58983

rd
2009 Brazilian Symposium on Aerospace Eng. & Applications 3 CTA-DLR Workshop on Data Analysis & Flight Control
Copyright 2009 by AAB September 14-16, 2009, S. J. Campos, SP, Brazil
A SIMPLIFIED GEOMETRIC METHOD FOR WING LOADS

ESTIMATION
Marcelo Satoru Tamura, marcelo.tamura@gmail.com

Flvio Luiz de Silva Bussamra, flaviobu@ita.br
ITA - Instituto Tecnolgico de Aeronutica
Diviso de Engenharia Aeronutica
Praa Marechal Eduardo Gomes, 50 - Vila das Accias
CEP 12.228-900 So Jos dos Campos SP - Brazil
Abstract. In this work, a simplified method for aerodynamic loads estimation on wing surfaces is proposed. In order to
do this analysis, basically only the use of the main geometric data of the wing was necessary. In order to illustrate the
performance of the proposed method, it is applied to a 174-seat civil aircraft. Numerical results are compared with three
other methods, say, BLWF, Vortex Lattice and Schrenk.
Keywords: aircraft loads, BLWF, Vortex Lattice, Schrenk Method
1. INTRODUCTION
The structural loads estimation has been an important stage for the aircraft design process since the early years of the
commercial aircraft age. Due to the advances and availability of computation resources, more and more detailed analyses
became accessible. On the other hand detailed analyses require huge amounts of information and generate a lot of
outputs. It often demands too much time to manage the large amount of data and the loads estimation process becomes
complicated and not useful to the aircraft preliminary design stage. In this work, a simplified approach to estimate
aerodynamic loads in civil aircraft wings is proposed. This approach is suitable for early estimations of aircraft loads due
to its simplicity and reasonable accuracy. This method is applied to a 174-seat civil aircraft and the results are compared
to those obtained by using known methods: BLWF (Karas and Kovalev, 2001), Vortex Lattice (Melin, 2000) and Schrenk
(Schrenk, 1940), so that the performance of the proposed method may be evaluated. The purpose of using the BLWF
method is the possibility of considering the fuselage effects on the wing surface loads distribution. This method considers
the viscous effects on the wing. The Vortex Lattice is an improvement of the classic Prandtl method, with some
differences in the sustaining distribution concepts. Schrenk Method is based on an elliptical lifting coefficient distribution
span wise hypothesis on the wing. This method also assumes that the pressure distribution is proportional to the wing
area.
2. METHOD
The Geometric Method (Tamura, 2006) is the method to be validated in this paper, whose proposal is a quick
estimation of the aerodynamic loads distribution on wing surfaces, based on a few aircraft preliminary data. This method
is based on the wing surface geometry, and it is intended to be used in the preliminary design stage, when there are only
few estimated aircraft data, although the wing geometry, as well as the weight and balance data is usually already
available. The basic premise of the Geometric Method is that the pressure is distributed equally, with a constant value, on
the wing span wise. This implies that the local lift coefficient, Cl, is also constant span wise. So the resultant aerodynamic
pressure is uniformly distributed on the wing area. The loading distribution L [N/m] is the product of the constant
pressure P [N/m] span wise by the chords distribution c[m] span wise, where F is the aerodynamic force and S is the
wing area:
L( y ) P c ( y ) (1)
and
F
P (2)
S
so
F (3)
L( y ) c( y )
S
rd
Cl.c is obtained by multiplying the local pressure W by the dynamic pressure q, say:
L( y )
W( y) (3)
Ci
then,
Cl c W q (4)
where
1
q V 2 (5)
2
The local Cl is obtained by dividing the result by the chord Ci, on the i station:
(C l c) (6)
Cl
Ci
In order to calculate the global CL, corresponding to a given load factor, the equations (8) and (9) may be used, where
W is the average pressure applied to the wing surface, m the mass, nz the load factor and g, the gravitational acceleration:
W (7)
C L global
q
where
m g nz
W (9)
S
The Shear Force and the Bending Moment are obtained by dividing the running load diagrams on vertical strips span
wise. The area of each strip represents the aerodynamics Normal Force modulus to be applied to each chord considered in
the Shear Force or in Bending Moment calculation. The diagram from Figure 1 has been idealized to allow defining the
centers of pressure for Torsion Moment estimation, once the Geometric Method is not able to generate this kind of output.
These centers of pressure were previously obtained by the BLWF method.
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
CP [% Chord]
60.0%
CL=-0.52
CL=0.25
50.0%
CL=0.5
CL=1.3
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Y [m]
Figure 1. Center of Pressure on chord [%] per wing station

rd
3. CASE STUDY
The geometric wing reference data of the 174-seat civil aircraft are shown in the Table 1. In this work, the loads have
been estimated considering four cases of global CL: -0.52 and 1.3, corresponding to load factors 1.0 and 2.5
respectively, as well as other two intermediate values, 0.25 and 0.5. For load estimation, the Maximum Take-off Weight
was considered as the reference value, whose value is 77,100 kg. After applying the Geometric Method to estimate the
considered wing data, a performance comparison with other methods was made in the wing-to-fuselage interface station
(Y = 2.25m). The winglet effects have been neglected for all four methods. Based on wing geometric data on Table 1, the
first step is defining the local chords distribution, as illustrated in Figure 2. Using Equation (9), we are able to obtain the
Pressure distribution presented in Figure 3. The graph shown in Figure 4 was obtained by using Equation (4). The local
lift coefficient Cl (Figure 5) may be calculated by dividing the values shown in Figure 4 by the local chord. By dividing
the average local pressure by the local chord, according to Equation (1), we obtain the Running Load distribution as
shown in Figure 6.
Table 1. Main geometric data of the wing
Wing Span 35.58 m

Wing Area 147.02 m
Wing Root Chord 6.55 m
Wing Tip Chord 1.71 m
Taper Ratio 0.26
Aspect Ratio 8.61
1/4 Chord Line Sweep 270
Wing Dihedral 50
Chord Geometric Incidence on Wing Root 0
Variation of Span wise Incidence Angle 50
5
Local Chord [m]
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Y [m]
Figure 2. Local chord distribution

rd
15000
10000
5000
Pressure [N/m 2]
CL=-0.52
CL=0.25
CL=0.5
CL=1.3
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
-5000
-10000
Y [m]
Figure 3. Pressure distribution
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0 CL=-0.52
CL=0.25
Cl x C
2.0
CL=0.5
CL=1.3
0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
-2.0
-4.0
-6.0
Y [m]
Figure 4. Local Cl x local chord distribution

rd
1.5
1.0
0.5
Cl=-0.52
Cl=0.25
Cl
0.0 Cl=0.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Cl=1.3
-0.5
-1.0
Y [m]
Figure 5. Local Cl distribution
100.0
80.0
60.0
Running Loads [kN/m]
40.0
CL=-0.52
20.0
CL=0.25
CL=0.5
0.0 CL=1.3
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
-20.0
-40.0
-60.0
Y [m]
Figure 6. Running Loads distribution

rd
3.1 Results
Figure 7 shows the Shear Force estimation from each method. For global CL equal to -0.52 and 1.3, the Geometric
Method presented a non-conservative maximum difference of 5% when compared to other methods. For global CL of
0.25 and 0.5, this difference was less than 1%. In the Bending Moment estimation (Figure 8), the maximum difference
value is 12%, more specifically for global CL -0.52. As the global CL values approach zero, this difference converges
among four methods, as shown on Figure 9. Regarding the Torsion Moment (Figure 10), the Geometric Method presented
a maximum difference of 3%, as presented in Figure 11.
1,200
CL=1.3
1,000
800
600 Schrenk
Shear Force [kN]
Vortex Lattice
CL=0.5
400 BLWF
Geometric
200
CL= 0.25
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
-200
-400
CL= - 0.52
-600
Y [m]
Figure 7. Shear Force Diagrams
8,000
CL=1.3
6,000
4,000
Bending Moment [kNm]
Schrenk
CL=0.5
Vortex Lattice
2,000 BLWF
Geometric
CL= 0.25
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
-2,000
CL= - 0.52
-4,000
Y [m]
Figure 8. Bending Moment Diagrams

rd
6,000
5,410
5,176 5,170 5,147
5,000
4,000
3,000
Bending Moment [kN.m]
1,978 1,976 1,949 1,850 Global CL -0.52

2,000
Global CL 0.25
989 988 878 Global CL 0.5
1,000 830
Global CL 1.3
0
Geometric Schrenk Vortex Lattice BLWF
-1,000
-2,000
-2,070 -2,068
-2,434 -2,325
-3,000
Figure 9. Bending Moment at wing-to-fuselage interface station
400
CL=1.3
300
200
Torsion Moment [kNm]
100
CL=0.5
Schrenk
0 Vortex Lattice
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 BLWF
Geometric
-100 CL= 0.25
-200
-300 CL= - 0.52
-400
Y [m]
Figure 10. Torsion Moment Diagrams

rd
400
327 335 335 336
300
200
100
41 Global CL -0.52
Momento Toror [kN.m]
38 41 40
Global CL 0.25
0
Global CL 0.5
Geometric Schrenk Vortex Lattice BLWF
Global CL 1.3
-54 -53 -54 -54
-100
-200
-300
-336.4 -337.0 -325.4 -328.1

-400
Figure 11. Torsion Moment at wing-to-fuselage interface station
4. CONCLUDING REMARKS
The Geometric Method has been presented as a simple and quick load estimation method to estimate aircraft wing
running loads. For negative values of Global CLs, the Geometric Method presented non conservative values of Shear
Load and Bending Moment, and for high values of Global CLs, the Torsion Moment estimation showed non conservative
values if compared with the other methods. However the proposed method has generated reasonably accurate results, in
terms of Shear Force, Bending Moment and Torsion Moment, if compared to other more sophisticated methods.
Therefore the Geometric Method is indicated to be used in a preliminary stage of the aircraft design, when it is necessary
to estimate the aircraft loads with reasonable accuracy and only few aircraft data are available.
5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank EMBRAER Empresa Brasileira de Aeronutica S.A. for the financial support.
6. REFERENCES
Karas O.V. & Kovalev V.E., 2001, BLWF28 Users Guide, TsAGI, Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute, Moscow,
Russia, pp. 5-33.
Melin, T., 2000, Users Guide and Reference Manual for Tornado 1.0, Royal Institute of Technology - KTH,
Aerodymics Dept., Sweden, pp. 16-27.
Schrenk, O., 1940; A Simple Approximation Method for Obtaining the Spanwise Lift Distribution, Technical
Memorandums, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Washington, EUA.
Tamura, M.S.,2006, Estudo de Cargas na Asa de uma Aeronave Comercial, Thesis (Master in Aeronautical and
Mechanical Engineering), Instituto Tecnolgico de Aeronutica, So Jos dos Campos, Brazil, 95 p.
7. RESPONSIBILITY NOTICE
The authors are the only responsible for the material included in this paper.

58983

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

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

58983

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

rd

A SIMPLIFIED GEOMETRIC METHOD FOR WING LOADS

Marcelo Satoru Tamura, marcelo.tamura@gmail.com

Keywords: aircraft loads, BLWF, Vortex Lattice, Schrenk Method

Figure 1. Center of Pressure on chord [%] per wing station

Table 1. Main geometric data of the wing

Wing Span 35.58 m

Figure 2. Local chord distribution

Figure 3. Pressure distribution

Figure 4. Local Cl x local chord distribution

Figure 5. Local Cl distribution

Figure 6. Running Loads distribution

Figure 7. Shear Force Diagrams

Figure 8. Bending Moment Diagrams

1,978 1,976 1,949 1,850 Global CL -0.52

Figure 9. Bending Moment at wing-to-fuselage interface station

-300 CL= - 0.52

Figure 10. Torsion Moment Diagrams

327 335 335 336

-336.4 -337.0 -325.4 -328.1

Figure 11. Torsion Moment at wing-to-fuselage interface station

Potrebbero piacerti anche