CHAPTER

Fuselage Design
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 VOLUME CONSIDERATIONS AERODYNAMIC CONSIDERATIONS DRAG ESTIMATION SPREADSHEET FOR FUSELAGE DESIGN PROBLEMS

5.5

Photograph of the Aero Spacelines B-377PG "Pregnant Guppy," which was designed to transport outsized cargo for the NASA Apollo Program. The upper fuselage was more than 20 fe et in diameter to accommodate portions of the Saturn V rocket. (NASA Dryden Research Center Photo Collection.)
Following the main wing, the next logical step in the conceptual design involves the design of the fuselage. The fuselage has a number of functions that vary depending on the type and mission of the aircraft. These include accommodating crew, passengers, baggage or other payload, as weil as possibly housing internai engines. Other considerations for the fuselage design include possible fuel storage, the structure for wing attachments and accommodations for retractable landing gear.
86

Section 5.1

Volume Considerations

87

Ail of these generally aim at setting the internai volume, height, width and length of the fuselage. For example, the primary mission of the "Pregnant Guppy" pictured on the previous page, was to carry 20-foot diameter sections of the Apollo Saturn V rocket. This specifically dictated the size and shape of the fuselage, and resulted it its distinctive appearance. Depending on the Mach number regime, the optimum shape of the fuselage, or more specifically the length-to-diameter ratio, may be determined on the basis of minimizing the aerodynamic drag. With subsonic aircraft, this ratio is historically far from the optimum and dictated more by function. With supersonic aircraft, however, the penalty for deviating from the optimum leaves little room for compromise.
VOLUME CONSIDERATIONS ... .1 Passenger Requirements

The size and shape of subsonic commercial aircraft are generally determined by the number of passengers, seating arrangements and cargo requirements. Table 5.1 gives typical dimensions for the passenger compartments. These are generally based on an average passenger who is assumed to weigh 180 lbs. Figure 5.1 accompanies the table and provides graphical definitions of the nomenclature used. Seating arrangements on commercial passenger aircraft vary depending on the size and range. Examples of different aisle seating arrangements for a variety of aircraft is illustrated in Figure 5.2. Table 5.2 lists additional seating information for these aircraft. The seating arrangements in Figure 5.2 generally correspond to "coach class." In large commercial aircraft, there is additional variability in seating arrangements based on other passenger classes. This is illustrated in Table 5.3 with a comparison between coach and first class for two typical jet transports. As indicated in Table 5.1 , passengers are allocated from 40-60 lbs of baggage. On average, this is expected to occupy a volume of 15-25 f 3 . In addition, passengers are allocated 3 f3 for onboard overhead baggage storage. In modem aircraft, checked baggage and other cargo are carried in standard cargo containers. Examples of these are shawn in Figure 5.3.
TABLE 5.1: Passenger compartment requirements.

Long-Range Seat Width (in) Seat Pitch (in) Headroom (in) Aisle Width (in) Aisle Height (in) Passengers/Cabin Lavatories/Passenger Galley Volume/Passenger (f3 ) Baggage/Passenger (lbs) 17-28 34-40 >65 20-28 >76 10-36 1/(10-20) 1-8 40-60

Short-Range 16-18 30-32 >15 >60

~50

1/(40-50) 0-1 40

88

Chapter 5

Fuselage Design

~ ---

----------- 1
1 '1

1 1
1

1
1

1
1

1
1

1
1

Seat Pitch

:
1
1 1

1
1

FIGURE 5.1: Schematic drawing of a passenger seating arrangement defining parameters.

TABLE 5.2: Passenger aircraft seating arrangements.

Passenger No. 4-9 10-20 20-50 50-75 75-190 190-270 270-360 360-450

Fuselage Diam. (in.) 64 58 94 91 106 130 148 198 222 222 236 256

Aisle Seating 1+ 1 1+ 1 2+1 2+1 2+2 2+3 3+3 2+3+2 2+4+2 2+4+2 2+5+2 3+4+3

Ex amples Citation V Beech 1900 Gulfstream II Saab 340 DHC-8/300 MD-80 Boeing 757 Boeing 767 Airbus A300 Airbus A330 DC-10, L-1011, Boeing 777 Boeing 747

Sect ion 5.1

Volume Considerations

89

Boeing 767

AirbusA300

BB
Lockheed L- 1011
McDonnell Douglas DC-10

BB
Boeing777

BB
Boeing 747

FIGURE 5.2: Schematic drawings of coach compartment cross-sections that are typical of different commercial passenger aircraft. Also shown are types of lower deck cargo containers used on these aircraft.

90

Chapter 5

Fuselage Design

LD-2, LD- 3

lJ
1
H

D~

LD-4, LD- 5

D~

LD-8

FIGURE 5.3: Schematic drawing of differe nt styles of lower deck containers listed i Table 5.4

Section 5.1

Volume Considerations

91

TABLE 5.3: Typical passenger accommodations for large jet

transports. B757 Seats Total First Class Coach First-Class Pitch Coach Pitch First-Class Aisle Coach Aisle First Class Coach First-Class Pass./Lav. Coach Pass./Lav. First-Class Volume First-Class f3 /Pass. Coach Volume Coach f3 /Pass. 178 16 (9%) 162 (91 %) 38 in. 34 in. 2+2 3+3 1 3 16 54 70 f3 4.4 231 f3 1.4 DC-10 292 24 (8.2%) 268 (91.8%) 38 in. 34 in. 3+3 2+5+2 1 6 24 45 120 f3 5.0 450 f3 1.7

Lavatories

Galleys

TABLE 5.4: Cargo container dimensions.

Type LD-2* LD-3* LD-4 LD-5 LD-8*

Height (in.) 64.0 64.0 64.0 64.0 64.0

Width (in.) 61.5 79.0 96.0 125.0 125.0

Depth (in.) 60.4 60.4 60.4 60.4 60.4

Volume (f3 ) 120 156 195 279 245

Gross Wt. (lbs) 2700 3500 5400 5400 5400

* Trapezodal shape. Table 5.4 lists the dimensions of the more widely used containers. The smaller containers are suitable for smaller commercial/transport aircraft, such as the Boeing 727. The larger ones, for example the LD-3 , are commonly used on larger commercial aircraft, such as shown in Figure 5.2. Table 5.5 lists the number of LD-3 containers that can be carried on these transports. Smaller, short-range aircraft do not use cargo containers, but rather have space only for bulk cargo with a volume that is based on 6-8 f3 per passenger. Passenger aircraft also have requirements for the number, placement and type of emergency exits in the event of a survivable accident. These are based on the number of passenger seats installed on the aircraft. The requirements are summarized in Table 5.6, with the description of the exit types given in Table 5.7. They indicate a fairly straightforward criteria for passenger numbers up to 179. After which, the number and type of exits is based on the arrangement that gives sufficient "seat credits." These credits need

92

Chapter 5

Fuselage Design

TABLE

5.5: Large-body aircraft cargo compartment arrangements.

Number of LD-3 Containers B-747 L-1011 DC-10 A-300 30 16 14 10

Bulk Cargo Volume (f3 ) 1000 700 800 600

TABLE 5.6: Number and type of emergency exits required for passeng'

transport aircraft by FAR 25.807. No. Pass. 1-9 10-19 20-39 40- 79 80-109 110-139 140-179 180-299 Type I Type II Type ill Type IV

1 1 2

2 2

2
~

Add exits so that 179 plus "seat credits" Seat Credit 12 15 35 40 45

110

passenger number.

Exit Type Single Ventral Single Tailcone Pair Type III Pair Type II Pair Type I Pair Type A

300

Use pairs of Type A or Type I with the sum of "seat credits" ~ passenger number.

to correspond to the number of passenger seats in excess of 179 on the airera procedure holds for up to 299 passenger seats. Above this number, the designs u of Type A or Type I exits with the sum of the credits equal to the passenger se(

5.1.2

Crew Requirements
The size of the crew compartment will vary depending on the aircraft. With lon military/commercial transport and passenger aircraft, the crew compartment sb designed to accommodate from two to four crew members. Recommendations

Section 5.1

Volume Considerations

93

TABLE 5.7: Types of emergency exits for passenger transport aircraft defined

by FAR 25.807. Type Location Min. Dimensions Width x Height (in.) 24 x 48 20 x 44 20 x 44 20 x 36 19 x 26 20 x 60 Equiv. Type I 42 x 72 Min. Step Height Inside:Outside (in.)

Type I Type II Type ill Type IV Tailcone Ventral Type A

Floor Level Floor Leve] Overwing Overwing Overwing Aft of Pressure Hull Bottom of Fuselage Floor Level

10:17 24:27 29:36 24:27

that the crew compartment have a length of approximately 150 inches for four crew members, 130 inches for three crew members and 100 inches for two crew members. An important factor that impacts the shape of the forward section of the fuselage is the requirement that the pilot have an unobstructed forward view. A critical need in achieving this is obtaining the proper amount of over-nose angle. This is especially important for the landing phase for ali aircraft, and during the combat phase of militaryfighter aircraft. The Concorde and Russian Tu-144 supersonic passenger jets have a nose section that deftects downward in order to give the necessary over-nose angle for landing. Figure 5.4 shows a photograph of the Tu-144 with the nose deftected during landing. The over-nose angle, a 0 vernose, is defined as the angle between a horizontal line through the pilot' s eye, down to the point of the highest visual obstruction. A schematic representation is shown in Figure 5.5. The proper over-nose angle depends on the landing approach angle, Yapproach. and the landing approach velocity, Vso. ln the landing analysis in Chapter 8, the approach angle is found from
Yapproach
. -1 = sm

(-D)
W

(5.1)

where D is the drag and W is the weight at landing. The approach velocity, Vso, refers to the velocity at an elevation of 50 f, which starts the landing phase with

Vso = 1. 3 V.~ ,

(5.2)

and V5 is the stall velocity that will include an enhanced lift configuration of the main wing, which is covered in Chapter 9. If these quantities are known, a reasonable empirical relation for the over-nose angle is
C:Xovcmosc

= Yapproach + 0.07Vso ,

(5.3)

where V5o has units of knots, and a and y have units of degrees. Table 5.8 gives sorne typical values for a variety of aircraft. A somewhat Jess critica1 visual requirement for the crew compartment is the over side vision angle, a 0 verside This is the unobstructed viewing angle from a horizontalline

94

Chapter 5

Fuselage Design

FIGURE 5.4: Photograph of Tu-144 with nose defl.ected to give necessary over-nose angle during landing. (NASA Dryden Research Center Photo Collection.)

~ Pilot's Eye

\-

-~ ----

Grazing Angle

SideView

Pilot's Eye

Front View

FIGURE 5.5: Illustration defining crew compartment vision parameters.

Section 5.1

Volume Considerations

95

TABLE 5.8: Values of over-nose and over-side

angles for different aircraft.

ovem ose ovcrside

Military Transports/Bombers Military Fighter General Aviation Commercial Transport

17 11 -15 5-10 11 -20

35 40 35 35

through the pilot' s eye down to the highest visu al obstruction formed by the si de of the fuselage. Typical values for a variety of aircraft are also given in Table 5.8. The upward vision angle is also important. Military/commercial transport and passenger aircraft should have an unobstructed viewing angle of at least 20 above the horizon. Military combat aircraft should have at least a 120 unobstructed upward viewing angle. Another factor that impacts pilot vision, which is mostly only an issue with combat and high-speed aircraft, is the transparency grazing angle. (See Figure 5.5.) This corresponds to the smallest angle between a line of vision of the pilot and the cockpit window or windscreen. If this angle becomes too small, the visibility through the window can become substantially reduced or distorted. The recommended minimum grazing angle is 30 .

. 1.3

Fuel Storage Requirements

In long-range aircraft, a large percentage of the weight at take-off is due to the weight of the fuel. The volume required to hold this fuel can be allocated to the fuselage or wing, or most likely both. The decision on where to store the fuel depends on a number of factors. These include the location of the center of mass with respect to the center of lift, thus affecting the static stability, the vulnerability of crew and passengers in the event of an uncontrolled landing, and the vulnerability of the fuel in combat aircraft caused by enemy tire. In the case of the static stability, the placement of the fuel is also important in defining how the location of the center of mass might change as a result of the changing fuel weight from the beginning to the end of cruise. In order to maintain static stability in the pitch direction, the center of mass must always be forward of the center of lift. As a result, if any fuel is stored in the fuselage, it should be located at or slightly forward of the wing attachment point. A detailed analysis of the static stability will be done later in Chapter 11. The volume needed to accommodate the fuel is based on the maximum weight of fuel at take-off and the density of the fuel. The specifie volumes of various fuels are given in Table 5.9. The actual volume that is available in locations in the fuselage or wing depends on the type of fuel tank used. There are generally three types: discrete, bladder and integral. The choice of these determines what percentage of the available volume is capable of holding fuel.

96

Chapter 5

Fuselage Design

TABLE 5.9: Specifie volumes for different

aviation fuels (f3 /lb).

oop
AV-gas JP-4 JP-5 JP-8 0.0219 0.0199 0.0186

100F 0.0235 0.0208 0.0196

Mil-spec 0.0223 0.0206 0.0197 0.0199

Discrete tank are generally only used for small general aviation aircraft. They consist of separately manufactured containers that mount in the aircraft. In the wing, these are often mounted at the inboard span portion, near the leading edge. In the fuselage, they are generally placed just behind the engine and above the pilots feet. Bladder fuel tanks are thick rubber bags that are placed into cavities in the wing or fuselage. The advantage of bladder tanks is that they can be made to be self-sealing. This feature improves the aircraft survivability in the event of an uncontrolled landing or enemy f1re. The thickness of the rubber bladder walls reduces the available volume of the cavity. As a general rule, 77 percent of a cavity volume in the wing, and 83 percent of a cavity volume in the fuselage, is available with bladder tanks. Integral tanks are cavities within the airframe structure that are sealed to form fuel tanks. Examples are the wing box areas forrned between wing spars and the area between bulkheads in the fuselage. Becau e integral tanks are more prone to leaking compared to the other two types, they should not be located near air inlet ducts or engines. The tire hazard of integral tanks can be reduced by filling the tank with a porous foam material. This, however, reduces the volume capacity by approximately 5 percent. As a general rule, 85 percent of the volume measured to the external skin of the wing, and 92 percent measured to the external skin of the fuselage, is available with integral tanks.
5.1.4 Internai Engines and Air lnlets

Engines may be mounted internai to the fuselage. This is often the practice in combat aircraft and mali general aviation aircraft, but sometimes has been done with long-range commercial passenger aircraft, su ch as the B-727 and L-1 011. At this stage of the design, the total drag is not yet known so that the thrust requirements of the engine (size and number) are not yet determined. This will be covered in Chapter 7. As a result, the internai arrangement of the engine and air delivery system is difficult to a sess at thi point in the conceptual design. Therefore, if the propulsion system is likely to be internai to the fuselage, the volume to enclose it needs to be accounted for in the design. At this stage, the best approach i to rely on suitable comparison aircraft. For internally mounted jet engines, the air delivery system is an integral element. The type and geometry of the inlet wil1 determine the pressure loss and uniformity of the air supplied to the engine. These in turn affect the installed thrust of the engine and fuel consomption. The types of air inlets depend on the operating Mach number. In general, the objective of the air inlet system for turbojet and turbofan engines is to reduce the Mach

Section 5.1

Volume Considerations

97

number of the air at the compressor face to between 0.4 and 0.5. In subsonic aircraft, this is accomplished using a subsonic diffuser. In supersonic aircraft, this is done through area changes at the inlet that result in the formation of one or more compressive shocks. At this stage of the design, the objective is to size the fuselage. Therefore in addition to basing the design on suitable comparison aircraft, a first estimate can come from empirical data that indicate that the diameter of the air inlet be the same as that of the engine compressor face and that the length of the inlet be 60 percent of the engine length .
. 1.5 Wing Attachments

The manner in which the main wing attaches to the fuselage is an important element in the fuselage design. For structural reasons, the wing is generally constructed as an integral unit. The portion that passes through the fuselage is referred to as the wing carry-through. The root-span portion of the wing has the largest thickness in order to withstand the large bending moment in the wing. As a result, the wing carry-through occupies a large volume where it passes through the fuselage. An illustration of the wing carry-through is shown in Figure 5.6. A photograph of the partially assembled fuselage section with the main wing attachment for the Boeing 777 is shown in Figure 5.7. Since the details of the main wing are known from the analysis of the preceding chapter, the volume requirements for the carry-through structure can be directly applied to the design of the fuselage.

- .1.6

Landing Gear Placement

In most aircraft, the fuselage needs to accommodate ali or sorne parts of the landing gear when it is retracted. Therefore, its placement and volume requirements need to be considered in the design of the fuselage. The size and location of the landing gear will vary depending on the aircraft. Again, a good first estimate can come by examining suitable comparison aircraft. In selecting comparisons for the basis of the landing gear size and placement, it is important to select aircraft that have a comparable take-off weight. Figure 5.8 shows an illustration of sorne of different landing gear arrangements.

FIGURE 5.6: Illustration of a typical fuselage wing carry-through arrangement.

98

Chapter 5

Fuselage Design

FIGURE 5.7: Photograph of a Boeing 777 fuselage wing attachment section during assem-

bly. (Courtesy of the Boeing Company.)

Most commercial passenger/transport and combat aircraft use retractable tricycletype landing gear. With these, the nose wheel is mounted on and retracts into the fuselage. The main wheels are usually mounted on the main wing. Depending on their size, they retract into the main wing, or into the main wing/fuselage junction. Heavier aircraft use a multi-bogeyed tricycle arrangement that have multiple sets of wheels at three points. Two-wheel bogeys are typically used on aircraft with take-off weights in the range of 50,000 to 150,000 lbs. Four-wheel bogeys are generally used on aircraft with higher take-off weights between 200,000 to 400,000 lbs. A fewer number of military long-range aircraft such as the B-52, use a quadricycle landing gear arrangement in which the wheels are on either side of and retract into the fuselage. An extreme variation of this is used on the Russian built An-225, which has a take-off weight of 1.3 million pounds and uses 14 two-wheel bogeys on either side of the fuselage. Another variation on the quadricycle landing gear arrangement can be seen on the MD-Il. This uses a fourth set of wheels, which are located further aft, on the fuselage centerline. These are revealed in .the photograph of an MD-11 during take-off in Figure 5.9 The largest portion of the landing gear for which space has to be allotted in the fuselage is the landing gear wheels. Here wheels refer to the hub and tire. The size of the wheels is proportional to the percentage of the aircraft weight that they hold. Most typically, the tires on the main landing gear carry approximately 90 percent of the aircraft weight. The other 10 percent is carried by the nose gear.

Section 5.1

Volume Considerations

99

Single PersonaU Utility

Tandom

Triple SR-71

C-130

Dual

DualTandom

Triple Dual Tandom

B-727 DC- 9

B-737 MD-80

B-707 DC-8 B-747

DC-10 L-1011

B-777 Tu-144

Dual '!Win DR Trident

Dual Twin Tandom

Twin Tricycle
C-S A

B-58

FIGURE 5.8: Illustration of different main landing gear footprints.

At this point in the design, the size of the main landing gear wheels can be estimated using a statistical fit of historie data. This gives the diameter and width of the wheels, with units of inches, as Main Whee1 Diameter or Width (in.)= A W!ain
(5.4)

with A and B as given in Table 5.10. The weight on each wheel of the main landing gear depends on the number of wheels, so that
Wmain = - - Nwhccls

0.9WTo

(5.5)

After determining the size of the wheels on the main gear, the size of the nose whee1 can be assumed to be approximately 40 percent smaller. An exception is for the quadricycle arrangement, where the nose wheel is typically the same size as the main wheels. The calculated values for the diameter and width of all the wheels should be increased by 30 percent if the aircraft is intended to be operated on unpaved runways. 5.1. 7 Arma ment Placement With combat aircraft, the number and size of bombs and armament are generally decided in the initial design proposai when the mission requirements are set. At this stage, when