Abstract

Wing design involves many compromises, but none more important than the one between aerodynamics, represented by lift-to-drag ratio, and structural weight. Multidisciplinary design optimization is used to compare the effect of configuration changes on wing weight and lift/drag ratio for 1) cantilever, 2) strut-braced, and 3) truss-braced wing aircraft for a medium-range, transonic, 162 passenger mission. Pseudo-Pareto fronts are generated to illustrate maximum lift/drag ratio compared to minimum wing weight. Lower lift/drag ratio aircraft have a shorter, more highly swept wing, with a change in taper at 75% semispan. Higher lft/drag ratio aircraft have much greater span and maximum chord at 33% semispan. To increase lift/drag ratio, both wing-weight and takeoff gross weight penalties must be paid. However, there are high lift/drag ratio designs with low wing-weight penalty that are clearly displayed by the pseudo-Pareto front. Fuel weight minima were found in the high lift/drag ratio and low wing-weight region of the pseudo-Pareto front for the truss-braced wing with both fuselage-mounted and wing-mounted engine configurations and for the cantilever configuration. An interesting pseudo-Pareto front was observed for the wing-mounted engine truss-braced wing configuration, where the pseudo-Pareto front almost became an asymptote to a lift/drag ratio of . Also, one can look across all the configurations and compare attractive designs from each to search for an overall best aircraft design.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call