Light Aircraft Stability

Light Aircraft Design 2011
Light Aircraft Stability and Control

We’ve schemed a fuselage, …

we’ve developed a wing, …

… now to finish the job:
• Tail & elevator geometry?

• Fin & rudder geometry?
• Longitudinal position of wing?
• Dihedral?
• Aileron size?

The simple approach

Empennage volume coefficients
𝑆ℎ 𝑙𝑡
V h=
𝑆 𝑐
𝑆𝑣 𝑙𝑣
Vv=
𝑆 𝑏



We choose this one as being similar …



Simple approach (example only)
Vh=0.52
Vv=0.033

Stick fixed static margin ~10% of MAC.

Effective dihedral:
Γeff = 3-4⁰

Effective dihedral:
Γeff = 3-4⁰
So the job’s done???

Limitations of simple approach

Our aircraft may have different:
Flap type.
Power loading.
Approach speed & X-Wind limits.
cg range.
Tail position.
Wing geometry.
Ceiling.
Etc., etc., etc.

What if our design looks like this?

What if our design looks like this?

Simple approach
Volume coefficient approach not

always appropriate or reliable …

Simple approach
… especially so if we plan to go to
production. In which case we need
to bite the bullet and adopt a more
fundamental approach.

Biting the bullet


Certification/compliance

Certification/compliance

Military specifications
Mil Spec 8785C.

(Def Stan 00-970).


Tools

Panel methods

Wind tunnel tests

Free stuff




Mil 8785C

Longitudinal

‘X’ or ‘notch’ diagram

Tail size
hmin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Elevator authority at forward cg
Tail size
hmin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

• Lift nose at ~0.9 VS1 in take-off configuration.

• From trimmed approach in landing configuration,
no more than ⅔ elevator deflection for 1.2g flare
in ground effect.
• Stall the aircraft in all configurations.
Forward surface must stall first

Tail size
hmin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Tip-back limit
Tail size
hmin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Tail size
hmin
Locus of neutral point

(aircraft aero centre)
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Tail size
hmin
Aft cg limit for

‘acceptable’ stability.
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Tail size
hmin
Static margin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Required cg range
Tail size
hmin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Tail sized by aft stability limit

Tail size
hmin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Required cg range
Tail size
hmin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Tail sized by forward stability limit

Tail size
hmin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Tail optimally sized?

Tail size
hmin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity


Tail size
hmin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity


Tail size
hmin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity


Tail size
hmin
fwd aft
Centre of gravity


Tail size
hmin
What should the

static margin be?
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Target static margin?

Tail size
hmin?
What should the

static margin be?
fwd aft
Centre of gravity


Tail size
hmin?
What should the

static margin be?
fwd aft
Centre of gravity


Tail size
hmin
What should the

static margin be?
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Limitations of designing to static margin
• Wide range of ‘acceptable’ static margins

~3% to ~15% of MAC.
• Tail area depends on wing x location as well as
static margin.
• Tail contribution to static stability proportional to
tail arm, but damping proportional to square of
tail arm.

Limitations of designing to static margin
Static margin therefore correlates imperfectly with

longitudinal response.

Setting static margin
Option 1: By comparison with similar aircraft.

Option 2: By consideration of longitudinal dynamics.

Setting static margin
Option 1: By comparison with similar aircraft.

Option 2: By consideration of longitudinal dynamics.

Longitudinal
dynamics

Longitudinal modes
• Phugoid – exchange between speed & height

• Short period – pitch oscillation at constant speed

Longitudinal modes
• Phugoid
Stuck with what you get?
• Short period

Longitudinal modes
• Phugoid
• Short period
Governs longitudinal response perceived by pilot.
Can be used to set target static margin.

Control Anticipation Parameter (CAP)
The amount of instantaneous angular

pitching acceleration per unit steady state
normal acceleration.

𝜔2
𝑛 𝛼
3.6
Mil 8785C
CAP
0.085

Moorhouse & Jenkins, 1975

Use of Short Period Frequency Requirements in Horizontal Tail Sizing
ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑛 > 𝐴 𝐶𝐴𝑃𝑚𝑖𝑛 − 𝐵𝑆𝐻
𝐴 = 𝑓 𝐼𝑦 , 𝑊, 𝑐
𝐵 = 𝑓 𝐼𝑦 , 𝜌, 𝑙𝑡 , 𝐶𝑙𝛼ℎ

Tail sized by CAP ℎ𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 𝐴 𝐶𝐴𝑃𝑚𝑖𝑛 − 𝐵𝑆𝐻
Tail size
fwd aft
Centre of gravity

Longitudinal stability – common ‘errors’

• Wing position fixed independently of tail size.
• Required cg envelope specified as ‘%MAC’.
• Influence of varying wing position and tail size
not included in calculation of cg.

Directional

Directional requirements
• Positive weathercock stability - 23.177 (a).
• X-wind take-off and landing.
• Spin damping & recovery.
• Counter adverse yaw.
• Counter engine-out yaw.

• Counter engine-out yaw.




AA-587 New York

Weathercock stability requirements
Perkins & Hage

Fokker M5




X-wind take-off and landing
Choice of fin area and dihedral, Baker, 1948




Spin recovery
Def Stan 00-970

Spin recovery
Def Stan 00-970

Spin Recovery: Def Stan 00-970

Spin recovery
Spin recovery analysis

Spin recovery

Spin recovery

Spin recovery

Spin recovery

Directional requirements (conjecture)

If we design for:
Design will likely be adequate for:

• Countering adverse yaw.

Lateral stability




Accepted criteria??
Effective dihedral:
Γeff = 3-4⁰
(Clβ= -0.0006 to -0.0008)

Pilot opinion

Pilot opinion

Lateral requirements
• Lateral stability must be positive – 23.177 (b).
With limited exceptions.

• Lateral stability must be positive – 23.177 (b).
With limited exceptions.
FARs do not reflect pilot opinion!

• Positive lateral stability – 23.177 (b).
• ‘Get home’ with roll control failure. – 23.147 (c).

• Positive lateral stability – 23.177 (b).
• ‘Get home’ with roll control failure. – 23.147 (c).
Imposes minimum dihedral
Alternative means of compliance:
Rudder-aileron interconnect
Roll trim override



Roll Trim Override System

Lateral-Directional

Lateral-Directional modes
• Roll
• Spiral
• Dutch roll

Lateral-Directional requirements
• Roll
• Spiral Mil 8785C
• Dutch roll

Lateral directional requirements
• Lateral-directional modes subject to

strong requirements (Mil 8785C).
Spiral mode time constant
Dutch roll damping and period
• Directional control driven by several
strong requirements.
• Dihedral requirements weak.

Lateral directional requirements
Following design philosophy therefore

suggested …

Lateral-directional design
1. Set target for max X-wind angle: βmax x-w
2. Design fin and rudder for:
Steady sideslip at βmax x-w
Spin recovery

3. Check rudder moment +ve at βmax x-w (rudder lock)
Increase fixed area of fin?
Add dorsal strake?
Reduce rudder authority (& X- wind limits)?

4. Check fin does not stall at 150% βmax x-w.
Reduce aspect ratio?
Increase sweep?
Add dorsal strake?
Add vortex generators?
Reduce rudder authority (& X-wind limits)?



5. Set dihedral to achieve acceptable spiral mode:
e.g. Tdouble>20s
6. Check effective dihedral is positive:
Increase geometric dihedral?
Increase dihedral by other means?
Rudder-aileron interconnect?
Roll trim override?



7. Check Dutch roll mode (Mil 8785C):
Increase fin size?
Add ventral strake(s)?
Add yaw damper?
Repeat steps (3 to 7 as appropriate)

Ventral strake

8. Design roll control for:
Mil 8785C time constants, T-30⁰/+30⁰, or 𝑝𝑏
2𝑉
= 0.07.
Check that no more than one third aileron is required

for steady sideslip at βmax x-w.

8. Check remaining requirements of:
FAR23/EASA CS-23
Mil 8785C

Power effects

Forces on prop at yaw & pitch
Ribner

Reduction in effective dihedral with power
ESDU 06012

References
1. Airplane Performance, Stability and Control,
Perkins & Hage, 1949
2. A Survey of Handling Criteria, ARC CP 833,
Leyman & Nuttall, 1966.
3. Wind-tunnel procedure for determination of
critical stability and control characteristics of
airplanes, NACA R781, Goett et al., 1944.
4. Choice of Fin Area and Dihedral, Baker, Aircraft
Engineering and Aerospace Technology, Vol. 20
No. 3, pp.87 – 88, 1948
References
5. Use of short period frequency requirements in
horizontal tail sizing, Moorhouse & Jenkins,
Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 12 No. 6, 1975.
6. USAF DATCOM, USAF, 1975.
7. ESDU data sheets, IHS London.
8. Mil 8785C: Flying Qualities of Piloted Airplanes,
1980.
9. A Criterion for the Prediction of the Recovery
Characteristics of Spinning Aircraft, Kerr, CP195,
1955.

Mil 8785C

Light Aircraft Stability

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Light Aircraft Stability

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Light Aircraft Design 2011

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

We’ve schemed a fuselage, …

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

we’ve developed a wing, …

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

… now to finish the job:

• Tail & elevator geometry?

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

The simple approach

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Empennage volume coefficients

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

We choose this one as being similar …

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Simple approach (example only)

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Simple approach (example only)

Stick fixed static margin ~10% of MAC.

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Simple approach (example only)

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Simple approach (example only)

So the job’s done???

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Limitations of simple approach

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

What if our design looks like this?

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

What if our design looks like this?

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Volume coefficient approach not

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Biting the bullet

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Mil Spec 8785C.

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

‘X’ or ‘notch’ diagram

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Elevator authority at forward cg

• Lift nose at ~0.9 VS1 in take-off configuration.

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control

Light Aircraft Stability and Control