11 Aircraft Stability and Control

11.1 Stability and Control Overview

Stability and controllability are important factors in aircraft design. Maneovrability of the aircraft is also an important factor, especially for aircraft expected to perform demanding, acrobatic flight maneovres. However, high maneovrability often comes at the cost of good stability. There is thus a tension between these two factors as trade-offs have to be made. In the design of NTUM-200, the decision was made to accord higher priority to stability, while necessary compromises in maneovrability. The decision for this design compromise was borne out of the recognition that the primary role of the aircraft is that of a transporter. Hence, passenger comfort and aircraft stability are thus the primary design design considerations. Prior to this stage of the design process, estimations of the aerodynamic parameters of the wing, horizontal and vertical tail, and the sizing of the control surfaces had been made. Estimates of the aircraft component weights and volumes also been determined. A suitable engine and wing sizing has also been determined following the Constraint Analysis design stage. To design a stable and controllable aircraft, the following parameters were integrated and holistically considered: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) Longitudinal Stability and Controllability. Directional Stability and Controllability. Lateral Control. The output of this stage will thus include the following: Wing location and incidence angle relative to Fuselage Reference Line. Horizontal tail location and incidence angle relative to Fuselage Reference Line. Minimum elevator deflection requirements. Vertical tail location. Minimum rudder deflection requirements.

11.2 Location of Aircraft Center of Gravity 11.2.1 CG Coordinate System

The weight of the individual components of the aircraft was addressed in Chapter XX of this report. With the determination of the component weights, and factoring in the changing fuel load and payload weight distribution, the CG of the aircraft can be determined. The coordinate system used is the distance from the nose of the aircraft, as shown in Figure 11.2.1.1. 73

Xlandgear, rear

Xfuselage

Xlandgear,front

Xwinggroup

XVT XHT

Figure 11.2.1.1 Aircraft CG Corrdinate System

11.2.2 Location of Dry Fuselage, Vertical Tail and Front Landing Gear Center of Gravity
The location of the dry fuselage CG is known to be within of the range of 42 and 45% of of the fuselage length, as shown in Figure 11.2.2.1. In the following calculations the fuselage CG was taken to be at 43.5% of fuselage length. It was also decided that the location of the vertical tail will be fixed at the aft-most location of the fuselage, as shown in Figure 11.2.2.2, to maximum the moment arm of the rudder, hence the CG of the vertical tail was also fixed. The front landing gear was also sited at 17% of the fuselage length measured from the nose.

74

Figure 11.2.2.1 Statistical Range for Fuselage CG

Figure 11.2.2.2 Location of Vertical Tail CG

11.2.3

Wing-Group Center of Gravity

The wing-group center of gravity takes into consideration the following weights: wing structural weight, fuel load, and engine weight because the aircraft's engines will be wing-mounted. The CG of the wing-group, relative to the fuselage centerline, is shown in Figure 11.2.3.1. With the dimensions of the wing provided following constraint analysis, the fuel tank capacity can be determined with the formula shown in Figure 11.2.3.2. It was also found from aircraft range, weight and fuel consumption analysis that the fuel required for the aircraft for its intended

75

missions can be fully stored in the wings. With this information, the contribution to aircraft CG due to fuel load can be determined, and is shown in Table 11.2.3.1. The exact location of the wing, and thus its overall contribution of aircraft CG, stability and control will be addressed in an integrated design process that will be elaborated upon in the following sections of this report.

Figure 11.2.3.1 Wing-Group CG Location

Fuel Capacity in Wing = [0.54(S2/b)(t/c)root(1+0.5 + 2)]/(1+ )2

Figure 11.2.3.2 Wing Fuel Capacity Formula

CG Distance Moment About Weight from Nosetip Nose (Nm) 100.00% 30.66 58687.13 1799059.8 80.00% 30.66 52923.13 1622363.82 60.00% 30.66 47159.13 1445667.84 40.00% 30.66 41395.13 1268971.86 20.00% 30.66 35631.13 1092275.88 Table 11.2.3.1 Fuel Mass Contribution to Aircraft Center of Fuel Load
Gravity

11.2.4

Passenger and Baggage Weight Distribution

The location of the passenger seating and baggage storage location is shown in Figure 11.2.4.1. The passenger seating were split into 5 sequential capacity blocks of 20%. From the cross-

76

sectional area of the baggage storage compartment located in the fuselage undercarriage, it was found that length the baggage storage space to be accorded to each passenger capacity block approximately equates to the length of the passenger capacity block. Hence, the passenger and baggage weights for each capacity block will be merged during calculations. The table showing the contribution of payload contribution to aircraft CG is show in Table 11.2.4.1.
Block1 Block2 Block3 Block4 Block5

37.16 31.02 24.88 18.73 12.59 Figure 11.2.4.1 Passenger and Baggage CG Blocks

Passenger Capacity Block 1 (20%) Block 1 & 2 (40%) Block 1 to 3 (60%) Block 1 to 4 (80%) Block 1 to 5 (100%)

CG Distance from Nosetip 9.73 15.87 22.02 28.16 34.3

Passenger Weight 3360 3360 3360 3360 3360

Baggage Weight 840 840 840 840 840

Moment About Nose 61507.32 76985.16 92463 107940.84 123418.68

Table 11.2.4.1 Passenger and Baggage Contribution to Aircraft Center of Gravity

11.3 Longitudinal Stability and Controllability 11.3.1 Cardinal Requirements and Design Process for Longitudinal Stability and Controllability
The cardinal requirements for operability of the aircraft in terms of longitudinal stability and controllability are as follows: a) CG location must be bounded by Neutral Point (as defined by Neutral Point calculations) and Forward-Most CG Limit (as defined by horizontal tail and rudder parameters) b) Aircraft must have a positive trim angle.

77

The aircraft CG location changes with passenger capacity and fuel load. Hence, the expected operational loadings must be taken into consideration during this stage of the design. Also, this stage of the design integrates the preliminary aerodynamic design factors with operational CG conditions. The process for this stage is shown in Figure 11.3.1.1.

Assemble Pitching Moment Equation (Based on Preliminary Aerodynamic Design Parameters)

Integrate CG Factors and Pitching Moment Equation (CG and aerodynamics factors linked by location and orientation of wing and other control surfaces)

Iteration of Stability and Controllability Factors - Wing location and incidence angle relative to Fuselage Reference Line - Horizontal tail location and incidence angle - Control surface sizing

Does design provide the following: - Positive trim angle of attack - Static stability (negative dCm/dCl slope) - CG location for all operational loadings bounded by Neutral Point and Forward Most CG Limit Yes Iteration Ends/ Process Complete

No

Figure 11.3.1.1 Longitudinal Stability and Control Process

78

11.3.2 Determining Static Longitudinal Stability and Positive Stick-Fixed Trimmed Angle of Attack
The equations used in assembling the pitching moment equation, given by Nelson (1989) are as shown in Table 11.3.2.1. The effect of the fuselage, wing, horizontal tail and elevator were taken into consideration. The effect of the ailerons were taken to be small compared with the other factors and was thus neglected. Fuselage Pitching Moment Components Kf = Dimensionless parameter dependent on Position of 1/4 root chord on body as fraction of body length. Lf = Fuselage length. Sw = Wing planform area. c = Wing aerodynamic chord. CLw = Wing lift curve slope. *The pitching moment of a symmetric fuselage Cmo,fuse, which is a close approximation for NTUM-200, is zero when angle of attack is zero. Wing Pitching Moment Component The overall pitching moment contribution of the wing is given by:

where Cmow is given by:

and Cmw is given by:

where X(.)/c is a parameter non-dimensionalised by the wind aerodynamic chord. Horizontal Tail Moment Component The pitching moment component of the horizontal tail is given by:

79

Overall Aircraft The overall pitching moment equation of the aircraft is therefore given by: Pitching Moment Equation where Cmo is given by:

and Cm is given by:

and d/d is the rate of change of downwash effect with respect to wing angle of attack.
Table 11.3.2.1 Aircraft Pitching Moment Equation Components

It should be noted that with the shifting of the aircraft CG, the moment arm of the aerodynamic centers of the wing and horizontal tail about the CG change, and thus the pitching moment coefficients changes as well. It was thus essential to ensure that the design objectives for stability and controllability were met for all the CG locations. The design process required the iteration of the wing location and incidence angle, the horizontal tail location and incidence angle. The complete table showing that the design objectives for positive trim and static stability at design operational payload and fuel load scenarios is shown in Appendix 11B. An extract of this table is shown in Table 11.3.2.2.

Passenger Fuel Load Load

Wing Fuselage Cmo,w Cm,w Cmo,f Cm,f 100.00% 100% Fuel -0.61 -3.69 0 0.23 80.00% 80% Fuel -0.54 -2.98 0 0.23 40.00% 20% Fuel -0.33 -1.18 0 0.23 20.00% 60% Fuel -0.17 0.3 0 0.23

Tail Cmo,t Cm,t 1.4 -5.7 1.39 -5.68 1.37 -5.61 1.36 -5.56

trim,stickf ixed Aircraft Cmo Cm (rad) 0.78 -9.15 0.09 0.85 -8.42 0.1 1.04 -6.56 0.16 1.19 -5.02 0.24

Table 11.3.2.2 Pitching Moment Equation used in Determining trim and Cm Gradient

Hence, as an example, the stick-fixed pitching moment equation for the aircraft at 100% passenger capacity and fuel load is shown in Figure 11.3.2.1. Cmcg, stickfixed = 0.78 9.15
Figure 11.3.2.1 Aircraft Pitching Moment Equation at 100% Payload and 100% Fuel

80

11.3.3

Limits for Aircraft Center of Gravity

The travel of aircraft CG is limited by the aircraft neutral point (NP) and elevator trim limited forward CG limit (Xcg,f). The equations used in determining these two locations are shown in Table 11.3.3.1. Aft CG Limit (Neutral Point)

*The parameters have been previously defined earlier sections Forward-Most CG Limit (Xcg,f)

Where e,trim,o = Elevator deflection angle at zero lift. e,max = Maximum elevator deflection angle. Cme = Rudder control power.
Table 11.3.3.1 Aircraft CG Limits Equation Components

Similar to trim,stick-fixed and Cm slope, the Xcg,f and NP changes with aircraft CG. Their locations were tabulated and the complete table is shown in Appendix 11C. It was found that for the eventual set of stability and controllability parameters, the X cg,f and NP locations were found to undergo small changes and can thus be assumed to be static for all payload and fuel load conditions.

11.3.4 Integrating Requirements

CG

Travel

and

Stability

and

Controllability

The parameters that had to be iterated to achieve the objectives of stability and controllability, at all operational payload and fuel load scenarios, is summarised below in Table 11.3.4.1. With the manipulation of the these factors, a summary table, the design cockpit was created. The table facilitated the design parameter iteration process by providing a comprehensive view of the design objectives. The complete table can be found in Appendix 11D. A sample is shown in Table 11.3.4.2.

81

S/N Wing 1 Wing Location (% Fuselage Length) Wing Incidence Angle, iw 2 Horizontal Tail 3 HT Location (% Aircraft Length) (d/de) 4 it Tail Incidence Angle 5 6 Max Elevator Deflection, e,max

Table 11.3.4.1 Stability and Controllability Design Factors

Passenger Capacity 100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00%

Fuel Load 80% Fuel 40% Fuel 40% Fuel 20% Fuel 20% Fuel

SM 2.35 2.22 1.93 1.64 1.26

Stickfixed trim (deg) 4.63 5.23 6.87 9.08 13.48

Xcg/c Xnp/c Xcg,f/c 5.81 5.93 6.21 6.49 6.85 8.16 5.21 8.15 5.21 8.14 5.2 8.13 5.2 8.12 5.19

Positive Within Stability Trim Stall Limit OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK

Table 11.3.4.2. Stability and Controllability Design Factors

11.3.5

Iteration Process Summary

The iteration process centered around the selection of 3 wing locations. The other parameters were iterated in the attempt to meet the design objectives for the particular wing location.
Selected Parameters Set Wing Wing Centerline Location (% Fuselage Length) Wing incidence angle (deg), iw Horizontal Tail HT Centreline Distance from Nose (% Aircraft Length) Stail (d/de) it tail incidence (deg) e,max

52.00% 2 90.00% 40.5 0.6 -2 35

Table 11.3.5.1 Chosen Stability and Controllability Parameters

During the iteration process, it was necessary to generate multiple combinations of the relevant stability and controllability parameters as shown below. The baseline requirement were: the

82

combination of parameters would provide static stability and controllability. If the combination of parameters met this requirement, it was shortlisted for further comparison. Typically, each of the individual parameters are acceptable a certain range, subject to its compatibility with the other parameters. Hence, once the baseline requirement was met, further iteration was done to further enhance the combination of parameters to met the design objectives. The objectives for this secondary iteration phase was to: a) lower the stick-fixed trim angle of attack. b) provide a reasonable static margin that is neither too low (should not be too close to boundary of static instability) or high (which may render the aircraft prone to elevator stall). The 3 shortlisted set of parameters can be found in Appendix 11E and the final chosen parameter set is shown in Table 11.3.5.1. A comparion was made between them and the final chosen set of parameters was selection on the basis that it: a) b) c) provides a low stick fixed trim angle of attack, provides static stability over the complete operational CG range, the location is suitable for siting the landing gear on the wing.

11.3.6 Summary of Aircraft Longitudinal Stability Characteristics Arising From Chosen Parameters
Figure 11.3.6.1 below shows the variation of the trim angle of attack for operational payload and fuel load conditions. It can be seen that the the values are well below the stall angle of attack. Thus the design parameters can be said to provide a relatively good maneovrability envelope for the aircraft. Figure 11.3.6.2 shows a graph of the variation of the static margin (SM), a measure of the longitudinal static stability is shown below. It can be seen that the design parameters give relatively high SM. It should be noted that the impact of this on aircraft dynamics were not taken into consideration. However, within the scope of the current design goals, the chosen set of parameters provide a statically stable aircraft across the entire range of CG travel.

83

Static Margin Variation

2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2 CG, 100% Passenger CG, 80% Passenger CG, 100% Passenger CG, 80% Passenger CG, 100% Passenger

SM

1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 100% Fuel 80% Fuel 60% Fuel 40% Fuel 20% Fuel

Fuel Load

Figure 11.3.6.2 Variation of Static Margin with Payload and Fuel Load

Variation of Stick Fixed Trim Angle of Attack with Payload and Fuel Load
16 14

Stick Fixed Trim Angle of Attack

12 10 8 6 4 2 0 100% Fuel 80% Fuel 60% Fuel 40% Fuel 20% Fuel 100.00% 80.00% 60.00% 40.00% 20.00% stall

Fuel Load

Figure 11.3.6.1 Variation of Trim Angle of Attack with Payload and Fuel Load

84

Location of CG, NP, Forward CG Limit

38 36 34

Distance from Nose (m)

32 30 28 26 24 22 20 100% Fuel 80% Fuel 60% Fuel 40% Fuel 20% Fuel

CG, 100% Passenger CG, 80% Passenger CG, 100% Passenger CG, 80% Passenger CG, 100% Passenger Xcg,f Neutral Point

Fuel Load

Figure 11.3.6.3 Variation of CG, NP and Xcg,f at Various Operational Loads

Figure 11.3.6.3 belows shows the variation of the CG across the operational loading range. It can be seen that with the selected set of design parameters, the CG of the aircraft lies within the boundaries for stability and controllability.

11.4 Directional Stability and Controllability 11.4.1 Overview of Design Objectives and Process

The design objectives for directional stability and control are: a) Sufficient rudder control power to provide steady sideslip at a crosswind velocity equivalent to 20% of take-off velocity. b) Sufficient rudder control power and deflection angle (C nr) to overcome asymmetrical thrust loading in the event of one engine inoperative, particularly during low flight velocities during takeoff.

85

The relevant formulas used in the directional stability and control calculations are shown in Table 11.4.1.1. The design process for this stage is as shown in Figure 11.4.1.1. Total Yawing Moment Equation Where r = rudder deflection angle Cn due to Vertical Tail and WingFuselage Group Cn Contribution from Vertical Tail

Where CLvt = the lift curve slope of vertical fin = Sidewash angle (taken to be negligible = Fin efficiency factor (= 0.9) Vvt = Fin volume ratio Cn Contribution from Wing-Fuselage Group Where kN = empirical factor dependent on the wing-fuselage interference factor kRI = empirical factor dependent on fuselage reynolds number Sfs = fuselage side area Lf = fuselage length Rudder Control Power Rudder control power is given by:

And where

86

 = flap effectiveness parameter dependent on control surface-lifting surface area ratio

Table 11.4.1.1 Directional Stability and Control Parameters

Assemble Yawing Moment Equation

Iterate Design Parameters - rudder area - rudder deflection angle - tail location - fin lift curve No

Check for Sufficient Rudder Control Power Yes Process Complete

Figure 11.4.1.1 Directional Stability and Controllability Design Process

11.4.2

Directional Stability Design Outcome and Summary

Rudder control power is a key factor in determining directional controllability. Thus, given that rudder control power is dependent on the moment arm of of the fin aerodynamic center from from the aircraft CG, the rudder control power is dependent on CG location. Thus, similar to the process in designing for longitudinal stability and controllability, it was essential to ensure that the rudder has sufficient power to control the aircraft under the most adverse conditions. The yawing moment equation for full operational range of CG locations was assembled and can be found in Appendix 11F.

87

The adverse operational conditions used in the calculations are: a) According to D.P. Raymer, under the crosswind-landing conditions, an aircraft must be able to operate in a crosswind equal to 20% of the takeoff velocity, equivalent to sideslip angle of 11.5. b) One engine failure during low velocity flight (take-off ground roll, landing deceleration) From control parameters used in the design iterations and their eventual selected values are shown in Table 11.4.2.1.
Control Parameters r,max 0.5 35 Xac,vt CLvt 45 3.34
Table 11.4.2.1 Directional Control Parameters

For these parameters, the rudder deflection angles were calculated for each CG location and for each adverse operational condition and the complete list is shown in Appendix 11F, and summarised below in Table 11.4.2.2. It can observed from Table 11.4.2.2 that the rudder has sufficient control leverage to overcome the destabilizing yawing moments under the expected adverse conditions. Adverse Operation Condition Vcrosswind = 20% Vtakeoff One engine failure at take off velocity Rudder Deflection Angle Range (Absolute Values) 0.88 to 9.39 15.89 to 20.2 Maximum Design Rudder Deflection (Absolute Values) 35

Table 11.4.2.1 Comparison of Required Rudder Deflection and Maximum Design Rudder Deflection Angle

In addition, FAR25 regulations stipulate that In straight, steady sideslips, the aileron and rudder control movements and forces must be substantially proportional to the angle of sideslip in a stable sense; and the factor of proportionality must lie between limits found necessary for safe operation throughout the range of sideslip angles appropriate to the operation of the airplane. Figure 11.4.2.2 shows the variation of rudder deflection angle necessary to maintain different magnitudes of constant sideslip angles. It can be seen that the rudder necessary rudder deflection angle varies linearly with the magnitude of sideslip at different payload and fuel loads.

88

Rudder Deflection Angle with Increasing Sideslip

16 14

Rudder Deflection Angle

12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sideslip Angle
Sideslip Angle 100% Passenger,40% Fuel 80% Passenger,60% Fuel 60% Passenger,80% Fuel 40% Passenger,100% Fuel 40% Passenger,20% Fuel 20% Passenger,40% Fuel 100% Passenger,100% Fuel 100% Passenger,20% Fuel 80% Passenger,40% Fuel 60% Passenger,60% Fuel 40% Passenger,80% Fuel 20% Passenger,100% Fuel 20% Passenger,20% Fuel 100% Passenger,80% Fuel 80% Passenger,100% Fuel 80% Passenger,20% Fuel 60% Passenger,40% Fuel 40% Passenger,60% Fuel 20% Passenger,80% Fuel 100% Passenger,60% Fuel 80% Passenger,80% Fuel 60% Passenger,100% Fuel 60% Passenger,20% Fuel 40% Passenger,40% Fuel 20% Passenger,60% Fuel

Figure 11.4.2.2 Variation of Rudder Deflection Angle with Sideslip

89