𝐶𝐿𝑊 = 0.380909 + 0.063485 (ARWL) (4-3)

𝐶𝑀𝑊 = 0.009041 + 0.016041 (ARWL) (4-4)

4.5.2 Aerodynamics Coefficient: Landing Configuration

Now, we continue our discussion on aerodynamics coefficient for the next

configuration, landing. This subchapter will show the output of Aerodynamics
Coefficient Module, submodule Landing Configuration as shown below. The
following calculations and output of cruise configuration submodule will be further
divided into 6 parts of calculation same as the submodule of Aerodynamics
Coefficient: Cruise Configuration.

4.5.2.1 Wing Geometry Calculation

As for this Light Sport Aircraft, the subjected wing are the same for any configuration
that being calculated through this software. Therefore, the output of this part of
calculation will be the same as the previous submodule calculation output. Please refer
to subchapter 4.5.1.1 above for this information.
 102

4.5.2.2 Additive Lift Distribution Calculation

Once again, the subjected wing for this Light Sport Aircraft has the same aerofoil for
any configuration which is the Clark Y aerofoil with the same lift curve of 0.0768.
Therefore, the output of this calculation part is the same as the previous submodule
calculation output. To view the stated output, Please refer to subchapter 4.5.1.2 as
above.

4.5.2.3 Stall Calculation

This part of calculation is different from the previous submodule calculation as the
configuration is in a landing configuration. Same as the previous submodule
calculation, this part provides the maximum lift coefficient (CLMAX) for each part along
the wing spanwise and its distributed lift coefficient (CL) for LSA’s landing
configuration. Now, the Table 4.15 will show the CLMAX values for each focused area
at root, centre and tip of wing

Table 4.15: Maximum Lift Coefficient, CLMAXS for each focused area

Element No., J. Y-axis (J) CLMAX (J)

1 2.552 1.557452
2 4.507 1.55744
49 96.379 1.556847
50 98.334 1.556834
51 100.288 1.556822
99 194.115 1.548847
100 196.070 1.548847

From the table above, we can clearly see that all part of the wing have a maximum CL
and eventually will stall at CLMAX 1.5 with optimum CL distribution of 1.38. Thus,
Table 4.16 will show us the lift coefficient, CL distribution along the wing’s spanwise
when distributed CL = 1.38.
 103

Table 4.16: CL distribution along spanwise for landing configuration at CL = 1.38

Element No., J. Y-axis (J) CL (J)

1 2.552 1.558994
2 4.507 1.558839
49 96.379 1.448016
50 98.334 1.443117
51 100.288 1.438086
99 194.115 0.850652
100 196.070 0.791

𝐶𝑖
Once again, we can calculate the ratio at root (element 1) is 1.13, at the centre
𝐶𝐿

(element 50) is 1.05 and tip (element 100) is 0.57. These values are the same as in the
cruise configuration where the wing will also stall first in landing configuration (by
𝐶
having maximum 𝐶 𝑖 ratio). Thus, these data can be accepted.
𝐿

4.5.2.4 Wing Aero Coefficient Distributions Calculation

From the calculation above, we found that the optimum distributed CL for landing is
1.38. For the stated distributed CL, the calculation continues with other related
aerodynamic coefficients as follow. Looking at Table 4.17 provided below, it will
show us the aerodynamic coefficient for every parts along the wing’s spanwise for
landing configuration.

Table 4.17: Wing aerodynamics coefficients for each wing part at landing

Element No., J. CL (J) CDI CD CM

1 1.558994 0.039127 0.068157 -0.0375
2 1.558839 0.039178 0.068208 -0.0375
49 1.448016 0.072858 0.101888 -0.0375
50 1.443117 0.074218 0.103248 -0.0375
 104

51 1.438086 0.075604 0.104634 -0.0375

99 0.850652 0.158273 0.187303 -0.0375
100 0.791 0.157896 0.186926 -0.0375

Based on Table 4.17, the values of CD and CM can be accepted as we

can see the CD is increasing due to the surface are of the subjected wing for each wing
is decreasing from wing root to its tip because of varying thickness. Moreover, we can
see the CM values are constant because we are referring to the same aerofoil from the
wing root towards its tip where it wholly used Clark Y aerofoil. Besides, the coefficient
of induced drag can also be accepted as it shows an increase in induced drag as the lift
is increasing, but due to increase in total drag (caused by CDI increment), the CL is
decreasing from root to tip. This calculation also finds that the overall wing
aerodynamics coefficient during landing is as shown in Table 4.18 below.

Table 4.18: Overall Aerodynamics Coefficient of wing at landing configuration

Aerodynamics Coefficients Value

Lift Coefficient, CL 1.373051
Drag Coefficient, CD 0.113233
Moment Coefficient, CM -0.0375

4.5.2.5 Airplane Less Tail Aero Coefficients Calculation

This part of calculation is to calculate the aerodynamics coefficient of the fuselage

without the tail, hence the name airplane less tail, of the Light Sport Aircraft. The
calculated aero coefficients are for fuselage only (FUS), fuselage with its wing and
landing gear (F+W+LG) and the whole airplane (A/P) based on the aircraft’s wing
angle from relative wind to waterline, ARWL, in degrees (o). The values of
aerodynamics coefficients of wings are obtained from previous calculations based on
ANWRL and the output of this submodule is shown through Table 4.19 as below.
 105

Table 4.19: Airplane Less Tail Aero Coefficient of LSA in landing configuration

ARWL Wing Wing CD CD for CD for Wing CM for CM for

(o) CL F+W+L A/P CM FUS F+W+LG
G
-28.511 -0.9797 0.071902 0.02011 0.092 -0.0375 -0.249 -0.29601
-26.936 -0.8802 0.063637 0.02011 0.0837 -0.0375 -0.224 -0.27075
-25.36 -0.7807 0.056256 0.02011 0.0764 -0.0375 -0.198 -0.24548
-23.785 -0.6813 0.049759 0.02011 0.0699 -0.0375 -0.173 -0.22021
-22.21 -0.5818 0.044146 0.02011 0.0643 -0.0375 -0.148 -0.19495
-20.635 -0.4823 0.039418 0.02011 0.0595 -0.0375 -0.122 -0.16968
-19.06 -0.3828 0.035574 0.02011 0.0557 -0.0375 -0.097 -0.14441
-17.485 -0.2833 0.032614 0.02011 0.0527 -0.0375 -0.072 -0.11914
-15.909 -0.1838 0.032614 0.02011 0.0506 -0.0375 -0.047 -0.09388
-14.334 -0.0843 0.029347 0.02011 0.0495 -0.0375 -0.021 -0.06861
-12.759 0.01522 0.02904 0.02011 0.0492 -0.0375 0.0039 -0.04334
-11.184 0.11472 0.029618 0.02011 0.0497 -0.0375 0.0291 -0.01807
-9.6086 0.21422 0.03108 0.02011 0.0512 -0.0375 0.0544 0.007195
-8.0335 0.31371 0.033426 0.02011 0.0535 -0.0375 0.0797 0.032463
-6.4583 0.41321 0.036656 0.02011 0.0568 -0.0375 0.1049 0.057731
-4.8831 0.51271 0.040771 0.02011 0.0609 -0.0375 0.1302 0.108266
-3.3079 0.6122 0.04577 0.02011 0.0659 -0.0375 0.1555 0.133534
-1.7327 0.7117 0.051653 0.02011 0.0718 -0.0375 0.1807 0.158802
-0.1576 0.8112 0.05842 0.02011 0.0785 -0.0375 0.206 0.184070
1.41762 0.91069 0.066072 0.02011 0.0862 -0.0375 0.2313 0.209337
2.9928 1.01019 0.074608 0.02011 0.0947 -0.0375 0.2565 0.234605
4.56798 1.10968 0.084029 0.02011 0.1041 -0.0375 0.2818 0.259873
6.14316 1.20918 0.094334 0.02011 0.1144 -0.0375 0.3071 0.285141
7.71834 1.30868 0.105523 0.02011 0.1256 -0.0375 0.3323 0.310409
9.29352 1.40817 0.117596 0.02011 0.1377 -0.0375 0.3576 0.310409
 106

Based on the table above, we can create some equations for aerodynamic
coefficients for our LSA’s Airplane Less Tail calculation in landing configuration as
depicted through Equations 4-5 until 4-8 below.
𝐶𝐷 = 0.04914 + 0.044664 (𝐶𝐿2 ) (4-5)

𝐶𝑀 = −0.047206 + 0.252678 (𝐶𝐿 ) (4-6)

𝐶𝐿𝑊 = 0.825303 + 0.063485 (ARWL) (4-7)

𝐶𝑀𝑊 = 0.161329 + 0.016041 (ARWL) (4-8)

4.5.3 Aerodynamics Coefficient: Enroute Configuration

As for enroute configuration, our Light Sport Aircraft does not have this type of
configuration i.e. dive brakes and etc. due to its category as a normal aircraft rather
than utility or acrobatic aircraft that surely have an enroute configuration. Therefore,
the output for enroute configuration will not be discussed further in this study. But, the
enroute data is available through appendix A of this thesis for general view and self-
understanding.

4.5.4 Aerodynamics Coefficients Graphs

To further discuss our output, there are several graphs that can be made from the output
data obtained.as shown in Figure 4.7 until Figure 4.9 in the next few pages that
follows. Note that these graphs are generated through Microsoft Excel by using the
data obtained from Airplane Less Tail Aero Coefficients Module output.
 107

CLw vs α
2.0

1.5

1.0
Landing
y = 0.063165x + 0.821147
0.5 Cruise
CLw

y = 0.063165x + 0.378991

0.0
-35.0 -30.0 -25.0 -20.0 -15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0

-0.5

-1.0

α ()
-1.5

Cruise Configuration Landing Configuration Linear (Cruise Configuration) Linear (Landing Configuration)

Figure 4.9: Graph of LSA CLW versus α for both cruise and landing configuration
 108

CD (A/P) vs CLw
0.16
Landing
y= 3E-07x4 - 2E-07x3 + 0.0447x2 - 5E-08x + 0.0491
0.14

0.12

0.10
CD (A/P)

0.08

0.06
Cruise
y = -2E-06x4 + 2E-06x3 + 0.0447x2 - 8E-07x + 0.0292
0.04

0.02

0.00
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
CLw

Cruise Configuration Landing Configuration Poly. (Cruise Configuration) Poly. (Landing Configuration)

Figure 4.10: Graph of LSA CD (A/P) versus CLW for both cruise and landing configuration
 109

CM (W+F+LG) vs α
0.40

0.30

0.20
Landing
y = 0.016041x + 0.161329
0.10
CM (w+f+lg)

0.00
-35.0 -30.0 -25.0 -20.0 -15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0
-0.10
Cruise
y = 0.016041x + 0.009041 -0.20

-0.30

-0.40

α ()
Cruise Configuration Landing Configuration Linear (Cruise Configuration) Linear (Landing Configuration)

Figure 4.11: Graph of LSA CM (W+F+LG) versus α for both cruise and landing configuration
 110

Based on Figure 4.7, we can find that the graph equation of CLW vs α for both
cruise and landing configuration are as shown in Equation 4-9 and Equation 4-10
respectively.

y = 0.063165x + 0.378991
(4-9)

y = 0.063165x + 0.821147
(4-10)

Therefore we can see that the slope of graph for both cruise and landing
configuration is the same, with value of 0.063165, where its unit is per degree. This
lift curve slope will be need in the Critical Horizontal Tail Loads Module later on
for further analysis. Thus, the value of lift curve slope is required to be converted
into per radians as shown in the Equation 4-11 below. Note that it is the same
value for both cruise and landing configuration.

𝑑𝐶𝐿 𝟎. 𝟎𝟔𝟑𝟏𝟔𝟓 𝑑𝑒𝑔

= 𝑋 57.3 = 𝟑. 𝟔𝟏𝟗𝟑𝟓𝟒𝟓/𝒓𝒂𝒅 (4-11)
𝑑𝛼 𝑑𝑒𝑔 𝑟𝑎𝑑

Furthermore, based on Figure 4.8, according to FAR 23 manual handbook published

by its company – DAR Corp, it said that the general graph shape of is CD (A/P) versus
CLW generally the same for all type of aircraft analysed using the same software. Thus,
the graph and obtained data is reliable.
Based on Figure 4.9, generally known that for CM (W+F+LG) versus α graphs
show the longitudinal stability of respective aircraft. It is known that a stable aircraft
will have a negative gradient or graph slope and vice versa where the steeper the
gradient, the greater the longitudinal stability. As for our graph, Figure 4.9, the aircraft
can be seen as unstable to it is illustrated to have a positive gradient slope. But, the
reference example from FAR23 software manual handbook do show the same slope
of graph. Therefore, by right, the graph and data obtained may be valid.
 111

4.6 Flight Loads Module

In this module, it uses the data obtained from previous modules such as Geometry
Module, Structural Speeds Module and Aerodynamics Coefficients Module. This
module will calculate the loading factor (NZ), aircraft speeds in knots, its Mach
number, corresponding CL and mass of aircraft’s fuselage and wings in pounds for
various conditions at four different weight and CG locations.
The output data will then be illustrated in form of aircraft loading diagram or
known as the V-n diagram at different aircraft weight and CG locations depend on its
configuration – cruise and landing. Table 4.23 and Table 4.24 will first show the
obtained values of aerodynamic coefficient and CG inputs for both configuration
(cruise and landing) that is used throughout the module calculations.

Table 4.20: Cruise Configuration data for Flight Loads Module at altitude 0 ft

Cruise Configuration Aerodynamics Data

Stall CL (CLS) 1.77
Negative Stall CL (-CLS) -0.259
Angle waterline to zero lift line, AWO (o) 6
Wings CL 0.380909 0.063485 0
Wings CD 0.0292 0 0.044664
Wings CM 0.009041 0.016041 0
Centre of Gravity (CG) data for Cruise Configuration
Name of CG Weight (lbs) X-axis Z-axis
CGcr Max 1 677.024 73.00 19.00
CGcr Max 2 677.024 64.865 19.00
CGcr Avg 543 60.015 18.00
CGcr Min 408.779 68.342 24.192

Table 4.21: Landing Configuration data for Flight Loads Module at altitude 0 ft

Landing Configuration Aerodynamics Data

Stall CL (CLS) 1.38
Negative Stall CL (-CLS) -0.98
 112

Angle waterline to zero lift line, AWO (o) 13

Wings CL 0.825303 0.063485 0
Wings CD 0.04914 0 0.044664
Wings CM 0.161329 0.016041 0
Centre of Gravity (CG) data for Landing Configuration
Name of CG Weight (lbs) X-axis Z-axis
CGcr Max 1 677.024 73.00 19.00
CGcr Max 2 677.024 64.865 19.00
CGcr Avg 543 60.015 18.00
CGcr Min 408.779 68.342 24.192

The Table 4.25 up to Table 4.28 will show us the output for LSA flight loads
during cruise configuration and their respective V-n diagrams are illustrated through
Figure 4.11 up to Figure 4.14. Note that we will only provide output data on the
aircraft speed, V (KEAS) together with its respective load factor, NZ in correspond to
variety of flying conditions and aircraft’s CG. This is to ease us to draw flight loading
diagram or known as the V-n diagram for this particular aircraft. Moreover, these data
and V-n diagram are only at altitude of 0 ft because according to FAR23 manual
handbook, flight below 12,000 lbs and have a ceiling service lower than 15,000 ft only
have to be analysed at sea level cruise and landing i.e. 0 ft for its flight loads. To view
and read remaining output data for this module, please turn to Appendix A as provided.

Table 4.22: Flight Loads Module output for cruise configuration for CGcr Max 1

Case No. Condition V (KEAS) NZ

1 Stall 1G 27.174 1.00
2 Stall +N 53.097 3.80
3 Man A 48.6 3.18
4 Man C 48.6 3.18
5 Man D 68.04 3.80
6 Man –D 68.04 0
7 Man –C 48.6 -0.63
8 Stall –N 79.193 -1.52
 113

9 Stall –1G 64.234 -1.00

10 Gust +C 48.6 3.00
11 Gust +D 68.04 2.40
12 Gust –D 68.04 -0.40
13 Gust –C 48.6 -1.00
14 Bal A 48.6 1.00
15 Bal C 48.6 1.00
16 Bal D 68.04 1.00
17 St Roll A 48.6 2.54
18 St Roll C 48.6 2.54
19 St Roll D 68.04 2.53
20 AC Roll 53.097 3.32

V-n Diagram of Cruise Configuration

5

3
Load Factor, Nz

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
-1

-2
Aircraft Speed, V (KEAS)

CNA Max -CNA Max VD limits Vc Gusts

Vd Gusts BAL Stall Limits ST Roll

Figure 4.12: V-n diagram of cruise configuration for CGcr Max 1

Based on Figure 4.11 above, we can see the drawn V-n diagram when the
weight of aircraft equals to 659 lbs with CG location of 73.00 (X-axis) and 19.00 (Z-
axis) namely CGcr Max 1. In the figure, we find that the Gust limit is to be 68.06 kts
and its stall limit at +1G = 27.174 kts and at -1G = 64.234 kts as shown above. We
 114

can also see the accelerated roll to be 53.097 kts and its standard roll for our LSA is
48.6 kts.

Table 4.23: Flight Loads Module output for cruise configuration for CGcr Max 2

Case No. Condition V (KEAS) NZ

21 Stall 1G 29.343 1.00
22 Stall +N 57.38 3.80
23 Man A 48.6 2.95
24 Man C 48.6 2.95
25 Man D 68.04 3.80
26 Man –D 68.04 0
27 Man –C 48.6 -0.58
28 Stall –N 79.193 -1.52
29 Stall –1G 64.234 -1.00
30 Gust +C 48.6 3.00
31 Gust +D 68.04 2.40
32 Gust –D 68.04 -0.40
33 Gust –C 48.6 -1.00
34 Bal A 48.6 1.00
35 Bal C 48.6 1.00
36 Bal D 68.04 1.00
37 St Roll A 48.6 2.53
38 St Roll C 48.6 2.53
39 St Roll D 68.04 2.53
40 AC Roll 57.38 3.33
 115

V-n Diagram of Cruise Configuration

5

3
Load Factor, Nz

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
-1

-2
Aircraft Speed, V (KEAS)

CNA Max -CNA Max VD limits Vc Gusts

Vd Gusts BAL Stall Limits ST Roll

Figure 4.13: V-n diagram for cruise configuration at CGcr Max 2

From the Figure 4.12, we can see the drawn V-n diagram when the weight of
aircraft equals to 659 lbs with aft CG location of 64.865 (X-axis) and 19.00 (Z-axis)
namely CGcr Max 2 where we find that the Gust limit is to be 68.04 kts and its stall
limit at +1G = 29.343 kts and at -1G = 64.234 kts as shown above. We can also see
the accelerated roll to be 57.38 kts and its standard roll for our LSA is 48.6 kts.

Table 4.24: Flight Loads Module output for cruise configuration for CGcr Avg

Case No. Condition V (KEAS) NZ

41 Stall 1G 29.711 1.00
42 Stall +N 58.281 3.80
43 Man A 48.6 3.27
44 Man C 48.6 3.27
45 Man D 68.04 3.80
46 Man –D 68.04 0
47 Man –C 48.6 -0.65
48 Stall –N 74.361 -1.52
49 Stall –1G 60.313 -1.00
 116

50 Gust +C 48.6 3.16

51 Gust +D 68.04 2.51
52 Gust –D 68.04 -0.51
53 Gust –C 48.6 -1.51
54 Bal A 48.6 1.00
55 Bal C 48.6 1.00
56 Bal D 68.04 1.00
57 St Roll A 48.6 2.53
58 St Roll C 48.6 2.53
59 St Roll D 68.04 2.53
60 AC Roll 58.281 3.33

V-n Diagram of Cruise Configuration

5

3
Load Factor, Nz

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
-1

-2
Aircraft Speed, V (KEAS)

CNA Max -CNA Max VD limits Vc Gusts

Vd Gusts BAL Stall Limits ST Roll

Figure 4.14: V-n diagram of cruise configuration for CGcr Avg

Figure 4.13 shows the V-n diagram of LSA in cruise configuration when the
weight of aircraft equals to 574 lbs with aft CG location of 60.015 (X-axis) and 18.00
(Z-axis) namely CGcr Avg. Through this figure, one could find that the Gust limit is
to be 68.05 kts and its stall limit at +1G = 29.711 kts and at -1G = 60.313 kts as shown
above. We can also see the accelerated roll to be 58.281 kts and its standard roll for
our LSA is 48.6 kts.
 117

Table 4.25: Flight Loads Module output for cruise configuration for CGcr Min

Case No. Condition V (KEAS) NZ

61 Stall 1G 23.841 1.00
62 Stall +N 46.581 3.80
63 Man A 48.6 3.27
64 Man C 48.6 3.27
65 Man D 68.04 3.80
66 Man –D 68.04 0
67 Man –C 48.6 -0.65
68 Stall –N 68.218 -1.52
69 Stall –1G 55.332 -1.00
70 Gust +C 48.6 3.16
71 Gust +D 68.04 2.51
72 Gust –D 68.04 -0.51
73 Gust –C 48.6 -1.51
74 Bal A 48.6 1.00
75 Bal C 48.6 1.00
76 Bal D 68.04 1.00
77 St Roll A 48.6 2.53
78 St Roll C 48.6 2.53
79 St Roll D 68.04 2.53
80 AC Roll 46.581 3.33
 118

V-n Diagram of Cruise Configuration

5

3
Load Factor, Nz

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
-1

-2
Aircraft Speed, V (KEAS)

CNA Max -CNA Max VD limits Vc Gusts

Vd Gusts BAL Stall Limits ST Roll

Figure 4.15: V-n diagram of cruise configuration for CGcr Min

The above Figure 4.14 , shows us the V-n diagram of LSA during cruise when
at minimum aircraft weight of 489 lbs with aft CG location of 68.342 (X-axis) and
24.192 (Z-axis) namely CGcr Min. In this diagram, one could find that the Gust limit
is to be 68.218 kts and its stall limit at +1G = 23.841 kts and at -1G = 55.332 kts as
shown above. We can also see the accelerated roll to be 46.581 kts and its standard
roll for our LSA is 48.6 kts.
Next, for our LSA flight loads during landing configuration, Table 4.29 until
Table 4.32 will show us the output for the flight loads and their corresponding V-n
diagrams are shown through Figure 4.15 until Figure 4.18. Once again, if readers
want to view and read remaining output data for this module, please turn to Appendix
A as provided.

Table 4.26: Flight Loads Module output for landing configuration for CGcr Max 1

Case No. Condition V (KEAS) NZ

81 Stall 2/3 G 23.817 0.67
82 Stall 1GL 29.128 1.00
83 Stall 2 G 41.147 2.00
 119

84 Man 2G Vf 57.6 2.00

85 Man 0G Vf 57.6 0
86 Gust Vf 57.6 2.19
87 Gust –Vf 57.6 -0.18
88 Bal Vf 57.6 1.00
89 Bal 1.4 Vs 40.779 1.00
90 Level Land 23.217 0.67

From this calculation, the software predicts that the angle of landing for our LSA in
this CG condition, CGcr Max 1 is to be 10.298o.

V-n diagram for Landing Configuration

3

2.5

2
Load Factor, Nz

1.5

0.5

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-0.5

-1
Aircraft Speed, V (KEAS)

Gusts Vf Bal Vf Flight Envelope

Figure 4.16: V-n diagram for landing configuration for CGcr Max 1

Based on Figure 4.15, we can see the V-n diagram or known as flight envelope
of our LSA during maximum weight of 659 lbs with forward CG location at 73.00 (X-
axis) and 19.00 (Z-axis). We find that, from the diagram, the landing limit is to be 57.6
kts and the gusts limit also to be 57.6 kts. In the figure, one can also find the level
landing of our LSA is to be at 23.217 kts.
 120

Table 4.27: Flight Loads Module output for landing configuration for CGcr Max 2

Case No. Condition V (KEAS) NZ

91 Stall 2/3 G 24.723 0.67
92 Stall 1GL 30.23 1.00
93 Stall 2 G 42.698 2.00
94 Man 2G Vf 57.6 2.00
95 Man 0G Vf 57.6 0
96 Gust Vf 57.6 2.19
97 Gust –Vf 57.6 -0.18
98 Bal Vf 57.6 1.00
99 Bal 1.4 Vs 42.322 1.00
100 Level Land 24.123 0.67

From this calculation, the software predicts that the angle of landing for our LSA in
this CG condition, CGcr Max 2 is to be 9.907o.

V-n diagram for Landing Configuration

3

2.5

2
Load Factor, Nz

1.5

0.5

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-0.5

-1
Aircraft Speed, V (KEAS)

Gusts Vf Bal Vf Flight Envelope

Figure 4.17: V-n diagram of landing configuration for CGcr Max 2

 121

The above Figure 4.16 showed us the V-n diagram or the flight envelope of
our LSA during maximum weight of 659 lbs with aft CG location at 64.865 (X-axis)
and 19.00 (Z-axis) From the said diagram, one can know the landing limit is to be 57.6
kts and the gusts limit also to be 57.6 kts. In the figure, one can also find the level
landing of our LSA is to be at 24.123 kts.

Table 4.28: Flight Loads Module output for landing configuration for CGcr Avg

Case No. Condition V (KEAS) NZ

101 Stall 2/3 G 23.598 0.67
102 Stall 1GL 28.851 1.00
103 Stall 2 G 40.744 2.00
104 Man 2G Vf 57.6 2.00
105 Man 0G Vf 57.6 0
106 Gust Vf 57.6 2.28
107 Gust –Vf 57.6 -0.28
108 Bal Vf 57.6 1.00
109 Bal 1.4 Vs 40.391 1.00
110 Level Land 22.698 0.67

From this calculation, the software predicts that the angle of landing for our LSA in
this CG condition, CGcr Avg is to be 10.536o.
 122

V-n diagram for Landing Configuration

3

2.5

2
Load Factor, Nz

1.5

0.5

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-0.5

-1
Aircraft Speed, V (KEAS)

Gusts Vf Bal Vf Flight Envelope

Figure 4.18: V-n diagram for landing configuration for CGcr Avg

The Figure 4.17 is illustrating the flight envelope or V-n diagram of our LSA
during average aircraft weight - 574 lbs with a CG location of 60.015 (X-axis) and
18.00. Based on the diagram stated, we can tell the landing limit is to be 57.6 kts and
the gusts limit also to be 57.6 kts with level landing of our LSA is to be at 22.698 kts.

Table 4.29: Flight Loads Module output for landing configuration for CGcr Min

Case No. Condition V (KEAS) NZ

111 Stall 2/3 G 20.965 0.67
112 Stall 1GL 25.626 1.00
113 Stall 2 G 36.193 2.00
114 Man 2G Vf 57.6 2.00
115 Man 0G Vf 57.6 0
116 Gust Vf 57.6 2.39
117 Gust –Vf 57.6 -0.39
118 Bal Vf 57.6 1.00
119 Bal 1.4 Vs 35.877 1.00
120 Level Land 19.465 0.67
 123

From this calculation, the software predicts that the angle of landing for our LSA in
this CG condition, CGcr Min is to be 12.312o.

V-n diagram for Landing Configuration

3

2.5

2
Load Factor, Nz

1.5

0.5

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-0.5

-1
Aircraft Speed, V (KEAS)

Gusts Vf Bal Vf Flight Envelope

Figure 4.19: V-n diagram of landing configuration for CGcr Min

Last but not least, based on Figure 4.18 it shows the flight envelope of our
LSA during landing with minimum aircraft weight i.e. 489 lbs with its CG location at
68.342 (X-axis) and 24.192 (Z-axis) Based on the stated figure, one can tell the landing
limit is to be 57.6 kts and the gusts limit also to be 57.6 kts with level landing of our
LSA is to be at 19.465 kts.
 124

CHAPTER 5

CONCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In this last chapter, a brief conclusion of this study is made base on the data obtained
from it and corresponding achieved objectives will be seen. Apart from conclusions,
some recommendations for future works will be inserted here for sustainability of this
study on Light Sport Aircraft in future times.

5.1 Conclusion

First and foremost, let us review back what we had done throughout this study in brief.
This study focused on the structural design of a Light Sport Aircraft, hence the name
of thesis where the structural design of a known aircraft design, Hazreen Hazman’s
Light Sport Aircraft is being analysed by using a software i.e. FAR23 Loads. After
collecting all necessary input, those input are calculated using the stated program and
the outputs are being lain out in terms of tables and appropriate figures as shown
before.
This study also make use of Shrenk’s Approximation Method to integrate the
effect of aerodynamics coefficient towards and the aircraft’s stability with the
distribution of loads especially on the aircraft’s wings. Although, all necessary output
had been done, it is advisable for future researcher of same field of study especially on
Hazreen Hazman’s LSA to recheck and validate on all of the outputs given in this
thesis as error may occur overtime in using the software.
The aim of this research is to analyse the loadings on Hazreen Hazman’s Light
Sport Aircraft design and suggest the improvements that can be made towards the
 125

design to prepare it for its detailed design phase. Therefore, in order to achieve the aim
of this research, three (3) objectives had been proposed:
1. To develop a preliminary structural design of a Light Sport Aircraft
2. To analyse the structural layout strength of a Light Sport Aircraft
3. To simulate the loads expected to act on the Light Sport Aircraft
structure using Aeronautical Engineering software such as FAR.23
Loads.
In order to meet the objective requirements, research methodologies was proposed as
seen in the previous chapters. Now, let us breakdown the conclusion into achievement
of study objectives.

5.1.1 Preliminary Structural Design

The preliminary design phase is the second part of design process after conceptual
design. In this study, the first of its objectives is to develop a preliminary structural
design of a Light Sport Aircraft. For additional information, the conceptual design had
already been done by previous student i.e. Hazreen Hazman where he provide this
study with his own LSA design in form of drawing through SOLIDWORKS.
Then, the provided design is further analysed throughout this study because the
aim of preliminary design phase is to prepare the once conceptual design before going
into the detailed design phase. This had been deeply discussed through subchapter
2.1.2 of this thesis.
This objective had already achieve through the outputs of first three modules
of FAR23 Loads namely Weight Estimation Module, Weight & CG Module and the
Geometry Module. Therefore, objective number one is achieved successfully.

5.1.2 Structural Layout Strength Analyzation

The structural layout of a designed aircraft must sustain enough loads and sometimes
critical loads during its operation throughout its entire life. Thus, it is vital for a
structural layout strength analyzation being made towards the design of an aircraft to
ensure safety in operation.
 126

In this study, the second objective of it is to analyse the structural layout

strength of a Light Sport Aircraft. Once again the referred and used aircraft’s design
throughout this study is Hazreen Hazman’s LSA. This objective can be seen achieved
through the output of several modules i.e. Structural Speeds Module, Mach
Limitations Module and Aerodynamics Coefficient Module. Thus, it can be seen that
the second objective also being successfully achieved.

5.1.3 Expected Loads

In designing certain aircraft, it is the designers’ duty to simulate and expect any loads
that will be encountered by the aircraft during operation. This is to have the
understanding on how the loads will affect our aircraft’s structural strength and the
ways to counter it if any. For this study, the last objectives of it is to simulate the loads
expected to act on the Light Sport Aircraft structure using Aeronautical Engineering
software such as FAR.23 Loads. Therefore, it can be seen that this objective also had
been achieved successfully.
The proof relies on the output from some modules of FAR 23 software i.e.
Envelope of Loads Module, Aerodynamics Coefficient Module and Flight Loads
Module. Charts and figures such as useful load envelope, V-n diagram and Aircraft
Operating Limits diagram also show that this objective had been achieved.

5.2 Recommendations

The objectives of this study is successfully achieved the objective although some of
the methodologies and limitation obstructed it through time. Even though this study is
a success, there are some things that need to be improved in future times. To continue
the research in the near future that relates to any Light Sport Aircraft field, there are
several recommendations that need to be considered.
1. All of the output data provided in this study must be rechecked and validated
for any errors occurred throughout this study.
2. Future analyzation of the structural design of Light Sport Aircraft best to be
analysed with any engineering software that have direct visualization such as
 127

SOLIDWORKS, CATIA, AUTOCAD and others. This is to ensure that no

errors in providing aircraft geometry via coordinates and measurements as we
had done through this software.
3. Anyone who want to analyse this same aircraft design can use other
aeronautical engineering software i.e. Advance Aircraft Analysis to compare
and contrast the results obtained from this software.
 128

REFERENCES

[1] NASA, “History of Flight,” 2014. [Online]. Available:

https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-
12/UEET/StudentSite/historyofflight.html. [Accessed: 24-May-2017].
[2] E. A. Jamsari et al., “Ibn Firnas and His Contribution to the Aviation
Technology of the World,” Adv. Nat. Appl. Sci., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 74–78, 2013.
[3] T. D. C. Roger E. Bilstein, Walter James Boyne, “History of Flight - Aviation,”
2006. [Online]. Available: https://www.britannica.com/technology/history-of-
flight. [Accessed: 24-May-2017].
[4] J. John D. Anderson, Aircraft Performance and Design. United States of
America: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1999.
[5] M. C. Y. Niu, Airframe Structural Design, Second Edi. Hong Kong: Hong Kong
Conmilit Press Ltd., 1988.
[6] H. Hazman, “Pembangunan Rekabantuk Penjelmaan Bagi Pesawat Microlight,”
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, 2017.
[7] Cambridge University Press, “Design,” 2018. [Online]. Available:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/design. [Accessed: 28-
May-2017].
[8] E. Torenbeek, “Synthesis of Subsonic Airplane Design.” Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London, p. 618, 1982.
[9] S. Gudmundsson, General Aviation Aircraft Design- Methods and Procedures,
First Edit. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Inc., 2014.
[10] Monroe Aerospace, “Three Stages of Aircraft Design,” 2017. [Online].
Available: https://monroeaerospace.com/blog/the-three-stages-of-aircraft-
design/. [Accessed: 24-May-2017].
[11] European Aviation Safety Agency, “Certification Specifications and
Acceptable Means of Compliance for Light Sport Aeroplanes,” no. July, 2013.
 129

[12] Civil Aviation Safety Authority, “Light Sport Aircraft Certificate of

Airworthiness,” vol. 41, no. September, pp. 0–7, 2005.
[13] FAA, “Certification of Aircraft and Airmen for the Operation of Light-Sport
Aircraft,” no. 1, pp. 1–452, 2004.
[14] S. Houston, “Aviation and Aerospace: What Are Light Sport Aircraft?,” 2016.
[Online]. Available: https://www.thebalance.com/what-are-light-sport-aircraft-
282807. [Accessed: 24-May-2017].
[15] D. P. Coiro, A. De Marco, F. Nicolosi, N. Genito, and S. Figliolia, “Design of
a Low-Cost Easy-to-Fly STOL Ultralight Aircraft in Composite Material,” vol.
45, no. 4, pp. 73–80, 2005.
[16] Illusionist, “Introduction Into Aeroplane,” 2011. [Online]. Available:
http://engg-learning.blogspot.com/2011/03/introduction-to-aeroplane-airplane-
is.html. [Accessed: 30-May-2017].
[17] National Aeronautics and Space Administration, “Four Forces on an Airplane,”
2015. [Online]. Available: https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-
12/airplane/forces.html. [Accessed: 30-May-2017].
[18] Academic Aviation Dictionary, “Center of Pressure,” 2017. [Online].
Available:
http://aviation_dictionary.enacademic.com/1292/center_of_pressure.
[Accessed: 30-May-2018].
[19] U. of C. Faculty of Science, “Fluid Dynamics And A Counter-Intuition,” 2017.
[Online]. Available: https://fos.cmb.ac.lk/blog/fluid-dynamics-and-a-counter-
intuition/. [Accessed: 30-May-2017].
[20] J. Cutler, Understanding Aircraft Structures, Fourth Edi. UK: Blackwell
Publishing Ltd, 2005.
[21] D. M. Neubauer and G. Gynther, “Aircraft Loads,” pp. 1–8, 2002.
[22] Thompson, “Difference between Static and Dynamic Loads.” [Online].
Available: https://www.thomsonlinear.com/en/training/what-is-the-difference-
between-static-load-and-dynamic-load. [Accessed: 30-May-2017].
[23] M. G, “Static and Dynamic Loads,” 2017. [Online]. Available:
https://www.quora.com/How-does-a-static-load-differ-from-a-dynamic-load.
[Accessed: 30-May-2017].
[24] D. Dubina, “Introduction to Fatiguue.” Parague, 2013.
 130

[25] D. Sukumar, “Maintenance of Airframe and Systems Design,” pp. 1–17, 2015.
[26] D. Stinton, The Anatomy of The Aeroplane, Second Edi. Oxford, UK: Blackwell
Publishing Ltd, 2003.
[27] F. A. A. U.S. Department of Transport, “Aircraft basic construction,” Aircr.
basic Constr., pp. 1–22, 2012.
[28] R. V. Saeed Farokhi, Introduction to Transonic Aerodynamics, First Edit.
Springer Publishing Ltd., 2015.
[29] Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum, “How Things Fly,” 2012.
[Online]. Available: https://howthingsfly.si.edu/ask-an-explainer/what-kinds-
materials-are-used-make-aircraft. [Accessed: 30-May-2017].
[30] Pritamashutosh., “Materials Used in Aircraft,” 2012. [Online]. Available:
https://pritamashutosh.wordpress.com/2012/10/04/materials-used-in-aircraft-
2/. [Accessed: 27-May-2017].
[31] T. H. . Megson, Aircraft Structure for Engineering Students, Third Edit. Oxford,
UK: Elsevier Inc., 1999.
[32] E. Torenbeek, Advanced Aircraft Design: Conceptual Design, Analysis and
Optimization of Subsonic Civil Airplanes. Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ,
United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication, 2013.
[33] Nyinyilay, “Basic Aircraft Structure,” 2011. [Online]. Available:
https://www.slideshare.net/nyinyilay/basic-aircraft-structure. [Accessed: 24-
May-2017].
[34] Airplane Pictures Team, “Airplane Pictures.” [Online]. Available:
http://www.airplane-pictures.net/type.php?p=385. [Accessed: 24-May-2017].
[35] AeroFredUneditedPlans, “Schleicher Ask 14.” [Online]. Available:
https://aerofred.com/details.php?image_id=89079. [Accessed: 24-May-2017].
[36] M. Sadraey, “Wing Design,” Aircr. Des. A Syst. Eng. Approach, p. 808, 2012.
[37] Bright Hub Inc., “What are Low Wing Aircraft?” [Online]. Available:
http://www.brighthub.com/science/aviation/articles/108766.aspx. [Accessed:
24-May-2017].
[38] J. Berson, “Is boeing 737 or 787 a mid wing aircraft?,” 2016. [Online].
Available: https://www.quora.com/Is-boeing-737-or-787-a-mid-wing-aircraft.
[Accessed: 24-May-2017].
[39] S. Nation, “Aircraft N38KP Photo,” 2006. [Online]. Available:
 131

http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/photo/000195314L.html. [Accessed: 24-

May-2017].
[40] Airlines.Net, “High/Low Wing Aircraft Advantages/disadvantages,” 2016.
[Online]. Available: https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=748815.
[Accessed: 27-May-2017].
[41] Wikiwand contributors, “Singular SA03.” [Online]. Available:
http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Singular_SA03. [Accessed: 24-May-2017].
[42] Wikipedia Contirbutors, “Stabilizer (Aeronautics),” 2016. [Online]. Available:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stabilizer_(aeronautics). [Accessed: 24-May-
2017].
[43] “Empennage Layout.” [Online]. Available:
http://www.pawsplay.talktalk.net/uniweb/emplayout.htm. [Accessed: 24-May-
2017].
[44] “The Jet Engine.” [Online]. Available: http://www.runkle.org/Student
Gallery/07-7th-iSearch-Projects/Nina-Jet Plane/The Jet Engine.htm.
[Accessed: 24-May-2017].
[45] Dave, “Aviation- What is the difference between a propeller and a turbo-
propeller?,” 2015. [Online]. Available:
https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/16047/what-is-the-difference-
between-a-propeller-and-a-turbo-propeller. [Accessed: 24-May-2017].
[46] Seminarsonly authors, “Landing Gear Arrangement,” 2016. [Online].
Available: http://www.seminarsonly.com/mech & auto/landing-gear.php.
[Accessed: 24-May-2017].
[47] Federal Aviation Authority, “Chapter 13 - Aircraft Landing Gear Systems,”
Aviat. Maint. Tech. Handb. - Airframe, pp. 20–22, 2014.
[48] M. J. Kroes and J. R. Rardon, Aircraft Basic Science, Seventh Ed. United States
of America: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, 1993.
[49] Swyde, “Airfoil,” 2017. [Online]. Available: https://swyde.com/s/Airfoil.
[Accessed: 29-May-2017].
[50] H. H. Hurt, Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators. California, USA: University of
Souther California, 1965.
[51] Clarkson Education, “Airfoil.” [Online]. Available:
http://people.clarkson.edu/~rjha/Teaching/AE212/Loads.pdf.
 132

[52] J. John D. Anderson, Fundamentals of Aerodynamics, Second Edi. Singapore:

McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1991.
[53] Wikipedia Contirbutors, “Clark-Y Airfoil.” [Online]. Available:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clark_Y. [Accessed: 29-May-2017].
[54] M. La Grange, “Best Airfoil for LSA,” 2017. [Online]. Available:
https://www.quora.com/Is-the-s1223-li-a-good-airfoil-for-a-n-ultralight-
aircraft. [Accessed: 28-May-2017].
[55] Gordon McKay, “Clark Y Airfoil.” [Online]. Available:
http://www.electricplanebygordon.com/clark-y-airfoil/. [Accessed: 01-Jun-
2017].
[56] T. L. Lomax, Structural Loads Analysis for Commercial Transport Aircraft:
Theory and Practice, Third Edit. Virginia. United States of America: American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc, 1996.
[57] RalphTheMouth, “V-N Diagram,” 2010. [Online]. Available:
http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/425355-757-767-v-g-diagram.html.
[Accessed: 24-May-2017].
[58] H. Denis, Aircraft Loading and Structural Layout. Cranfeild, UK: Professional
Engineering Publishing, 2004.
[59] W. A. W. Hassan, “Reverse Engineering of Microlight Aircraft Systems and
Design,” Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, 2014.
[60] DARcorporation, “Far 23 loads,” no. 785.
[61] DARcorporation, FAR23 Loads Software Manual Handbook. McGettrick.
[62] DARcorporation, FAR23 Loads Theory and Example Manual. McGettrick.
 133

APPENDIX A

View publication stats