DOUBLE WING AIRCRAFT
20200156787 ยท 2020-05-21
Inventors
Cpc classification
Y02T50/10
GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
B64C3/32
PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
International classification
Abstract
The present invention is a double wing aircraft with two fixed wings embodied as either a flying wing configuration or a double wing configuration having a fuselage with smaller external dimensions, larger airlifting area, thinner airfoils, and lighter airframe relative to prior art that altogether is resulting with lower drag, fuel consumption, harmful emissions, and noise, as well as higher speed and flight safety, longer range, and shorter runway when compared to prior art.
Claims
1. A double wing aircraft comprising: a. a front wing lifting surface defined by: i. a low aspect ratio less than 4.5; ii. a high taper with a taper ratio less than 0.2; b. a rear wing lifting surface with an area that is 40% to 100% of the front wing lifting surface area defined by: i. a low aspect ratio less than 56.5; ii. a high taper with a taper ratio less than 0.2; c. at least one connecting element joining the front wing and the rear wing; d. an aircraft gravity center; e. a front wing mean aerodynamic chord with a leading and trailing edge having a front wing air pressure center located forward of 35% of the front wing mean aerodynamic chord in cruise and a rear wing mean aerodynamic chord with a leading and trailing edge having a rear wing air pressure center located forward of 35% of the rear wing mean aerodynamic chord in cruise wherein the rear wing mean aerodynamic chord leading edge is located aft of the front wing mean aerodynamic chord trailing edge at a short distance that is less than the length of the front wing mean aerodynamic chord, the aircraft gravity center is located forward of the rear wing lifting surface air pressure center and aft of the front wing lifting surface air pressure center in cruise; whereby the front wing aspect ratio, the front wing taper ratio, the rear wing aspect ratio, the rear wing taper ratio, the ratio between the front wing and rear wing lifting surface areas, the front wing air pressure center location, the rear wing air pressure location, and the distance between the front wing mean aerodynamic chord trailing edge and the rear wing mean aerodynamic chord leading edge are the mutually supported critical geometric and aerodynamic variables for the improvement of double wing aircraft cruise flight efficiency, the aircraft gravity center location in flight direction is an additional independent variable that is used in conjunction with other geometric and aerodynamic variables for additional improvement of double wing aircraft cruise flight efficiency; the low aspect ratios of the front and rear wing lifting surfaces for their given respective wing spans result with increased front and rear wing lifting surface areas due to elongated wing chords across their respective wing spans, thus further resulting with increased length of the front and rear wing mean aerodynamic chords, the elongated front and rear wing chords result with the reduction of skin friction drag coefficients of the front and rear wing and additionally allowing for the reduction of airfoil relative thickness of the front and rear wing across their respective wing spans; the increased front and rear wing lifting surface areas require lower cruise lift coefficient that with the square value thereof decrease induced drag coefficient and together with reduced airfoil relative thickness exponentially reducing compression and wave drag coefficient at high subsonic speeds; the increased front wing lifting surface area with elongated chords increasing front wing ground effect when the aircraft is flying close to the ground and thereby preventing rough landing, thus allowing for the reduction of landing gear weight, the increased front wing ground effect further reducing takeoff speed, and consequently reducing either takeoff runway length or engine thrust and weight; the front wing high taper and the rear wing high taper shift the respective resultants of front wing and rear wing lifting forces toward their respective front and rear wing roots, thus reducing bending momentums across the front and rear wing spans that allow for the reduction of structural weight of the front and rear wing; the front wing high taper and the rear wing high taper increase the rate of elongation of the respective front and rear wing chord lengths approaching wing roots, thus further increasing the structural resistance to reduced bending momentums and allowing for further reduction of airfoil relative thickness approaching wing roots of the front and rear wing, which wing roots experience highest bending momentums; the increased front wing lifting surface area generating higher positive front wing lifting forces in cruise, the forward shift of the front wing air pressure center where the resultant of the front wing lifting forces is located along with the elongated front wing mean aerodynamic chord together increase the distance of the resultant of the front wing cruise lifting forces from the gravity center, thus both increased positive front wing cruise lifting forces and the increased distance of front wing air pressure center from the gravity center substantially increasing the positive front wing pitch momentum in cruise; the forward shift of the rear wing air pressure center where the resultant of the rear wing lifting forces is located along with the elongated rear wing mean aerodynamic chord together with the shorter distance between front wing mean aerodynamic chord trailing edge and the rear wing mean aerodynamic chord leading edge shift the rear wing air pressure center and the resultant of the rear wing cruise lifting forces substantially forward toward the gravity center, thus the substantially increased positive front wing cruise pitch momentum and the substantial shift of the resultant of the rear wing cruise lifting forces forward toward the gravity center compel the rear wing lifting surface to create higher rear wing positive cruise lifting forces to establish and maintain the required static pitch stability of the double wing aircraft in cruise, the required higher rear wing positive lifting forces in cruise are obtained by the increase of the ratio between the rear and front wing lifting surface areas until the rear wing generate approximately the same cruise lift coefficient as the front wing; the mutually supported critical geometric and aerodynamic variables with their suggested numerical values altogether are simultaneously substantially increasing structural, lift, and aerodynamic efficiency, thus consequently substantially increasing the cruise flight efficiency of double wing aircraft relative to prior art.
2. (canceled)
3. (canceled)
4. (canceled)
5. (canceled)
6. The double wing aircraft of claim 1, wherein the connecting element is a fuselage for payload accommodation.
7. (canceled)
8. The double wing aircraft of claim 1, wherein at least two vertically oriented slender connecting elements are joining the front and rear wing with the front wing enclosure accommodating payload.
9-20. (canceled)
Description
SHORT DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS
[0044]
[0045]
[0046]
[0047]
[0048]
[0049]
[0050]
TABLE-US-00001 REFERENCE NUMERALS IN DRAWINGS 100 Double Wing Aircraft 110 Line of Symmetry 120 Aircraft Gravity Center 130 Lateral Connecting Elements 140 Fuselage Connecting Element 150 Externally Attached Engines 160 Internally Integrated Engines 162 Engine Fan 164 Engine Air Intake 170 Rear Landing Gears 172 Front Landing Gears 175 Hydrodynamic Floats 180 Payload Cabin 190 Fin With Rudder 195 Winglet Fin With Rudder 200 Front Wing 210 Front Wing Leading Edge 220 Front Wing Trailing Edge 222 Front Wing Trailing Edge Lateral Segments 224 Front Wing Trailing Edge Central Segment 226 Front Wing Trailing Edge Farthest Aft Point 230 Front Wing Mean Aerodynamic Chord 235 Front Wing Mean Aerodynamic Chord Leading Edge 236 Front Wing Mean Aerodynamic Chord Trailing Edge 240 Front Wing Trailing Section 242 Front Wing Trailing Section Lateral Elements 252 Front Wing Trailing Section Lateral Ends 260 Front Wing Air Pressure Center 300 Rear Wing 310 Rear Wing Leading Edge 312 Rear Wing Leading Edge Farthest Forward Point 314 Rear Wing Leading Edge Lateral Segments 316 Rear Wing Leading Edge Central Segment 320 Rear Wing Trailing Edge 322 Rear Wing Trailing Edge Farthest Aft Point 330 Rear Wing Mean Aerodynamic Chord 335 Rear Wing Mean Aerodynamic Chord Leading Edge 336 Rear Wing Mean Aerodynamic Chord Trailing Edge 340 Rear Wing Central Section 342 Rear Wing Central Section Leading Portion 344 Rear Wing Central Section Trailing Portion 350 Rear Wing Lateral Sections 352 Rear Wing Lateral Sections Free Inner Ends 354 Longest Rear Wing Chord 360 Rear Wing Air Pressure Center
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0051] The present invention is a double wing aircraft for mass commercial air transportation with front and rear wing being mutually arranged in flight direction and embodied as a fuselage or flying wing version with bulky payload including passengers and cargo being accommodated inside the fuselage or wing respectively while a propulsion system is primarily joined the rear wing by being either attached on the top thereof or integrated within. The double wing aircraft can be also designed for take-off and landing over the ground or water as a hydroplane.
[0052] In accordance with the present invention, apparatus and methods of carrying bulky payload in an efficient double wing aircraft are presented.
[0053] In the following description, for purposes of explanation and not limitation, specific details are set forth in order to provide a more thorough understanding of the present invention. However, it will be apparent to one skilled in the art that the present invention may be practiced in other embodiments that depart from these specific details. In other instances, detailed descriptions of well-known methods and devices are omitted so as to not obscure the description of the present invention with unnecessary detail.
[0054]
[0055] The shape and size of front wing 200 is defined by the shape of front wing leading edge 210 and trailing edge 220, as well as their mutual distance in flight direction that is affecting front wing aspect ratio, which is recommended to be under 4. The aspect ratio of front wing 200 in
[0056] The shape and size of rear wing 300 that has approximately the same wing span as front wing 200 is defined with leading edge 310 and trailing edge 320 with aspect ratio being approximately 3.2 as shown in
[0057] The resultant of front wing airlifting forces F.sub.LFW is positioned at the front wing air pressure center 260 that is located in front of gravity center 120 while the resultant of rear wing airlifting forces F.sub.LRW is positioned at the rear wing air pressure center 360 that is located behind gravity center 120 as shown in
[0058] Front wing air pressure center 260 is in front of 35% of front wing mean aerodynamic chord 230 from front wing mean aerodynamic chord leading edge 235. The same applies to rear wing air pressure center 360 that is in front of 35% of rear wing mean aerodynamic chord 330 from rear wing mean aerodynamic chord leading edge 335 as shown in
[0059] The longitudinal positions of air pressure centers 260 and 360 depend on the geometry of local airfoils across the span of front wing 200 and rear wing 300 respectively. Efficient airfoils with aft camber that have a high lift coefficient and more shifted air pressure center in aft direction at low cruise attack angles are not favorable for front wing 200 of double wing aircraft 100 as the lift efficiency of rear wing 300 would be lower while a high lift coefficient of large front wing 200 would generate high induced, compression, and wave drag. For that reason, double wing aircraft are using more balanced airfoils with forward shifted air pressure centers at cruise attack angles with a lower cruise lift coefficient to reduce major induced, compression, and wave drag of front wing 200 while the total cruise lift of aircraft would be restored by a higher lift production of large rear wing 300 by using similar airfoils as on front wing 200.
[0060] The extremely elongated chords, especially of front wing 200 of flying wing version as shown in
[0061] A relatively wide range of recommended geometric and aerodynamic variables including aspect ratio, mutual size and distance between front wing 200 and rear wing 300, as well as the longitudinal position of their air pressure centers is due to their complimentary use during optimization with different preferential priorities related to preferred flight performance of double wing aircraft 100.
[0062]
[0063] When comparing the double wing aircraft 100 with fuselage as shown in
[0064] Front wing 200 with much longer chords compared to prior art is integrated with the bottom of the fuselage 140, thus covering a wide area of the fuselage's bottom surface, whereby forming a wide and long integral lower surface of front wing 200 and fuselage 140 close to the ground, thus generating a substantial ground effect and therefore resulting with much shorter take-off runway when compared to prior art. Rear wing 300 is connected to the top of rear portion of fuselage 140 to avoid turbulent airflow behind front wing 200. High lateral aerodynamic reflection of the large fuselage and absence of lateral connecting elements 130 in
[0065] The double wing aircraft with fuselage is generally less efficient than flying wing version of double wing aircraft 100 due to smaller airlifting area of both front wing 200 and rear wing 300 for the same span that are discontinued by a wide fuselage and due to an added large parasitic area of fuselage 140, as well as fin and rudder 190. However, it is more suitable for accommodation of bulky payload for smaller size aircraft of up to 150 passengers since flying wing version of double wing aircraft 100 of that size would require much higher relative thickness of front wing airfoils in order to provide for a sufficient height of payload cabin, which would substantially increase compression and wave drag at higher speeds of the flying wing version when compared to double wing aircraft with fuselage.
[0066]
[0067] Large and heavy rear wing 300 with engines 150 and payload cabin 180 accommodated inside rear wing 300 are shifting the gravity center 120 very close to the front wing trailing edge 220, thus rear landing gears 170 that must be located behind gravity center would be impossible to attach to front wing 200 for aircraft shown in
[0068]
[0069]
[0070] Front wing trailing section 240 about line of symmetry 110 is having two lateral elements 242 as shown in cross-section I-I of
[0071] Initially short trailing section 240 that is bound by the central segment 224 as shown with dash lines in
[0072] The rear wing 300 inside the airlifting surface of trailing portion 344 of rear wing central section 340 is accommodating aircraft engines 160 about the line of symmetry 110 side-by-side between front wing lateral elements 242 as shown in cross section view I-I, as well as
[0073] The integration of engines 160 inside the airlifting surface of trailing portion 344 is eliminating the parasitic drag of engine pylons while side-by-side mutual position of engines 160 with air intakes 164 that border each other is substantially increasing the entry area of air intakes 164 as shown in cross section I-I in
[0074] The deep cut-out of leading portion 342 along with the rear wing leading edge central segment 316 as shown in
[0075] The lateral ends of air intakes 164 as shown in
[0076] The aft extension of trailing section 240 is generating many positive side effects: [0077] Extension of payload cabin, whereby increasing the payload capacity of double wing of aircraft as shown in
[0081]
[0082] The solution with separate engine assemblies 150 relative to the solution with integrated engines 160 has positive and negative aspects.
[0083] The positive aspect is that it is allowing to select the optimal size, number, and position of engines while the restored leading edge 316 of trailing portion 344 substantially increasing the efficiency of trailing portion 344 for lift production, as well as natural and commanded pitch control and stability of aircraft.
[0084] The negative side effects of the solution with separate engines 150 are related to the increased parasitic wetted area and weight of engine aerodynamic covers and pylons, as well as lower aerodynamic efficiency of separate engine air intakes and consequently lower engine fuel efficiency at higher cruising speeds and altitude relative to air intakes 164 of engines 160 that are shown in