Hostname: page-component-669899f699-2mbcq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-27T03:36:14.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evolution of generic flight vehicle design synthesis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

B. Chudoba  and
W. Heinze
B. Chudoba
Affiliation:
chudoba@uta.edu, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA
W. Heinze
Affiliation:
Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

When defining a new product like an aircraft, space access vehicle or space mission, the Advanced Projects Group evaluates the available design space and compares it with the design space required to accomplish the specified mission. As with any product development process, the general life-cycle characteristics are established first during the conceptual design (CD) phase, clearly before a design proposal can be released to the follow-on design phases such as preliminary design (PD), detail design (DD), flight test (FT), and finally operation and disposal. As a rule of thumb, it can be assumed that around 80% of the flight vehicle configuration and mission tandem are determined during the CD phase alone, which is the key phase where the initial brainstorming has to take place. Clearly, it is the responsibility of the CD team to simulate the entire life-cycle of the project from ‘cradle to grave’ where the focus is on correctness rather accuracy in order to identify the design space and offer an overall proof of design convergence. Currently, the important primary aerospace vehicle and mission design decisions at CD level are still made using extremely simple analysis and heuristics. A reason for this scenario is the difficulty in synthesising the range of individual design disciplines for both, classical and novel aerospace vehicle conceptual designs, in more than an ad hoc fashion. Although the CD segment is seen as the most important step in the product development phase due to its pre-defining function, it is the least well understood part of the entire product evolution process due to its level of abstraction. This paper presents the roadmap towards the next generation of aerospace life-cycle synthesis systems, a software and management process capable to immediately calculate cost and time implications while simultaneously linking design, manufacturing, testing, and operation. A historical review of how design has been accomplished until today is presented. The design approaches are categorised and the characteristics of today’s state-of-the-art design synthesis systems are discussed. A specification for the new class of intelligent generic design synthesis systems is presented capable of satisfying the demands imposed by the new breed of high-performance aircraft, space access vehicles, space missions, and others. Finally, the development status of the next generation aerospace vehicle design synthesis (AVDS-PrADO) simulation-based acquisition environment is presented.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 114 , Issue 1159 , September 2010 , pp. 549 - 567
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2010 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Newhouse, J., The Sporty Game, 1982, First edition, Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
2. Lynn, M., Birds of Prey – Boeing vs Airbus: A Battle for the Skies, April 1997, First edition, Four Walls Eight Windows.Google Scholar
3. Hannigan, R.J., Spaceflight in the Era of Aero-Space Planes, 1994, First edition, Krieger Publishing Company.Google Scholar
4. London, J.R., LEO on the Cheap – Methods for Achieving Drastic Reductions in Space Launch Costs, 2002, Reprinted edition, Books for Business.Google Scholar
5. Abrams, M., et al Space 2100 – To Mars and Beyond in the Century to Come, 2003, First edition, Bishop Books.Google Scholar
6. Kondo, Y. and Bruhweiler, F., et al (EDS). Interstellar Travel and Multi-Generation Space Ships, 2003, First edition, Apogee Books.Google Scholar
7. Mallove, E. and Matloff, G., The Starflight Handbook – A Pioneer’s Guide to Interstellar Travel, 1989, First edition, Wiley Science Editions, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
8. Straub, W.L., Managerial implications of computerized aircraft design synthesis, J Aircr, March 1974, 11, (3), pp 129–135.Google Scholar
9. Chudoba, B., Stability and Control of Conventional and Unconventional Aircraft Configurations – A Generic Approach, April 2001, First edition, Books on Demand.Google Scholar
10. Chudoba, B., Managerial implications of generic flight vehicle synthesis, 2004, Invited lecture, New Airplane Product Development, The Boeing Company, Renton, Seattle, 17 December 2004 Google Scholar
11. Chudoba, B., Huang, X., Coleman, G. and Czysz, P.A., Future space tourism transportation design requirements, 2005, AIAA Paper, AIAA-2005-3445, AIAA/CIRA International Space Planes and Hypersonic System and Technologies Conference 16-20 May 2005, Capua, Italy.Google Scholar
12. Stollery, J., Aerodynamics, past, present and future, The Sydney Goldstein Memorial Lecture, 1 November 1995, College of Aeronautics, Cranfield University.Google Scholar
13. Prem, H., Co-operation know-how in high-tech products, 1986, Binational Conference, University Hohenheim, Stuttgart, 16-17 October 1986, Forschung und Entwicklung – Technisch-Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen 1956-1987 – Ein Rück-und Ausblick, Jubiläumsausgabe anläßlich des 75, Geburtstag von Dipl.-Ing. Dr.-Ing. E.h. Ludwig Bölkow, MBB, 1987.Google Scholar
14. Rich, B.R. and Janos, L., Skunk Works – A Personal Memoir of My Years at Lockheed, 1994, First edition, Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
15. Hayward, K., The World Aerospace Industry – Collaboration and Competition, 1994, First Edition, Duckworth & RUSI.Google Scholar
16. Scott, W.B., Industry’s loss of expertise spurs counterattack, aerospace in crisis, Av Week & Space Tech, 13 March 2000, pp 60–61.Google Scholar
17. Anderson, J.D., Aircraft Performance and Design, 1999, First edition, WCB, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
18. Loftin, L.K., Quest for Performance – The Evolution of Modern Aircraft, 1985, NASA SP-468, NASA Scientific and Technical Information Branch.Google Scholar
19. Van Hengst, J., (728JET Chief Engineer), Private conversation, January 2000, Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH.Google Scholar
20. Bavitz, P.C., So you want to be an aircraft designer?!, Aerospace America, February 1964.Google Scholar
21. Kingsley-Jones, M. and Lewis, P., Airbus’ A3XX economics target ‘unachievable’, says Boeing, Flight Int, 22-28 September 1999, p 8.Google Scholar
22. Anon, , Pierson warns on A3XX costs, Flight Int, 4-10 March 1998, p 8.Google Scholar
23. Cook, W.H., The Road to the 707 – The Inside Story of Designing the 707, 1991, First edition, TYC Publishing Company, Bellevue, Washington.Google Scholar
24. Jones, B.M., The streamline aeroplane, Aeronaut J, 1929, 33, (221), pp 358–385.Google Scholar
25. Richards, E.J., A review of aerodynamic cleanness, Aeronaut J, 1950, 54, pp 137–186.Google Scholar
26. Gabrielli, G. and Von Kármán, T., What price speed? – specific power required for propulsion of vehicles, Mech Eng, October 1950, pp 775–781.Google Scholar
27. Poll, D.I.A. and Chudoba, B., Prospects in commercial aircraft design – evolution or revolution, 1998, FITEC’98: Farnborough International Technology Exploitation Conference, 8-10 September 1998, London (oral only).Google Scholar
28. Poll, D.I.A., Are we on the right evolutionary track for the 21st century?, 1997, Royal Aeronautical Society Goldstein Lecture, Manchester University.Google Scholar
29. Hilbig, R., Das Technologiekonzept ‘Adaptiver Flügel’, 2000, DASA Airbus Bremen, Presentation at Technical University Munich, 17 February 2000.Google Scholar
30. Yong, J., et al. What price speed – revisited, Ingenia, 22, March 2005, pp 46–51.Google Scholar
31. Boyne, W.J., Beyond the Horizons – The Lockheed Story, 1998, first edition, St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
32. Anon, , Company overview – about Skunk Works Palmdale, Lockheed Martin, http://www.skunkworks.net/company_overview.html.Google Scholar
33. Anon, , Phantom Works: the Advanced R&D Unit of Boeing, September 1998, The Boeing Company, http://www.boeing.com/news/feature/farn98/pworks.html.Google Scholar
34. Jenkinson, L.R., Simpkin, P. and Rhodes, D., Civil Jet Aircraft Design, 1999, First edition, Arnold.Google Scholar
35. Brown, E.M., Wings of the Weird & Wonderful, 1983, First Edition, Vol 1, Airlife Publishing.Google Scholar
36. Kroo, I., Reinventing the airplane: new concepts for flight in the 21st century, December 1995, Presentation.Google Scholar
37. Sterk, F.J. and Torenbeek, E., (EDS) Unconventional aircraft concepts, April 1987, Papers presented at a symposium organised by The Netherlands Association of Aeronautical Engineers (NVvL) and the Students Society ‘Leonardo da Vinci’, Delft University of Technology, First Edition, Delft University Press.Google Scholar
38. Jagger, D.H., (Former Head of Future Projects, BAe Airbus, Filton), 1994, Private Conversation, BAe Airbus.Google Scholar
39. Wood, D., Project Cancelled – British Aircraft That Never Flew, 1975, First US printing, Bobbs-Merrill Company.Google Scholar
40. Pape, G.R. and Campbell, J.M., Northrop Flying Wings – A History of Jack Northrop’s Visionary Aircraft, 1995, First edition, Schiffer Publishing.Google Scholar
41. Bushnell, D.M., (Chief Scientist NASA Langley Research Center), December 1998, Private conversation, Cranfield University.Google Scholar
42. Chudoba, B. and Huang, X., Development of a dedicated aerospace vehicle conceptual design knowledge-based system, 2006, AIAA Paper, AIAA-2006-0225, Reno, 9-12 January 2006.Google Scholar
43. Szodruch, J., Aircraft efficiency – investment for the future, 1997, Daimler-Benz Aerospace Airbus.Google Scholar
44. Bushnell, D.M., Frontiers of the ‘responsibly imaginable’ in civilian aeronautics, January 1998, AIAA Paper, AIAA-98-0001.Google Scholar
45. Liebeck, R.H., Page, M.A. and Rawdon, B.K., Blended-wing-body subsonic commercial transport, in Future aeronautical and space systems, Noor, A.K. and Venneri, S.L. (eds), Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1997, 172, AIAA.Google Scholar
46. Phillips, E.H., NASA to fly sub-scale blended wing body, Av Week & Space Tech, 7 February 2000 Google Scholar
47. Anon, , Global range aircraft, 10 February 1998, FAS – Military Analysis Network, http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/gra.htm.Google Scholar
48. Norris, G., US supersonic effort faces axe, Flight Int, 9-15 December 1998.Google Scholar
49. Davies, R.E.G., Supersonic (Airliner) Non-Sense – A Case Study in Applied Market Research, 1998, First Edition, Paladwr Press.Google Scholar
50. Sobieczky, H. (ed). New Design Concepts For High Speed Air Transport, 1997, CISM Courses and Lectures, No 366, First edition, Springer.Google Scholar
51. Bruner, H.S., SSBJ: a technological challenge, ICAO J, August 1991.Google Scholar
52. Czysz, P., Hypersonic convergence, December 2004, Vol 1, AFRL-VA-WP-TR-2004-3114, Air Force Research Laboratory.Google Scholar
53. Sarsfield, K., Kitted for flight – UK kit-maker Europa Aircraft is revolutionising personal aircraft, Flight Int, 11-17 January 2000, pp 38–39.Google Scholar
54. Nicolai, L.M., Fundamentals of Aircraft Design, 1975, First edition, METS.Google Scholar
55. Torenbeek, E., Synthesis of Subsonic Airplane Design, 1982, Reprint, Delft University Press.Google Scholar
56. Moore, W.F., A model for the configuration integration process, 1995, AIAA Paper 95–3905.Google Scholar
57. Hollowell, S. and Bitten, R., Application of multidisciplinary optimization to conceptual aircraft design at Rockwell International – a status report, February 1992, AIAA Paper 92–1196.Google Scholar
58. Bölkow, L., Ein Jahrhundert Flugzeuge – Geschichte und Technik des Fliegens, 1990, First edition, VDI Verlag.Google Scholar
59. Heinzerling, W. and Trischler, H. (eds), Otto Lilienthal – Flugpionier, Ingenieur, Unternehmer, 1991, First edition, Bertelsmann Lexikon Verlag.Google Scholar
60. Crouch, T., The Bishop’s Boys – A Life of Wilbur and Orville Wright, 1989, First edition, W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
61. Lovell, D.A., Some experiences with numerical optimisation in aircraft specification and preliminary design studies, 1980, ICAS Paper 80-2.4.Google Scholar
62. von Mises, R., Fluglehre, 1933, First edition, Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
63. Loftin, L.K., Subsonic aircraft: evolution and the matching of size to performance, August 1980, NASA RP 1060.Google Scholar
64. Cherry, H.H. and Croshere, A.B., An approach to the analytical design of aircraft, SAE Quarterly Transactions, January 1948, 2, (1).Google Scholar
65. Driggs, I.V., Aircraft design analysis, Aeronaut J, February 1950, pp 65–116.Google Scholar
66. Jensen, S.C. and Rettie, I.H., ET AL Role of figures of merit in design optimization and technology assessment, J Aircr, February 1981, 18, (2), pp 76–81.Google Scholar
67. Schmit, L.A., Structural design by systematic synthesis, 1960, Proceedings of Second Conference on Electronic Computation ASCE Google Scholar
68. Healey, M.J. and Kowalik, J.S., et al. Airplane engine selection by optimisation on surface fit approximations, AIAA J Aircr, 1975, 12, (7).Google Scholar
69. Boyles, R.Q., Aircraft design augmented by a man-computer graphic system, J Aircr, 1968, 5, (5), pp 486–497.Google Scholar
70. Van der Velden, A., Multi-disciplinary supersonic transport design, 1997, Chapter 17 in New Design Concepts for High Speed Air Transport, Sobieczky, H. (ed), First edition, CISM Courses and Lectures No 366, Springer.Google Scholar
71. Jenkinsson, L.R. and Rhodes, D.P., Application of spreadsheet analysis programs to university projects in aircraft design, 1995, AIAA Paper, AIAA-95-3868.Google Scholar
72. Huang, X., Chudoba, B. and Coleman, G., A Generic hands-on conceptual design methodology applied to a tourist space access vehicle, 2006, AIAA Paper, AIAA-2006-1242, Reno, 9-12 January 2006.Google Scholar
73. Küchemann, D., The Aerodynamic Design of Aircraft, 1978, First edition, Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
74. Burgess, M.A., The future of aircraft design, Aerospace America, September 1991, pp 22–25.Google Scholar
75. Chudoba, B., Aircraft conceptual design tool development – specification for an aircraft conceptual design synthesis methodology, 22 November 2000, E02-116/2000, Future Projects & Technologies E02, Fairchild Dornier.Google Scholar
76. Chudoba, B., Energy for cruising flight, May 2005, AME 4593/5593, Lecture Notes Space Systems & Mission Design, Spring Semester 2005, University of Oklahoma.Google Scholar
77. Werner-Westphal, C., Heinze, W. and Horst, P., Multidisciplinary integrated preliminary design applied to unconventional aircraft configuration, AIAA J Aircr, 2008, 45, (2), pp 581–590.Google Scholar
78. Burdun, I., Theory, implementation and proof-of-concept study of flight safety‚ topology’ knowledge maps for accident prediction and prevention, 2005, EWHSFF 2005 Conference, 19-22 October 2005, Beijing, China.Google Scholar