Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Advance Seaplane Conceptual Design Adapting Trimaran Boat Hull Concept PDF
Advance Seaplane Conceptual Design Adapting Trimaran Boat Hull Concept PDF
1 Introduction
concept,
trimaran
design
theory
and
conventional flying boat theory will be blended
together to obtain the most optimum trimaran
design for this seaplane.
Finally, the main goals that should be
attained to acquire the desire design will be
focused on the following:
1. The seaplane should acquire an outstanding
hydrostatic stability in order to excel during
the water taxing operations, hence the
trimaran concept.
2. The advance design will have the capability
to operate in rough, high wave waters,
giving the seaplane more water options in
which to operate.
3. The increase in aerodynamic drag caused
by the extra components should not
compromise the flight performance of the
seaplane, hence the retracting undercarriage
floats.
4. Water Performance and Air Performance
should be comparable to that of a speed
boat and a speed aircraft, in order to attain
the best of both designs.
5. Finally, all structural components would be
analyzed thoroughly in order to meet all
requirements.
3.2 Sizing Code Development
A sizing mathematical code developed in
MATLAB was created in order to run specific
theoretical calculations that will be necessary to
size the optimum seaplane trimaran design. The
sizing code is set up to work with a number of
different aircraft configurations which would be
converted into a seaplane configuration. The
mathematical code will be elaborated in a
fashion were the main inputs will focus the
existing landplane parameters (Gross Weight,
Wing Characteristics, Power plants, Aircraft
Geometry). When given the known input
parameters, the code outputs all major trimaran
component geometries, hydrostatic estimation,
component drag estimates, and mission water
and air performance characteristics. The code is
then put into a loop, where it compares the
difference between the initial gross weight
estimate and the gross weight calculated based
on the trimaran geometry and performance
(2)
0.0525
0.0675
0.0825
0.0975
( 13 )
4 Results
To obtained desire results, the use of typical
data from an existing aircraft was researched. A
series of common features were analyzed that
are essential in order to conduct this advance
seaplane design; a high wing configuration,
engines with Short Takeoff or Landing (STOL)
capability, and have cargo space. From the
research conducted the input data of this typical
aircraft is shown in Table 2.
Gross Weight [kg]
6,600
3,960
1,300
1,710
14.47
1.92
Wing Area [m ]
34.86
CLmax
1.63
Aluminum
Composites
Seaplane
Seaplane
Hull
Float
Trimaran
Seaplane
0.44
Twin
Float
0.44
Draft Line
0.47
0.46
0.46
Center of
Buoyancy
Center of Gravity
0.26
0.24
0.24
0.25
0.25
0.85
0.37
0.42
0.83
1.84
Metacentre
Transverse
Metacentre
Longitudinal
Metacentric
Height Transverse
Metacentric
Height Long
0.45
0.04
6.99
1.83
1.83
22.92
5.98
12.93
20.82
20.82
-0.14
-0.09
6.82
1.26
0.24
22.33
5.85
12.75
20.25
19.23
MTOW
6,600
6,600
6,600
Boat Hull
745
370
Floats
540
270
Landing Gear
380
Empty Weight
3,960
4,865
4,220
Max Payload
1,710
1,710
1,710
Max Fuel
1,300
1,300
1,300
930
25
670
1,340
435
1,080
Outrigger
Slenderness Ratio
7.13
12
Spray Coefficient
0.0974
0.08
Beam [m]
2.03
0.59
Length [m]
14.47
7.13
Forebody [m]
6.99
3.38
Afterbody [m]
7.48
3.75
1.32
0.53
0.18
0.05
Forebody Angle
30
45o
Afterbody Angle
22o
40o
Volume [m3]
19.33
1.51
16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
-2000
2.2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Angle of Inclination [deg]
70
80
90
x 10
TA at 0
TA at 1,000
TA at 2,000
TA at 3,000
TA at 4,000
TA at 5,000
TA at 6,000
TA at 10,000
TR of Aircraft
TR of Seaplane [Ext]
TR of Seaplane [Ret]
2
1.8
Flat Plate
Drag Area
Breakdown
[m2]
Fuselage
Wing
Horizontal
Tail
Vertical Tail
Engines
Subtotal
Boat Hull
Floats
Total
Aircraft
Seaplane
Seaplane
Seaplane
[Extended]
[Retracted]
[No Floats]
0.144
0.144
0.144
0.144
0.303
0.303
0.303
0.303
0.074
0.074
0.074
0.074
0.052
0.052
0.052
0.052
0.095
0.095
0.095
0.095
1.109
1.109
1.109
1.109
0.000
0.240
0.200
0.200
0.000
0.082
0.057
0.000
1.109
1.440
1.368
1.310
0.0318
0.0413
0.0392
0.0376
0.0095
0.0074
0.0058
6850
8898
8448
8095
1.6
Thrust [N]
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
20
40
60
Velocity [m/s]
80
100
120
Seaplane
[Ext]
0.32
Seaplane
[Rect]
0.32
Climb [min]
12.35
13.86
13.24
Cruising [hr]
2.46
1.90
2.09
Descent [min]
19.17
19.20
19.19
Landing [min]
0.39
3.61
3.62
Total [hr]
3.08
2.60
2.77
Landplane
Seaplane
[Rect]
0.55
Cd
Cd Increment
Drag [N]
Drag Increase
23.02%
18.92%
15.39%
Endurance
Landplane
Takeoff [min]
Takeoff [km]
0.56
Seaplane
[Ext]
0.55
Climb [km]
42.12
45.48
43.79
Cruising [km]
936.35
720.79
792.33
Descent [km]
95.94
95.94
95.94
Landing [km]
0.77
2.45
2.45
1075.74
865.20
935.05
Range
Total [km]
10000
10
Froude Number
Altitude [m]
8000
0
10
3
4
5
Max Climb Speed [m/s]
200
0
20
25
Velocity [m/s]
30
35
40
45
5 Conclusions
2000
15
4000
Payload [kg]
6000
200
400
600
Range [km]
800
1000
1200
References
[1] The first seaplane, google.com 2011;
http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/fabre.html
[Cited August 13, 2011]
[2] Syed, Huda, Amphibian Aircraft Concept Design
Study, Dept of Aerospace Engineering, University
of Glasgow, 2009.
[3] MacGregor Garcia, G. K., Future Seaplane
Traffic, Dept of Aerospace Engineering, University
of Glasgow, 2009.
[4] Cronin Millar Consulting Engineers, Seaplane
Environmental Impact Information Report, The
Mews Cobh Co. Cork, 21 Dec 2009
[5] Seaplane Environmental Impact google.com 2011;
http://www.usace.army.mil/environment/Pages/home
.aspx [Cited Feb 3, 2011]
[6] Langley, Marcus, Seaplane Float and Hull Design,
Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, LTD, London, UK, 1935
[7] Mohanty, Pratabidya Concept Design of Seaplane
Hulls, Department of Aerospace, University of
Glasgow, 2011
[8] Bertorello, C., Bruzzone, D., Cassella, P., Zotti, I.
Trimaran Model Test Results and Comparison with
Copyright Statement
The authors confirm that they, and/or their company or
organization, hold copyright on all of the original material
included in this paper. The authors also confirm that they
have obtained permission, from the copyright holder of
any third party material included in this paper, to publish
it as part of their paper. The authors confirm that they
give permission, or have obtained permission from the
copyright holder of this paper, for the publication and
distribution of this paper as part of the ICAS2012
proceedings or as individual off-prints from the
proceedings.
10