Boundary-layer suction system design for laminar-flying-wing aircraft

The present study aims to provide insight into the parameters affecting practical laminar-flow-control suction power requirements for a commercial laminar-flying-wing transport aircraft. It is shown that there is a minimum power requirement independent of the suction system design, associated with the stagnation pressure loss in the boundary layer. This requirement increases with aerofoil section thickness, but depends only weakly on Mach number and (for a thick, lightly loaded laminar flying wing) lift coefficient. Deviation from the optimal suction distribution, due to a practical chamber-based architecture, is found to have very little effect on the overall suction coefficient; hence, to a good approximation, the power penalty is given by the product of the optimal suction flow rate coefficient and the average skin pressure drop. In the spanwise direction, through suitable choice of chamber depth, the pressure drop due to frictional and inertial effects may be rendered negligible. Finally, if there are fewer pumps than chambers, the average pressure drop from the aerofoil surface to the pump collector ducts, rather than to the chambers, determines the power penalty. For the representative laminar-flying-wing aircraft parameters considered here, the minimum power associated with boundary-layer losses alone contributes some 80-90% of the total power requirement. © 2011 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

Conceptual design for a laminar-flying-wing aircraft

The present study details the conceptual design for a 220-passenger laminar-flying-wing aircraft, utilising distributed suction, with a cruise Mach number of 0.67, over a range of 9000 km. The estimated fuel burn is 13.9 g/pax.km, demonstrating substantial gains relative to current, conventional, passenger aircraft. For comparison, a conventional aircraft with a high-mounted, unswept, wing is designed for the same mission specification, and is shown to have a fuel burn of 15 g/pax.km. Despite significant aerodynamic efficiency gains, the fuel burn of the laminar flying wing is only marginally better as it suffers from a poor cruise engine efficiency and is much heavier. Copyright © 2012 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.