International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Applications

2016; 4(4): 143-151

http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/ijmea
doi: 10.11648/j.ijmea.20160404.12
ISSN: 2330-023X (Print); ISSN: 2330-0248 (Online)

Aerodynamic and Stability Analysis of Blended Wing Body

Aircraft
Sanjiv Paudel, Shailendra Rana, Saugat Ghimire, Kshitiz Kumar Subedi, Sudip Bhattrai*
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Engineering-Central Campus, Tribhuvan University, Lalitpur, Nepal

Email address:
mechesanjiv@gmail.com (S. Paudel), ranashailendra74@gmail.com (S. Rana), saugatghimire014@hotmail.com (S. Ghimire),
kshitiz.subedi@hotmail.com (K. K. Subedi), sudip@ioe.edu.np (S. Bhattrai)
*
Corresponding author

To cite this article:

Sanjiv Paudel, Shailendra Rana, Saugat Ghimire, Kshitiz Kumar Subedi, Sudip Bhattrai. Aerodynamic and Stability Analysis of Blended
Wing Body Aircraft. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Applications. Vol. 4, No. 4, 2016, pp. 143-151.
doi: 10.11648/j.ijmea.20160404.12

Received: May 17, 2016; Accepted: June 12, 2016; Published: June 23, 2016

Abstract: The main purpose of the paper is to study the aerodynamic and stability characteristics of a blended-wing-body
(BWB) aircraft. This paper presents the estimation and selection of aircraft design parameters, planform design, reflex airfoils,
and conduct thorough stability investigation of the aircraft. A conceptual design of BWB aircraft has been done and the design
was analyzed and refined to achieve static stability. The CFD analysis of the BWB aircraft was done at three different values of
angle-of-attack (AOA) and thus the stall AOA was determined from the computational results. The dynamic stability of the
aircraft has been studied under five modes namely- short period, phugoid, Dutch-roll, roll and spiral. The static stability has
been achieved with a wide positive value of static margin. Results also show that the aircraft is dynamically stable for
longitudinal and lateral modes when subjected to disturbances in respective conditions. The BWB aircraft fulfils the criteria of
Class I Category B aircraft and shows flight level 1 characteristics in all stability modes.
Keywords: Blended-Wing-Body Aircraft, Reflex Airfoils, Static Stability, Dynamic Stability, Stability Modes

industry due to various advantages with which it overpowers

1. Introduction over the conventional aircraft. With no clear distinction
The need and requirements of aircrafts for transporting between wing-fuselage, it shows an advantage with the
passengers and cargo from one destination to another has interference drag. Having the center body as one of the
took-off to greater heights since few decades. The section of the airfoil, it acts as a lift generating surface,
conventional aircraft with the external wings as the major giving a higher lift-to-drag ratio. The rear end positioning of
contributor of the lift are the available medium for fulfilling the engine gives significant reduction in noise [2]. Various
such purpose. Various technological developments have took design challenges have been seen in the design of BWB
off in various sectors of aircraft design such as propulsion, aircraft like being less favorable for internal cabin
aerodynamics, avionics, etc. BWB aircraft being one of the pressurization as a tubular body is best suited for such
promising aircraft shows a greater efficiency in its pressurization purpose. Having the position of control
aerodynamic parameters. Though the name BWB actually surface at the rear end adds an extra demerit making the
famed in the aviation industry only a decade or two before, aircraft stability design more complex. The design
but the context has been flying in the sky since 1933, when procedures for the design of an aircraft are similar in many
Horten brothers conceived their first glider [1]. Recently, cases. However, it varies on the parameters estimation like
NASA and Boeing are continuously producing prototypes of wing loading, aspect ratio and few others which ought to
BWB, upgrading one after the other with X48C being the change upon the stability and CFD analysis. The works
recent advancement in the design [2]. mainly include two sections: one section covers the basic
The BWB aircraft is able to catch many eyes of aviation design of the aircraft from parameter estimation to CFD
analysis and section two includes the design of control
 International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Applications 2016; 4(4): 143-151 144

surfaces along-with the static and dynamic stability of the studied in this paper taken into consideration are wing
aircraft. loading, Take-off-weight and engine thrust (or engine
This paper aims to give the detail procedure of an aircraft power). Wing loading affects stall speed, climb rate, take-off
design, from initial parameter estimation to computational and landing distances, and turn performance [13]. The wing
analysis and its stability analysis. Many researches have been loading determines the design lift coefficient, and impacts
done in blended-wing-body as stated, especially in planform drag through its effect upon wetted area and wing span. The
shape optimization. This paper intends to provide the new aircraft weight and wing planform area is initially taken
researchers an entire basic procedure of an aircraft design intuitively, which is supposed to be changed to the actual
from parameter selection to computational analysis through required weight and size upon stability analysis further in
stability analysis. ANSYS ICEM CFD 14.5 is used for mesh this paper.
generation and ANSYS Fluent 14.5 is used for the simulation The weight of the aircraft is initially chosen to be 2.51 kg
during the entire phase of research. considering the weight of a model aircraft. The values from 4.83
kg/m2 to 8.78 kg/m2 is an acceptable range for the wing loading
2. Literature Review [14]. Using the wing loading of 5.4 kg/m2, the planform area of
the aircraft is calculated to be 0.4648 m2 using:
There have been significant developments in the field of
BWB research over time and it's still ongoing. Significant Planform area = Weight of the aircraft / Wing Loading (1)
researches have already been put by Aerospace researchers The necessary deflection of flaps upon stability analysis
and scientists. R. H Liebeck introduced the concept of slightly and changes the planform area of the aircraft, which
blending the wing, fuselage, and the engines into a single does not change the overall aircraft characteristics like lift
lifting surface. Liebeck’s design concept offered biggest and drag significantly.
improvement in aerodynamic efficiency as it reduced surface
area and thereby reducing skin friction drag. His design 2.2. Operational and Geometrical Parameters
shows that 33% reduction in surface is achievable,
representing a potential revolution in subsonic transport Out of the large number of reflex airfoils to compensate
efficiency. In his paper, BWB is considered to have an 800 for the lack of horizontal stabilizers, four airfoils namely
passenger capacity, cruising at Mach 0.85 and a 7000 nm MH45, MH62, SB97 and HS522 (mod14%) were analyzed
range [3]. In 2002, Qin presented the main aerodynamic in XFLR5 at Reynolds number 400000 and their polar
advantages of the new BWB design are its lower wetted area characteristics were compared with each other. 400,000
to volume ratio and lower interference drag as compared to Reynolds number was randomly selected to study and
the conventional aircraft. Indeed, an increase in lift to drag compare the aerodynamic characteristics of airfoils under
maximum of about 20% over the conventional design has consideration.
been estimated for the BWB [4]. In 2003, Roman studied Table 1. Characteristics of different airfoils.
aerodynamics of high subsonic BWB configurations,
concluded that Mach number 0.93 has penalty performance Airfoil Clmax αmax Cl/Cd)αmax Cdαmax Cmαmax
HS522 14% 1.35 140 42 0.032 0.019
relative to Mach number 0.85 [5]. Later in 2004, Qin again MH45 1.23 11.50 46.6 0.026 0.006
calculated the aerodynamic performance of BWB aircraft; MH62 1.15 10.50 42.5 0.027 0.001
they carried out 3-D aerodynamic surface optimization of SB97 1.27 120 36.2 0.035 -0.005
different BWB configurations and improved aerodynamic
performance at cruise condition [6]. Toshihiro Ikeda From the results that follow, MH62 was rejected early
designed a conceptual model of BWB, wingspan of 79.8 m, because of its low maximum lift coefficient and small
wetted aspect ratio 181 and wetted surface area 3524.85 m2, maximum angle of attack as compared to HS522-14% and
capable of carrying 555 passengers [7]. HAW students MH45, which can be seen from table 1. SB97 was then
conducted research study of AC 20.30 BWB aircraft whose rejected due to the low value of lift to drag ratio and high
geometry is based on VELA 2 [8]. In their research, MH45 drag coefficient near stall angle. Also, it has negative
airfoil was employed in wing profile whereas the body moment coefficient which is unfavorable considering the
profile was equipped with MH91 airfoil [9]. DLR-LY-BWB design of our aircraft. Due to fairly high lift to drag ratio near
configuration, whose mission requirements were a range of stall angle, high stall angle and fairly constant moment
7560 nm and 500 seat capacities, was designed by DLR that coefficient curve throughout the range of angle of attack, the
resulted from the studies presented in [10] and [11]. NASA other two airfoils were selected. Out of these two airfoils, the
successfully completed the flight of X-48C aircraft, a HS522 (mod 14%) was chosen to be used at the root section
modified version of X-48B, in 2013 to investigate and because of its thickness and MH45 towards the tip providing
validate the aerodynamic characteristics of the Blended Wing the aerodynamic twist. The airfoil coordinates are taken from
Body Aircraft design concept [12]. the Hartmut Siegmann airfoil database [15].

2.1. Initial Aircraft Sizing 2.3. Aircraft Planform Design

The primary design parameters for the BWB aircraft The initial planform is assumed to be trapezoidal in shape.
145 Sanjiv Paudel et al.: Aerodynamic and Stability Analysis of Blended Wing Body Aircraft

Table 2 lists the conceptual design parameters as below: . 0 (2)

Table 2. Major parameters of Aircraft Planform.
The above equation reduces to . 0 for incompressible
S.N. Parameters Value fluid.
1. Wing loading 5.40 kg/m2 The transport of momentum in an inertial reference frame
2. Maximum take-off weight 2.51 kg is given by:
3. Aspect ratio (AR) 5.78
4. Reference area (Sref) 0.4648m2 . . (3)
5. Wing span (b) 1.8 m
6. Leading edge sweep angle 330 Where, is the static pressure, is the stress tensor, and
7. Main (root) chord 760 mm and are the gravitational body force and external body
8. Tip chord 100 mm forces respectively.
Pressure-velocity coupled solution method was used for
2.4. Calculation of Level Flight Condition both the 2-D and 3-D analyses. A least square cell based
Table 3 lists the major characteristics of the BWB aircraft method was used for gradient calculation with second order
as below: upwind extrapolation for primitive variables in the
momentum solution. The courant number used for the
Table 3. Characteristics of BWB aircraft. coupled solution is unity. K-ω SST model is used to model
S.N. Characteristics Value
the turbulence, based on the type of flow and flow
1. Default AOA 30 separation near the boundary wall, with SST k-ω being
2. Lift coefficient(CL) 0.5 more accurate and reliable for flow with adverse pressure
3. Flight velocity 12.8 m/s gradients.
4. Reynolds number(tip) 86,667 The transport equations for SST k-ω model are:
5. Reynolds number(root) 6,58,667
∂ ∂ ∂  ∂k 
(ρ k )+ (ρ k u j ) =  Γk + G k − Y k + S k (4)
2.5. Construction of Model Geometry ∂t ∂xi ∂xj  ∂ x j 
The wing planform of the whole aircraft is drawn with the And,
root chord and tip chord equal to 760 mm HS-522(mod 14%)
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ω
( ρω ) + ( ρωuj ) =  Γω  + G ω − Y ω + Dω + S ω (5)
and 100 mm MH-45 respectively in XFLR5. 450 mm HS-
522(mod 14%) airfoil at 200 mm from root chord and 280 ∂x ∂xj ∂xj  ∂x j 
mm MH-45 airfoil at 350 mm from root chord are placed in
the geometry. Dihedral angle and twist are chosen based on In these equations, Gk represents the generation of
historical research and there is a 20 dihedral and -30 twist turbulence kinetic energy due to mean velocity gradients. Gω
from root chord to chord at 200 mm, and a 20 dihedral and - represents the generation of ω. Γk and Γω represent the
30 twist from the chord at 200 mm to chord at 350 mm. The effective diffusivity of k and ε respectively. Yk and Yω
model of the aircraft designed using the calculations above is represent the dissipation of k and ω due to turbulence. Dω
shown in Figure 1. represent the cross diffusion-term. Sk and Sω are user defined
source terms. Both turbulent kinetic energy and specific
dissipation rate used first order upwind for the solution.
2.7. Full Body CFD Analysis

The two reflex airfoils MH45 and HS522 -14% are used
in the full body BWB. The analysis of the airfoils are done
at two AOA, 30 and 70. 30 being the default AOA of the
aircraft and 70 AOA, which is the angle at which the
aircraft attains its maximum lift to drag ratio. At 30 and 70,
the 2D airfoil analysis is carried out to visualize airfoil
characteristics like pressure distribution, velocity
distribution, lift force, and drag force. The computation
Figure 1. BWB aircraft model geometry. domain consists of a 10m by 10m control volume, with an
airfoil with 760mm chord. The pressure contours for both
2.6. Numerical Methods the airfoils at default AOA 30 are shown in Figure 2 and 3
respectively and the corresponding values of lift and drag at
For the modeling of the 3-D incompressible flow, the 30 and 70 are listed in Table 4.
solvers resolved the mass and momentum conservation
equations. The mass, or continuity equation can be written
as:
 International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Applications 2016; 4(4): 143-151 146

shown in Figure 4, has a density of 1, 35,472 cells. The

dimensionless y + value of 1 mm is used to find the
corresponding minimum wall distance at Reynolds number
658,667, which is 0.024mm.
The computation domain for the half body simulation
extends to 16m upstream and 16m downstream from leading
edge and trailing edge of the root chord respectively. The
CFD analysis of the BWB aircraft is done for two angle of
attack, one at its default angle of attack at
3 degrees, and 7 degrees, where the aircraft has maximum
lift to drag ratio (CL/CD). Results for the full body
Figure 2. Pressure contour of HS-522 mod-14. simulation are shown in the Figure 5 and 6 and the obtained
aerodynamic parameters are listed in table 5.

Figure 3. Pressure contour of MH-45.

The pressure contour plots of HS522 and MH45 airfoils

are shown in above figures, which shows the stagnation point Figure 5. Pressure contour of BWB in lower (left) and upper (right) region
of airfoil just below the leading edge at an angle of 30. The at 30.
aircraft generates take off lift at an angle of 30, which is thus
the default angle of attack of the aircraft. Fig. 2 shows a
lower pressure region of -118 Pa at the upper surface and a
higher pressure region of 102 Pa at the lower surface of
HS522 airfoil, thus generating a lift to drag ratio of 42. Fig. 3
shows a lower pressure region of-97.4 Pa at the upper
surface and a higher pressure region of 94.5 Pa at the lower
surface of MH45, thus generating a lift to drag ratio of 46.6.

Figure 6. Pressure contour of BWB in lower (left) and upper (right) region
at 70 AOA.

The pressure contours of BWB aircraft at 3 degrees AOA

shows a lower pressure region of -58.6 Pa at upper body and
46 Pa at its lower body, which gives a CL/CD ratio of BWB
aircraft of 8.87. Further, the ratio increases linearly up to 7
degrees AOA which shows a higher pressure region of 26 Pa
at its lower body and -125 Pa at its upper body, which gives a
CL/CD ratio of BWB aircraft of 16.45. Beyond this angle of
Figure 4. Mesh across the blended wing body aircraft. attack, the body shows a tendency of shock wave generation
spoiling the lift. Hence, 7 degrees AOA is considered to be
Table 4. Lift and drag values at 30 and 70 AOA.
the AOA of maximum lift to drag ratio of the BWB aircraft.
Airfoil AOA Cl Cd Cl/Cd
30 0.414 0.012 34.50 Table 5. Showing lift and drag values of BWB at 30 and 70 AOA.
HS 522 14%- modified
70 0.812 0.018 45.11
S.N. Angle of attack CL CD CL/CD
30 0.483 0.014 34.50
MH 45 1. 3 0
0.1751 0.01975 8.87
70 0.863 0.018 47.94
0
2. 7 0.51 0.031 16.45
The unstructured mesh of the half-body BWB aircraft
147 Sanjiv Paudel et al.: Aerodynamic and Stability Analysis of Blended Wing Body Aircraft

3. Stability Analysis of the BWB Aircraft based on the required mitigation of disturbances. The sizing
of the control surfaces are obtained iteratively to balance the
3.1. Sizing of Control Surfaces input disturbance parameters within acceptable damping
The three primary control surfaces in the aircraft namely- time. Table 6 lists the sizing and characteristics of the control
flaps, rudders and elevons as shown in Figure 7, are chosen surfaces.
Table 6. Size of different control surfaces and their respective locations.

Control Surfaces C1 (m) C2 (m) Span (m) Surface area (m2) Airfoil

Flaps 0.107 0.07 0.131 0.02318 MH45

Elevons 0.065 0.029 0.444 0.02086 MH45

Rudders 0.2 0.08 0.18 0.0504 NACA 0009

Figure 7. 3-d view of control surfaces. Figure 8. Plot showing Cm vs alpha.

3.2. Static Stability of the Aircraft 3.3. Dynamic Stability

After the mass components like ducted fan motor, Longitudinal and lateral stability of the aircraft have been
electronic speed controller (ESC), battery, etc. were provided studied. For longitudinal motion, dynamic stability has been
at their estimated positions, the computed position of the C. studied under two modes namely: short period and Phugoid
G. was found to lie at 421.225 mm and the neutral point of mode whereas, for lateral motion, dynamic stability has been
the aircraft was found to be at 495.96 mm. studied under three modes namely: Dutch-roll, roll and spiral.
With mean aerodynamic chord (MAC) of 415.671mm, the
static margin is obtained as below:
X np -Xcg 495.96 − 421.225
S.M= = = 18% (6)
MAC 415.671

Such positive static margin shows that the aircraft is

statically stable, as shown in the results for static longitudinal
stability of the aircraft. Figure 8 shows the plot of Cm
against angle of attack, denoted by alpha, with the pitching
moment coefficient obtaining negative value near AOA of
80. This implies the aircraft has a stick-free nose down
tendency at high angle of attack.

Figure 9. Time response for short period mode.

 International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Applications 2016; 4(4): 143-151 148

Figure 14. Time response for roll mode.

Figure 10. Time response for phugoid mode.

Figure 15. Time response for spiral mode.

3.4. Dynamic Stability of the BWB for Longitudinal Motion

Figure 11. Time response for Dutch-roll mode.
For longitudinal motion, the investigation of the dynamic
stability of the BWB requires longitudinal state matrix. The
two main stability modes for the longitudinal motion are the
Short Period and the Phugoid mode. Two different sets of
conjugate eigenvalues are obtained from the longitudinal
state matrix which represent the two longitudinal stability
modes.
From XFLR computation, the eigenvalues obtained from
the longitudinal state matrix are as follows:

λ1 = −8.7623 + 15.3862i
λ2 = −8.7623 − 15.3862i
(7)
λ3 = −0.0733 + 1.1807i
Figure 12. Lateral time response for initial disturbance of 1°s-1 in roll rate. λ4 = −0.0733 − 1.1807i

The longitudinal state matrix consists of longitudinal

stability derivatives. After the computation of longitudinal
stability derivatives, the longitudinal state matrix A is
obtained as below:

(8)

The characteristic equation is obtained from the expansion

-1
Figure 13. Lateral time response for initial disturbance of 1°s in yaw rate.
of the following determinant:
149 Sanjiv Paudel et al.: Aerodynamic and Stability Analysis of Blended Wing Body Aircraft

λI − A of the aircraft, there are three main stability modes. They are
roll mode, Dutch-roll mode and spiral mode. Those
Where, I is the identity matrix. eigenvalues correspond to respective lateral modes. The
eigenvalues obtained from the lateral state matrix from
3.4.1. Short Period Mode calculation are as follows:
This mode consists of a symmetric disturbance caused due
to sudden up-gust or step elevator which changes the angle λ1 = −1.6103 + 14.8033i
of incidence and results in rapid pitching of the aircraft about λ2 = −1.6103 − 14.8033i
the center of gravity. Conjugate eigenvalues λ1 and λ2 (9)
λ3 = −74.8026
belong to the Short Period mode. Since the real parts of the
λ4 = −0.0059
Short Period mode eigenvalues λ 1 and λ2 are negative, it
can be predicted that the plane is inherently stable in Short The lateral state matrix consists of lateral stability
Period mode. The Short Period poles are underdamped with derivatives. After the computation of lateral stability
a natural frequency ω n of 17.7016 rads-1 and a damping
S
derivatives, the lateral state matrix A is obtained as below:
ratio ζ s of 0.495. The positive damping ratio indicates that
the aircraft is able to damp out the short period mode by
itself, bringing it back to a stable longitudinal position. (10)
Figure 9 represents the time response for the short period
mode. It can be observed that the short period mode shows a
rapidly under-damped response as evidenced by a small time
period of 0.4084 secs. The time taken to halve amplitude of Similar to that of longitudinal motion, a characteristic
the disturbances is 0.08 secs. The forward speed u, equation is obtained, from which the eigenvalues for lateral
downward velocity w, pitch rate q and pitch angle are motion are determined as below:
analyzed to observe their time response in this mode. It is
seen that all the four parameters i.e. forward speed, λI − A
downward velocity, pitch rate and pitch angle rapidly recover
to equilibrium. Where, I is the identity matrix.

3.4.2. Phugoid Mode 3.5.1. Dutch Roll Mode

This mode is also excited by the same symmetric The Dutch-roll mode consists of an oscillatory combined
disturbance and consists of slow sinusoidal motion where rolling and yawing motions of the aircraft. The eigenvalues
there is large amplitude variation of air-speed, pitch angle λ 1 and λ 2 correspond to the Dutch-roll mode of the BWB
and altitude, with no variation in angle of attack. The next aircraft. The real negative parts of the Dutch-roll mode
conjugate eigenvalues λ 3 and λ 4 belong to the Phugoid eigenvalues signifies that the aircraft is inherently stable in
mode. The real parts of the Phugoid mode eigenvalues λ 3 Dutch-roll mode. The Dutch-roll poles are under-damped
with a natural frequency ω n D of 10.7435 rads-1 and a
and λ4 are negative, implying that the plane is inherently
damping ratio ζ D of 0.108. The positive damping ratio
stable in Phugoid mode. The Phugoid mode poles are also
under-damped with a natural frequency ωn of 1.1823 rads-
P
indicates that the aircraft is able to damp out the Dutch-roll
mode by itself without the help of external control inputs
1
and a damping ratio ζ p of 0.062. The positive damping
and brings it back to a stable lateral position. However, due
ratio indicates that the aircraft is able to damp out the to small damping ratio, the disturbance is not sufficiently
Phugoid mode by itself, bringing it back to a stable damped. Figure 11 represents the time response for the
longitudinal position. Figure 10 represents the time Dutch-roll mode. The side-slip velocity v, roll rate p, yaw
response for the Phugoid mode. It is seen that the Phugoid rate r and bank angle φ are analyzed to observe their time
mode exhibits a slow under-damped response as evidenced response in this mode. It can be seen that all the four
by a large time period of 5.3216 secs. The time taken to parameters i.e. side-slip velocity, roll rate, yaw rate and
halve the amplitude of the disturbances in this mode is bank angle slowly recover to equilibrium. Initial conditions
9.4543 secs. Similar to the Short Period mode, the forward response analysis, where an initial disturbance in either roll
speed u, downward velocity w, pitch rate q and pitch angle rate, yaw rate or side-slip velocity is given as input, was
are analyzed to observe their time response in this mode. also conducted to observe the lateral time response. Figure
It can be observed that all the four parameters i.e. forward 12 shows the lateral response to an initial disturbance of
speed, downward velocity, pitch rate and pitch angle slowly 1°s-1 in roll rate. It is observed that the disturbance in roll
attain equilibrium. rate quickly decayed to zero, except side-slip velocity, yaw
3.5. Dynamic Stability of the BWB for Lateral Motion rate and bank angle, which gradually approached zero.
However, the amplitudes of disturbance in side-slip
The investigation of the dynamic stability of the BWB for velocity, yaw rate and bank angle is so small that their
lateral motion requires lateral state matrix. For lateral motion effects can be neglected. Figure 13 represents the lateral
 International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Applications 2016; 4(4): 143-151 150

response to an initial disturbance of 1°s-1 in yaw rate. It is which results in level 1 value as the minimum requirement
seen that the disturbance in side-slip velocity, roll rate and of damping ratio ζ D is 0.08 for the level 1 definition of the
yaw rate vanished in about 5 secs, except bank angle, flight qualities [16]. The product of the Dutch-roll natural
which gradually decayed to zero.
frequency and damping ratio gives the value of ωnD ζ D =
3.5.2. Roll Mode 1.6103 rads-1, which also provides the level 1 value as the
Roll mode consists of the rolling motions of the aircraft. minimum required value is 0.08 rads-1 for level 1
The eigenvalue λ 3 is associated with the roll mode, which is definition. Hence, the flight quality for the whole Dutch-
highly convergent and damped. Since the eigenvalue is roll mode is level 1. For spiral mode, the time to half
negative, it implies that the aircraft is stable for the roll amplitude is approximately 120 s. In other words, the time
mode. The roll damping time TξRoll , obtained from the to double amplitude is 30 s, which exceeds the minimum
time required to double amplitude for level 1 definition
eigenvalue is 0.0134 secs. This value indicates that the [16]. So the aircraft depicts level 1 flying qualities for the
aircraft is very stable for the roll mode and is able to damp it spiral mode.
out itself. Figure 14 shows the plots of time response for roll
mode. It is observed that the side-slip velocity, roll rate, yaw
rate and bank angle recover rapidly to equilibrium. 4. Conclusion
3.5.3. Spiral Mode A complete CFD analysis of the BWB aircraft was done at
The last eigenvalue λ 4 represents the spiral mode, which 30 and 70 AOA. Results showed a greater amount of lift to
can be either convergent or divergent. The negative drag ratio at 70 AOA and thus the stall AOA was determined.
eigenvalue signifies that the aircraft is stable for the spiral The stability investigation of the BWB shows that the
mode and is convergent in nature. The time to damp to half aircraft is statically stable with a positive static margin of
amplitude T1/ 2 is 118 secs. This value indicates that the
Spiral
18%. For longitudinal motion of the BWB, the aircraft is
degree of stability in spiral mode is low, so it requires special dynamically stable in all two modes namely- short period
attention. Figure 15 shows the time response for spiral mode. and phugoid with all the eigenvalues of the coefficient
It is seen that the side-slip velocity, roll rate, yaw rate and matrix having negative values for real parts. The BWB
bank angle recover very slowly to equilibrium. belongs to Category B Class I aircraft. The flight quality of
the BWB is a function of damping ratio of the aircraft. The
3.6. Flight Quality of the BWB Aircraft computed values of damping ratio for short period and
phugoid mode shows a flight level 1 characteristics. For
The flight quality represents the degree of stability and
lateral motion of the BWB, the aircraft is also dynamically
control that is required for the pilot to keep the aircraft
stable in all three modes since all the eigenvalues of the
flyable and safe. Such flight qualities are based on the pilot's
coefficient matrix for lateral motion have negative values for
opinion of the flying characteristics of the aircraft, and is
real parts. As for the flight quality in lateral motion, the
represented by empirical numeric values for classification.
aircraft shows flight level 1 characteristics in all three modes
3.7. Flight Quality for the Longitudinal Motion namely-Dutch-roll, Roll and Spiral. Overall, the BWB
aircraft is a Category B Class I aircraft with level 1 flight
According to the classification of aircraft presented in quality in all modes.
[16], the BWB aircraft is a Category B Class I aircraft. For
longitudinal motion, the classification is based on the
characteristic values of the damping ratio of the short period References
mode and the Phugoid mode. Comparing the computed
values of the damping ratio of both the short period mode [1] Bullard, D. (1997-2008). Horten Biography. Retrieved
and the Phugoid mode with that of the values given in [16], it October 2015, from Douglas Bullard Website:
http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/Horten_Nurflugels/Horte
can be confirmed that the BWB aircraft conforms to the n_Biography/horten_biography.html
specifications for the level 1 definition of the flying qualities
for the longitudinal motion. [2] NASA. (2015). NASA Website. Retrieved August 2015, from
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/Features/global_observer
3.8. Flight Quality for the Lateral Motion _wing_tests.html

The flight qualities of the BWB aircraft is determined [3] Liebeck, R. H., Page, M. A., & Rawdon, B. K. (1998).
Blended Wing Body Subsonic Commercial Transport. AIAA
with the help of Dutch-roll frequency and its damping, roll
Paper 98-0438.
time constant and the time to double amplitude for spiral
mode. For Category B Class I aircraft, the roll time [4] Qin, N., Vavelle, A., Le Moigne, A., Hackett, K., &Weinerfelt,
constant Tξ = 0.0134 s is smaller than 1.4 s, which is the P. (2002). Aerodynamic Studies for Blended Wing Body
Roll
Aircraft. AIAA.
required maximum value for level 1 [16], hence the aircraft
shows level 1 flying qualities for the roll mode. The [5] Roman, D., Gilmore, R., & Wakayama, S. (2003).
computed damping ratio ζ D of the BWB aircraft is 0.108, Aerodynamics of High-subsonic Blended Wing Body
Configuration. AIAA Paper.
151 Sanjiv Paudel et al.: Aerodynamic and Stability Analysis of Blended Wing Body Aircraft

[6] Qin, N., &Weinerfelt, P. (2004). Aerodynamic Considerations [12] The Boeing Company. (2016). Technology: The Boeing
of Blended Wing Body Aircraft. Progess in Aerospace Company. [Online] Available at:
Sciences, 40, 321-343. http://www.boeing.com/features/2013/04/bds-x48c-04-24-
13.page [Accessed 8 June 2016].
[7] Ikeda, T., & Bil, C. (2006). Aerodynamic Performance of a
Blended Wing-Body Configuration Aircraft. Proceedings of [13] Raymer, D. P. (2006). Aircraft design: A Conceptual
the ICAS (pp. 1-10). Edinburgh: ICAS. Approach (4th Edition ed.). Virginia: American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc.
[8] University of Greenwich. (2015). University of Greenwich.
Retrieved August 2003-2015, from [14] Nicolai, L. M., & Carichner, G. E. (2010). Fundamentals of
https://fseg.gre.ac.uk/fire/VELA.html Aircraft and Airship Design, Volume 1 – Aircraft Design .
California: American Institute of Aeronautics and
[9] Scholz, D. (2007). A Student Project of a Blended Wing Body Astronautics.
Aircraft-From Conceptual Design to Flight Testing. EWADE
2007- 8th European Workshop on Aircraft Design Education. [15] Siegmann, H. (1988-2015). Aerodesign. Retrieved August
Samara: Samara State Aviation University. 2015, from Hartmut Siegmann Website:
http://www.aerodesign.de/index.htm
[10] Ciampa, P. D., Zill, T., Pfeiffer, T. & Nagel, B. (2011). A
Functional Shape Parametrization of Approach for [16] Nelson, R. C. (1998). In Flight Stability and Automatic
Preliminary Optimization of Unconventional Aircraft. CEAS. Control. New York/San Francisco: WCB/McGraw-Hill.
[11] Zill, T., Ciampa, P. & Nagel, B. (2012). Multidisciplinary
Design Optimization in a Collaborative Distributed Aircraft
Design System. In 50th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting.