Upload
anthony-salazar
View
225
Download
6
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1B
Infinite ṁ
Specialized Propulsion Solutions:
enabling the missions of tomorrow
2B
Kyle KloudaDesign Team Lead (DTL)
Troy KillgoreCombustor section design
Cameron SchmittInlet design
Erik OmlidNozzle section design
Courtney HoughCompressor section design
Kevin WalkerTurbine section design
Jase HeinzerothCombustor section design
3B
• C-130 (50’s design)• 3 accidents
• P-2V Neptune (40’s design)• Half of accidents
• Half of firefighting fleet
4B
Figure 1B: P-2V Estimated Service Life
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022
Nu
mb
er
of
Ava
ilab
le P
-2V
Year
5B
• Current aircraft are modified
• Limitations in design increase risk during flights
• Limitation in airports for basing
• Torrent 19 mitigates risk by design and is purpose built
6B
• Designed to withstand the weather created by wildfires
• Uses latest technologies to ensure maneuverability in adverse conditions
7B
8B
• Aircraft Configuration Layout• Wing• Fuselage• Landing Gear• Weight and Balance• Stability and Control• Drag Polar• Powerplant• Performance Verification
Imber tech – Kevin Warren9B
10B
IAB Requirements:
• Ground roll no more than 6,000 ft. (IAB)
• Must maintain 100 ft/min climb with one engine inoperative upon takeoff (IAB)
• Must have emergency payload release lever within reach of both pilots (IAB)
11BImber tech – Kevin Warren
Imber tech – Kevin Warren12B
OUTBOUND
1. Taxi/Takeoff ground roll2. Climb3. Cruise4. Descent
INBOUND
5. Loiter/Slurry Drop6. Climb7. Cruise8. Descent9. Landing/Taxi
Imber tech – Kevin Warren13B
14BImber tech – Kevin Warren
10 Tanker DC-10-10 Evergreen 747-100
C-130J-30 Torrent 19
15B
Figure 2B: Torrent 19
Imber tech – Kelsey Kecherson16B
Figure 3B: Torrent 19
Imber tech – Kelsey Kecherson
Figure 4B: Torrent 19
17B
Figure 5B: Torrent 19
Imber tech – Kelsey Kecherson18B
Figure 6B: IM1 Dunamis
19B
Figure 7B: Pilot Seat in the Cabin
Imber tech – Kelsey Kecherson20B
Figure 8B: View From the Pilot Seat
Imber tech – Kelsey Kecherson21B
22B
• Clean CLmax at Vs (sea-level)
• CLmax for payload delivery phase
• Mcr and MDD during ferry phase
Imber tech – Jared Basile23B
Figure 9B: NASA SC(2)-0714 Experimental Data
Imber tech – Jared Basile24B
Imber tech – Jared Basile25B
Figure 10B: Torrent 19
Parameter Airfoil Wing
Clmax or CLmax 2.09 1.94
Clα or CLα 0.1204 0.0898
αstall 18o 20o
αl=0 -4o -4o
Table 4A: Wing Values
imber tech – Jared Basile26B
27Bimber tech – Jared Basile
Figure 11B: Torrent 19
Parameter Wing FlappedWing
CLmax 1.94 2.69
αstall ~19.5o ~17o
Table 4B: Comparison
Imber tech – Jared Basile28B
Figure 12B: Sizing of High-Lift Devices
Imber tech – Jared Basile29B
• Anderson Mcr estimation:
𝑀𝑐𝑟,𝑎𝑖𝑟𝑓𝑜𝑖𝑙 < 𝑀𝑐𝑟,𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔 <𝑀𝑐𝑟,𝑎𝑖𝑟𝑓𝑜𝑖𝑙
cos Λ𝐿𝐸0.72 < 𝑀𝑐𝑟,𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔 < 0.73
• Boeing MDD estimation:𝑀𝐷𝐷 = 𝑀𝑐𝑟,𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔 + 0.08
Transonic Mach Parameter
Estimated Value
Mcr ~ 0.725
MDD ~ 0.805
Table 5B: Comparison
Imber tech – Jared Basile30B
Imber tech – Jared Basile31B
Figure 13B: Horizontal Tail
Parameter Airfoil HT HT w/Elevator
Clmax or CLmax 1.33 1.12 1.95
Clα or CLα 0.105 /deg 0.066 /deg 0.066 /deg
αstall 13o 21o 20o
αl=0 0o 0o -11o
Table 5A: Horizontal Tail Values
imber tech – Jared Basile32B
Imber tech – Jared Basile33B
Figure 14B: Vertical Tail
Parameter Airfoil VT VT w/Rudder
Clmax or CLmax
1.33 1.12 1.98
Clα or CLα 0.105 /deg 0.066 /deg 0.066 /deg
αstall 13o 22o 21o
αl=0 0o 0o -12o
Table 6A: Vertical Tail Values
imber tech – Jared Basile34B
35B
Figure 15B: Fuselage Length
(191 ft)
Imber tech – Michael Browne36B
Figure 16B: Effect of Nose Fineness on Drag Divergence Mach Numberhttp://adg.stanford.edu/aa241/fuselayout/fuseplanform.html
Imber tech – Michael Browne37B
Figure 17B: Tailcone Sizing
Imber tech – Michael Browne38B
Figure 18B: Fuselage Planform
Imber tech – Michael Browne39B
Figure 19B: Structural Layout
Imber tech – Michael Browne40B
41B
Figure 20B: Structural Layout
Imber tech – Anthony Salazar42B
Figure 21B: Initial Landing-Gear Layout
Imber tech – Anthony Salazar43B
Figure 22B: Initial Landing-Gear Layout
44BImber tech – Anthony Salazar
Figure 23B: Oleo Shock Absorber
Source: Raymer, page 367, 5th Edition
Figure 24B: Shock Absorber Efficiency
Source: Raymer, page 369, 5th Edition
Figure 25B: Aircraft Gear Load Factor
Source: Raymer, page 370, 5th Edition
Imber tech – Anthony Salazar45B
Ƞ = shock-absorbing effiencyL = average total load during deflectionS = strokeST = stroke of tire (half diameter minus rolling radius)Vvertical = vertical velocity capabilityDoleo = diameter of oleoLoleo = length of oleo
Imber tech – Anthony Salazar46B
Figure 26B: General Tip-Over CriterionSource: Raymer, page 356, 5th Edition
Imber tech – Anthony Salazar
STRUT TRAVEL (7 DEG BEST)
STATIC GROUND LINE
> TIPBACK ANGLE
STATIC TAILDOWN ANGLE TIP BACK ANGLE
47B
Figure 27B: Lateral Tip-Over CriterionSource: Roskam, Part 2, Page 221
Imber tech – Anthony Salazar48B
Figure 28B: Ground-Clearance CriterionSource: Roskam, Part, 2 Page 221
Imber tech – Anthony Salazar49B
Figure 29B: Side View
Main-Gear Retraction
Figure 30A: Bottom View
Main-Gear Retraction
Imber tech – Anthony Salazar50B
51B
• Roskam’s Initial Estimate: 580,000 lb
• Raymer’s Component Weight:552,277 lb
• Highest weight contributors: Fuel, slurry, wing and engines
• Baffles and flapper valves will be used
Imber tech – Matthew Hanus52B
Material Location Density (lb/in3)
Carbon-FiberComposite
Skin 0.056-0.0567
Al 7075-T6 Ribs, spars 0.100-0.102
Al 7475 T7351 Fuselage 0.100-0.102
Low carbon steel,AISI 1010
Landing-gear 0.282-0.285
Table 8B: Material Selection
Imber tech – Matthew Hanus53B
Aircraft Max Take-off Weight (lb)
Payload (lb)
DC-10 Air tanker 420,000 119,556
Boeing 747Evergreen
Supertanker
750,000 170,000
Torrent 19 552,277 120,000
Table 9B: Weight Comparison
Imber tech – Matthew Hanus54B
Table 10B: Component C.G. Locations
Call Out
Component X C.G. Location in ft (in.) Z C.G. Location in ft (in.)
A Wing 85 (1,020) 27 (321)
B Horizontal Tail 192 (2,315) 66 (797)
C Vertical Tail 173 (2,081) 47 (565)
D Fuselage 78 (932) 17 (204)
E Main Landing Gear
92 (1,104) 2 (29)
F Engines (average) 59 (707) 13 (159)
G Fuel (average) 87 (1,042) 24 (286)
H Slurry 88 (1,056) 17 (205)
I Slurry Tank 88 (1,056) 12 (148)
J Torrent 19 86 (1,037) 21 (248)
Imber tech – Matthew Hanus55B
C: Fully loaded fuel and slurryA: Empty Weight B: Fully loaded fuel, no slurry
Figure 31A: Center-of-Gravity Excursion Diagram
imber tech – Matthew Hanus56B
• Forward Limit: 971 in.
• Aft Limit: 1,087 in.
imber tech – Matthew Hanus57B
58B
Figure 32B: Dimensions of Tail
Imber tech – David Wilson59B
Figure 33B: Static Margin vs. Horizontal Tail Area
Imber tech – David Wilson60B
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
AC
Full
No slurry
No Fuel
empty
Horizontal tailX
Horizontal Tail
Imber tech – David Wilson61B
Figure 34B: Torrent 19
Figure 35B: Elevator Sizing
Imber tech – David Wilson62B
Figure 36B: Moment Diagram
Imber tech – David Wilson63B
Figure 37B: Horizontal Tail CL Curve
Imber tech – David Wilson64B
Figure 38B: Engine Positioning
Imber tech – David Wilson65B
Imber tech – David Wilson
• Vertical Tail Area: 1,275 ft2
• Wing sweep: 10 degrees
• Cl: drop phase: 1.4
• Cnβ : 0.116
66B
Imber tech – David Wilson
• Dihedral: 0 Degrees
• Wing Sweep: 10 degrees
• Wing Position: High Wing
• Vertical Tail: 1,275 ft2
67B
• Static Margin: 0.102 – 0.128
• Elevator chord: 30 %
• Vmc: 135.6 kts
• Cnβ = 0.116
• Clβ = -0.002
imber tech – David Wilson68B
69B
Imber tech – Inigo Ripodas70B
Figure 39B: Torrent 19
Wing and Stabilizing Surfaces
S (ft2)
Left Wing 6,947
Right Wing 6,947
Horizontal Stabilizer 6,791
Vertical Stabilizer 2,119
Total 22,804
Table 19A: Wetted Area of Wing and Stabilizing Surfaces
imber tech – Inigo Ripodas71B
Drag estimations modeled for various altitudes:
• From Sea-Level to 40,000 ft in altitude in 10,000 ft increments
Imber tech – Inigo Ripodas72B
imber tech – Inigo Ripodas
• Parasite Drag:• Skin friction
• Miscellaneous
• Leakages & Protuberances
• Wave Drag
• Induced Drag:• “Drag-due-to-lift” factor
73B
• Thrust Required is the same as Total Drag (Assuming SLUF)
• Thrust Available obtained from Infinite Mdot
• Plots from Sea-Level to 40,000 ft
Imber tech – Inigo Ripodas74B
• Thrust Required is the same as Total Drag (Assuming SLUF)
• Thrust Available obtained from Infinite Mdot
• Plots from Sea-Level to 40,000 ft
Imber tech – Inigo Ripodas75B
• Thrust Required is the same as Total Drag (Assuming SLUF)
• Thrust Available obtained from Infinite Mdot
• Plots from Sea-Level to 40,000 ft
Imber tech – Inigo Ripodas76B
• Thrust Required is the same as Total Drag (Assuming SLUF)
• Thrust Available obtained from Infinite Mdot
• Plots from Sea-Level to 40,000 ft
Imber tech – Inigo Ripodas77B
• Thrust Required is the same as Total Drag (Assuming SLUF)
• Thrust Available obtained from Infinite Mdot
• Plots from Sea-Level to 40,000 ft
Imber tech – Inigo Ripodas78B
79B
ṁ - Kyle Klouda
• Fan and Compressor Design• Low- and High-Pressure Turbine Design• Combustor • Labor Hour and Cost Estimation• Conclusions and Recommendations
80B
ṁ81B
ṁ - Troy Killgore
Figure 40B: GE90-85B(http://www.epower-propulsion.com)
82B
ṁ - Troy Killgore
Figure 41B: Trent 800(http://cv01.twirpx.net)
83B
ṁ - Troy Killgore
Figure 42B: PW4084(http://www.pw.utc.com)
84B
ṁ - Troy Killgore
Engine Characteristics
Dry Weight (engine) (lb) 15396
Thrust(dry) (lb) 96240
TSFC(dry) (lbm/hr*lbf) 0.3115
TSFC(cruise) (lbm/hr*lbf) 0.854
Cruise Altitude (feet) 38000
Cruise Speed (Mach) 0.75
Bypass Ratio 7.5
Overall Pressure Ratio 37
Spool No. 2
Fan Stages 1
LPC Stages 4
HPC Stages 9
LPT Stages 5
HPT Stages 2
airflow (lbm/s) 3995.8
Length (inches) 348
Case Diameter (inches) 169.5
Fan Diameter (inches) 136
Table 20B: Dunamis Values
85B
ṁ86B
Figure 43B: Constraint Diagram
(75, 0.62)
Climb
2G Maneuver
Aircraft Stall
ṁ - Troy Killgore87B
• Bleed air for slurry tank pressurization
• Design choices based on similar thrust class turbofan
engines
ṁ - Troy Killgore88B
ṁ - Troy Killgore
Ps ContoursMinimum Time to ClimbMission Profile
(4)
(1)
(2)
(3)
300 500 700 900 1100
40
30
20
10
Figure 44B : Ps Optimization
Alt
itu
de
(kft
)
Velocity (ft/s)
89B
Wing Loading (psf) 75
Thrust Loading 0.62
Aircraft Weight (lbf) 564,396
SLS Installed Thrust (lbf) 349,926
Number of Engines 4
SLS Installed Thrust per Engine (lbf) 87,483
SLS Uninstalled Thrust per Engine (lbf) 96,240
Design Point Mass Flow (lbm/s) 2440.30
Cruise TSFC (lbf/hr*lbm) 0.854
Table 21B: Engine Characteristics
ṁ - Troy Killgore
• 5% overall loss assumed
90B
ṁ91B
ṁ - Kyle Klouda
Figure 45B: Engine Dimensions
92B
ṁ
Figure 46B: Final Inlet Design
93B
ṁ - Cameron Schmitt
Figure 47B: IM-1 DUNAMIS
94B
ṁ - Cameron Schmitt
Figure 48B: Inlet
95B
ṁ - Cameron Schmitt
Figure 49B: IM-1 DUNAMIS
96B
ṁ - Cameron Schmitt
Figure 50B: Blow-In-Door Configurations
97B
ṁ - Cameron Schmitt
Condition PEXT(psi) PINTpsi) ΔP (Psi) Doors
2-G Drop 9.95 8.54 1.41OPEN
T/O 11.17 9.59 1.58OPEN
Climb 10kft 9.95 8.54 1.41OPEN
Climb 17kft 6.60 8.02 -1.42CLOSED
Climb 24kft 4.74 6.21 -1.47CLOSED
Climb 31kft 3.30 4.74 -1.43CLOSED
Cruse 38kft 2.21 3.55 -1.34CLOSED
Climb Out 5.85 7.69 -1.84CLOSED
Table 22B: Pressure Calculations
98B
ṁ - Cameron Schmitt
A1=12076in2
Auxiliary area = 4524 in2
Condition M0 Alt (ft)M1 Φ(%) Φ(%)2-G Drop 0.232 10000 0.553 10.06 2.89T/O 0.232 7000 0.529 9.54 2.57Climb 10kft 0.232 10000 0.553 10.06 2.88Climb 17kft 0.612 17000 0.564 0.21 N/AClimb 24kft 0.658 24000 0.562 0.80 N/AClimb 31kft 0.704 31000 0.558 1.91 N/ACruse 38kft 0.75 38000 0.552 3.64 N/AClimb Out 0.66 19000 0.566 0.78 N/A
D1= 124in (10.33ft)
Table 23B: Install Losses
99B
ṁ - Cameron Schmitt
Figure 51B: Inlet Front View
100B
ṁ - Cameron Schmitt
Figure 52B: Cowling Profile
210in.
68in.62in.
101B
m - Erik Omlid
Figure 53B: Nozzle
102B
m - Erik Omlid
Figure 53B: Nozzle
103B
m - Erik Omlid
Figure 54B: Nozzle Chevrons
104B
m - Erik Omlid
External Nozzles
•EC1: 14 external chevrons (long)
•EC3: 18 external chevrons
•EC2: 14 spoon-shaped chevrons
•EC4: 18 external chevrons
Figure 55B: External Nozzles(http://www.lufthansagroup.com)
105B
m - Erik Omlid
•EC3: 18 external chevrons•IC1: 14 internal chevrons
Figure 56B: Nozzle Selection(http://www.lufthansagroup.com)
106B
m - Erik Omlid
Figure 57B: Core Plug
107B
m - Erik Omlid
Figure 58B: Thrust Reverser Location
108B
m - Erik Omlid
Figure 59B: Nozzle
109B
Takeoff/Landing 1.72%
2k ft/min Climb 1.66%
Cruise 1.58%
2G maneuver 1.68%
Slurry Drop 2.10%
• Based on similar engines
• 5% bogey combined with the inlet
• Mission analysis based on 5% bogey
m - Erik Omlid110B
• Initial Design Parameters
• Component Designs
• Fan
• Booster Compressor
• High Pressure Compressor
ṁ - Courtney Hough111B
• Fan
• Booster Compressor
• High-Pressure Compressor
ṁ - Courtney Hough
Design Point (Sea Level)
Mach 0
Altitude (ft) 0
Temperature (R) 490
Table 24B: Component Design Point
Low-Pressure Compressor
112B
ṁ - Courtney Hough
Figure 60B: Fan Dimensions
*All dimensions in inches
113B
ṁ - Courtney Hough
Figure 61B: Engine Model
114B
ṁ - Courtney Hough
Design Parameter
Stages 3
Pressure (psia) 25.91
Temperature Rise (R) 140.37
Entrance Angle (deg) 0
Tip Radius (in) 34.35
Angular Velocity(rad/s)
282.35
Inlet Mach 0.5
Mass Flow (lbm/s) 399.32
Design Pressure Ratio 1.94
Table 25B: Booster Design Parameters
115B
ṁ -Courtney HoughFigure 62B: Booster Dimensions
*All dimensions in inches
116B
ṁ - Courtney Hough
Design Parameter
Stages 9
Pressure (psia) 50.26
Temperature Rise (R) 812.70
Entrance Angle (deg) 0
Tip Radius (in) 15.94
Angular Velocity(rad/s)
1054
Inlet Mach 0.4
Mass Flow (lbm/s) 399.32
Design Pressure Ratio 10.57
Table 26B: HPC Design Parameters
117B
ṁ - Courtney Hough
Figure 63B: HPC Dimensions
*All dimensions are in inches
118B
ṁ - Courtney Hough
Figure 64B: Fan Model
Figure 66B: HPC Model
Figure 65B: Booster Model119B
ṁ
Figure 67B: Turbine
120B
ṁ - Kevin Walker
Figure 68B: High-Pressure Turbine
121B
ṁ - Kevin Walker
• Materials
• Rim/disk - Nimonic 105
(wrought nickel superalloy)
• Airfoils – Rene’ 80
(nickel-based superalloy)
122B
ṁ - Kevin Walker
• Stage Loading Coefficient: Measure of stage work Typical
Values 1.3 – 2.2
• Flow Coefficient: Measure of ability to allow air through.
Typical Values 0.5 – 1.1
• Velocity Ratio: Ratio of the rotor speed to the equivalent
velocity due to total enthalpy drop.
Typical Values 0.5 – 0.6
123B
ṁ - Kevin Walker
Figure 69B: Low-Pressure Turbine
124B
ṁ - Kevin Walker
• Materials
• Rim/disk - Nimonic 105
(wrought nickel superalloy)
• Airfoils – Rene’ 80
(nickel-based superalloy)
125B
ṁ - Kevin Walker
• Stage Loading Coefficient: Measure of stage work Typical
Values 1.3 – 2.2
• Flow Coefficient: Measure of ability to allow air through.
Typical Values 0.5 – 1.1
• Velocity Ratio: Ratio of the rotor speed to the equivalent
velocity due to total enthalpy drop.
Typical Values 0.5 – 0.6
126B
ṁ127B
ṁ - Jase Heinzeroth
Figure 70B: Combustor Dimensions
128B
ṁ - Jase Heinzeroth
Figure 71B: Combustor
129B
ṁ - Jase Heinzeroth
Figure 72B: Combustor
130B
ṁ - Jase Heinzeroth
Figure 73B: Diffuser Side View
131B
ṁ - Jase Heinzeroth
Figure 74B: Diffuser Profile
132B
ṁ - Jase Heinzeroth
• Hastelloy X • Maximum material temperature: 2400 °R
• Calculated Gas Temperature inside combustor: 3280 °R
133B
ṁ - Jase Heinzeroth
Figure 75B: Combustor Cut
134B
ṁ - Jase Heinzeroth
Figure 76B: PZ Length
135B
ṁ - Jase Heinzeroth
Figure 77B: SZ Length
136B
ṁ - Jase Heinzeroth
Figure 78B: DZ Length
137B
ṁ - Kyle Klouda138B
ṁ - Kyle Klouda
Date Engineering Management Engineering Technical Administration Professional Development Sum Projected
8/30/2013 73.5 73.5 136.5
9/6/2013 5 158.5 237 273
9/13/2013 4 6 164.5 411.5 409.5
9/20/2013 25 31 3 42 126.5 639 546
9/27/2013 4 119.66 762.66 682.5
10/4/2013 10 28 42.3 842.96 819
10/11/2013 12 45 7 14 41.2 962.16 955.5
10/18/2013 30 85 9 52 98 1236.16 1092
10/25/2013 13 102.3 1351.46 1228.5
11/1/2013 11 75 22 1459.46 1365
11/8/2013 15 85 8 1567.46 1501.5
11/15/2013 22 74 12 1675.46 1638
11/22/2013 42 139.33 1856.79 1774.5
11/29/2013 25 87 11 10 3 1992.79 1911
12/6/2013 43 123 9 57 6 2230.79 2047.5
Table 27B: Hours Spent
139B
ṁ - Kyle Klouda140B
ṁ - Kyle Klouda
Table 28B: Hours Spent
Engineering Management 261Engineering 778.33Technical 39Professional Development 875.16Administrative 210.3total 1288.63
141B
ṁ - Kyle Klouda
Table 29B: Costs
Category Hours CostsEngineering Management 261 $26,100 Engineering 778.33 $50,591 Technical 39 $1,560 Administrative 210.3 $4,206 Sub-total 1,289 $82,457 Professional Development 875.16 $43,758 Total 2,164 $126,215
142B
• Research ways to design thrust reversers further
• Research ways to design engine structure and struts
143B
144B
145BImber tech – Kevin Warren
Sea Level
38,000 ft
• Cruise phase of mission
• Mach = 0.75
• Climb rate greater than zero
146Bimber tech – Kevin Warren
• Aircraft designed to withstand adverse weather of wildfires
• Severe up- and down-drafts have caused structural failure in other aircraft
Imber tech – Kevin Warren147B
Figure 79B: Max Thrust Takeoff with 3 engines
Imber tech – Kevin Warren148B
• RFP requires a 2,000 ft/min climb to 10,000 ft
• IAB requires a 100 ft/min climb with one engine inoperative upon takeoff
• Max rate-of-climb based on thrust, drag, weight and flight velocity
• At max thrust (sea-level) and minimum drag
Imber tech – Kevin Warren149B
Imber tech – Kevin Warren150B
Figure 80B: Torrent 19
• Flaps at 20 degrees
• Spoilers and Thrust Reversers
• Max Braking
Figure 81B: Landing Performance
Imber tech – Kevin Warren151B
152B
• Engines: $15 million each
• 40 years in service• 50 missions per year
• 2 airframes for static testing
153BImber tech – Kevin Warren
Table 30B: Labor Hours
Imber tech – Kevin Warren154B
Table 31B: Hours Spent
Category Hours
Management 359.2
Engineering 707.1
Technical 478.75
Administration 233.75
Subtotal 1778.8
Professional Development 674.75
Total 2453.55
Imber tech – Kevin Warren155B
Table 32B: Costs
Category Cost
Management $35,920
Engineering $45,961.5
Technical $19,150
Administration$4,675
Subtotal $105,706.5
Professional Development$33,737.5
Total $139,444
Imber tech – Kevin Warren156B
157B
• Structure:
• Analyze door system structure to ensure tail support is adequate
• Investigate different gear-door configurations
• Further define and analyze internal support structure
• S&C:• Analyze tail structure for feasibility, investigate reducing
areas
• Analyze engine placement
• Build scale model and perform wind tunnel testing to test and analyze performance characteristics
158BImber tech – Kevin Warren
159B