Vendetta Final Proposal Part 1 (3.4 MB) - Cal Poly

More documents

Recommendations

Info

50 dB40 dB30 dB20 dB10 dB0 dB-10 dB-20 dB-30 dB-40 dB-50 dB35.3º LE Sweep40º LE Sweep1 GHz. 40º LE Sweep10 GHz. 40º LE Sweep1 GHz. 35.3º LE Sweep10 GHz. 35.3º LE SweepRFP Requirement (-13 dB)Figure 5.2 - Effect of Wing Leading and Trailing Edge Sweep on RCSFigure 5.3 - Wing PlanformTable 5.I - Wing MeasurementsPlanform Area 1,500 ft 2Span54.8 ftRoot Chord46.8 ftTip Chord8.0 ftMAC32.0 fty Location of MAC 10.5 ftAspect Ratio 2.0Leading Edge Sweep 40.0ºSweep at Quarter Chord 20.5ºSweep at Half Chord 4.7ºTrailing Edge Sweep -30.0ºTaper Ratio 0.17Leading Edge Flap Area 112 ft 2Trailing Edge Flap Area 137 ft 2Aileron Area 44 ft 2Flapped Wing Area 624 ft 219
5.3 Wing ThicknessThe effect of wing thickness-to-chord ratio (t/c) on performance was studied so that the optimum t/c could bechosen. Initially, a wing thickness of 3% of the chord was chosen based on existing supercruise aircraft. Increasing theroot thickness of the wing was considered to reduce the weight of the wing and to increase fuel volume in the wing. Theeffects of wing root thickness on wing weight, cross-sectional area, fuel consumption, and fuel volume were studied.The weight of the wing was estimated using the method presented in Raymer, and the additional cross-sectional area wascalculated numerically. The resulting wing weights and cross-sectional areas for wing root t/c from 3% to 6% are shownin Figure 5.4. The effects of the resulting weights and cross-sectional areas on the fuel consumption during the missionwere estimated using the same method used for the wing sizing. The results in Figure 5.5 show that the additional fuelconsumption over the mission due to the wave drag of a thicker wing greatly exceeds the additional fuel capacity of thewing. A constant wing t/c of 3% was chosen because it minimizes both wave drag and fuel consumption over themission.9,000t root = 3%8,500Weight of Wing (lb)8,0007,500t root = 4%t root = 5%7,000t root = 6%6,50013 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21Maximum Frontal Cross Sectional Area of Wing (ft 2 )Figure 5.4 - Effect of Root Thickness-to-Chord Ratio on Wing Weight and Cross-Sectional Area20
Page 6 and 7: Figure 11.1 - 1-g Military Specific
Page 8 and 9: Nomenclature6DOF Six Degrees of Fre
Page 10: 1 IntroductionThe American Institut
Page 13 and 14: Table 1.III - Comparison of the F-1
Page 15 and 16: The weight fraction method provides
Page 17 and 18: 3 ConfigurationThe current configur
Page 19 and 20: • Span = 53 ft• m.a.c. = 32 ft
Page 21 and 22: VendettaChris DroneyNate SchnaibleK
Page 23 and 24: low signature axisymmetric advanced
Page 25 and 26: 0° Lookup77°50403020100-10-20-30-
Page 27: 5.2 Wing SweepThe next wing paramet
Page 31 and 32: 0.10.050-0.05-0.1-0.150 0.1 0.2 0.3
Page 33 and 34: 5.6 DragDrag was divided into four
Page 35 and 36: 6 PropulsionIn developing the propu
Page 37 and 38: Turbine Engine Technology (IHPTET)
Page 39 and 40: 35,00030,000Sea Level 1.5K 5K10K20K
Page 41 and 42: 0.990.980.97Pressure Recovery0.960.
Page 43 and 44: oundary layer diverter for high spe
Page 45 and 46: 7 Structural Layout & Material Sele
Page 47 and 48: Vertical AttachmentPointsHorizontal
Page 49: 8 Landing GearLanding Gear design f

Vendetta Final Proposal Part 1 (3.4 MB) - Cal Poly

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?