CONCEPTUAL DESIGN STUDY OF QUAD-BUBBLE-

BUSINESS JET
Harijono Djojodihardjo*, Muhammad Anas Abd Bari**
*Professor and corresponding Author, ** PhD Student,
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Faculty of Engineering,
Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

Keywords: Aircraft Conceptual Design, Double-Bubble Business Jet, Applied Aerodynamics

Abstract transportation markets in the business jet type

are also potential, the present work is devoted
Realizing that air transportation markets in the
for exploring the possibilities of introducing
business jet type are potential, the present work
some of a number of visionary and pioneering
is devoted for exploring the possibilities of
introducing some of a number of visionary and ideas and upcoming enabling technologies in a
Conceptual Design Study of Quad-Bubble
pioneering ideas and upcoming enabling
Business Jet, which is inspired by Double-
technologies in a Conceptual Design Study of
Bubble (D.8) [1-4] configuration, and assess its
Quad-Bubble Business Jet (QB-BJ). In view of
characteristics in comparison to an appropriately
and driven by the vision for a fuel efficient,
chosen business jet as a reference. The term
environmentally friendly and technology driven
Quad-Bubble is adopted here since essentially,
aircraft to meet global need within the next 15
among the technologically developed fuselage
years, the characteristics of the conceptually
configurations, the selected fuselage cross
designed aircraft will be assessed in
section has the quad-bubble features. Major
comparison to an appropriately chosen business
ideas derived from N+3 aircraft technologies,
jet as a reference. Major ideas derived from D.8
which have been incorporated and translated
concept will be appropriately applied and
into D.8 concept introduced by Drela, will be
further elaborated. The work is carried out
selectively applied as appropriate and further
starting with fuel efficient motivation, and
elaborated in the Conceptual Design Study of a
followed by the selection of Wing
Quad-Bubble Business Jet. The Conceptual
Aerodynamics, and other critical factors related
Design and Aerodynamic Study of Quad-
to the Design Requirements and Objectives.
Bubble Business Jet (QB-BJ) is carried out
focusing on its Aerodynamics which includes
1 Introduction Wing Planform Configuration and profiles, and
Vision for a fuel efficient, environmentally their relationship to the Design Requirements
friendly and performance and technology driven and Objectives. Possible Configuration
aircraft to meet global need and N+ 3 goal- Variants, Mission profile, Flight Envelope
setting within the next 15 years have been requirements, performance, stability, as well as
recently developed or proposed in progression the influence of propulsion configuration of
[1-4]; the most attractive of these novel QB-BJ aircrafts are considered and elaborated.
transport aircrafts are the Blended-Wing-Body, Parametric study is performed on wing
Joined-Wing and Double-Bubble Wing planform, thickness, and twist optimization,
configurations. The latter configuration concept with design variables including overall span
has also been developed to address needs and plus chord, sweep, thickness, and twist at
anticipate available enabling technologies several stations along the span of the wing prior
progressive for three successive periods up to to more structured optimization scheme.
2030. Realizing that the upcoming air Considerations are also given to range,

1
 HARIJONO DJOJODIHARDJO, MUHAMMAD ANAS ABD BARI

maximum lift, stability, control power, weight elaborated in [11]. Further conceptual design
and balance. A statistical study and review on cycle will follow the scheme described by
prevailing market demand leads to the choice of Raymer [12], and Djojodihardjo and Kim [13],
conventional Subsonic Business Jet candidate, taking into considerations the relevance,
which will be used as a Reference Conventional motivation and the importance of the Quad-
Business Jet (RC-BJ) for the aerodynamic and Bubble business jet mission and design
configuration of the conceptual design of QB- requirements and objectives. To some extent,
BJ. The chosen business jet accommodates 18 the conceptual aircraft design procedure
passengers as a baseline. Some aerodynamic incorporates Drela's approach [1-4], with critical
and performance improvement is then carried iterative cycle to arrive at plausible primary
out through parametric study to arrive at the structure, aerodynamic performance, engine
best solution meeting the design requirements performance, trim and stability as well as flight
and objectives. trajectory and takeoff performance.
Particular attention has been given to identify
and adopt concepts and technologies needed for 2 Motivation and Objectives
reduction in fuel per passenger-mile from
current technology baseline that may be Research and development of transport aircraft
available by 2035, and the adaptation of Drela's technology in the upcoming period known as
[1-3] wide “double-bubble” fuselage with N+3 aircraft has been in progress; one inspiring
beneficial pitching moment and carryover lift work in this direction is the work of Drela [1-4],
characteristics and high Aspect Ratio nearly- in particular for several variants of large
unswept laminar wing. Other factors which have commercial aircraft similar to that Boeing 737-
been identified to be necessary for achieving 800 in capacity. As a baseline, such aircraft is
N+3 goals are reviewed, selected and utilized, intended to carry 180 passengers over a range of
such as the reduction of secondary structure 3000 nautical miles at cruise Mach number of
weight, the twin “pi-tail” configuration similar 0.80, and to fly within altitude agreeable to
to that utilized for wing-mounted engines; at the environmental concern and target for that period
present stage, conventional high efficiency onward. It is a very innovative and
engine with the appropriate choice of high revolutionary transport aircraft with significant
bypass ratio will be utilized. performance benefits in comparison to
Cruise velocity and altitude will be optimized contemporary conventional aircrafts.
commensurate with environmental requirements Aerodynamic advantages are achieved through
for ten years to come [5, 6, 7]. Considering positioning the engines to the rear fuselage for
cruise altitude acceptable by environmental noise reduction, efficient performance and bird
regulation, cruise velocity for 10 years to come impact avoidance, structurally efficient use of
can be assumed to be the same as at present, i.e. fuselage for lift to drag ratio increase, load
M = 0.8 and altitude between 33000 to 40000ft distribution and passenger accommodation.
[8]. The merit of each feature is evaluated in Noting that business jet transport aircraft is also
terms of mission fuel burn. The choice of wing potentially significant, the present study
profile and fuselage is carried out selectively, attempts to apply the host of novel ideas offered
first by comparing their characteristics as by D8 (double-bubble) aircraft configuration as
specified, and later by using XFLR5 simulations appropriate to its application for medium-to-
[9, 10]. large class business-jet with a conceptual design
At the present stage of the development, the of a Quad-Bubble medium size business jet. The
conceptual design started with Drela‟s Fuel current conceptual design study of QB-BJ
Burn considerations [1] which utilized Configuration will be challenging since it faces
Breguet‟s formula for fuel weight as initial more stringent geometrical as well as other
driver to look for target lift to drag ratio of the design and operational limitations compared to
QB-BJ, then follows the author simplified the large airplane.
preliminary conceptual design approach as
2
 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN STUDY OF QUAD-BUBBLE BUSINESS JET

Hence the main objectives of the present paper

are the following.
1. To take a critical look at the salient features
and technologies of Double-Bubble
aircrafts, with an emphasis on their
aerodynamic and fuel burn performance as
well as other green aircraft criteria, and
project these into the envisaged Quad-
Bubble- Business Jet Conceptual Design.
2. To carry out a conceptual design of „Quad-
Bubble Business Jet (QB-BJ)‟ for 18
passengers. In particular, the concptual
design will first address minimal technology
insertion as implied by D8.1 which offers
N+2 level reductions in fuel burn, noise, and
emissions
3. To compare the features and advantages of
Quad-Bubble Business Jet (QB-BJ) with the
baseline (reference) Business Jet, as well as
with the Blended Wing Body Business jet
(BWB-BJ)[11] and Joined Wing Business
Jet (JW-BJ)[13] worked out by the first
author and colleagues at conceptual phase.

3 Systematic and Methodology: Conceptual

Design Approach Fig. 1: Design Philosophy Flow Chart
The steps followed in the overall conceptual
design process will first determine a baseline engine selection, comprehensive wing sizing,
reference aircraft that can be used as the basis of centre of gravity determination, and landing
comparison for each of the concepts generated. gear /undercarriage configuration determination.
It will be followed by establishing a well- To arrive at plausible design configuration, the
documented mission scenario (including aircraft procedure is carried out iteratively with careful
requirements such as payload capacity, fuel judgment. Better estimation of aircraft design
burn and range) to identify comparative configuration follows through meticulous
parameters of the different aircraft concepts, and analysis. Structural and stability analysis are
developing metrics and tools for designing and considered as well. A performance analysis is
evaluating vastly different aircraft configuration then carried out followed by the summary of the
architectures. Then the candidate technologies reassessed design specifications. The first phase
and concepts of the technologies that could have of the Conceptual Design Approach is
the greatest impact in terms of the evaluated summarized in Fig.1.
metrics will be identified, followed by the The appeal of Quad-Bubble Business Jet (QB-
evaluation of aircraft performance using the BJ) aircraft technology is the promise of
mission scenario. Finally a comprehensive improved performance because of a higher L/D
assessment of the QB-BJ will be made. than can be obtained with a conventional “tube
The conceptual design of the Quad-Bubble and wing” aircraft. Using the fuselage structure
aircraft configuration includes the mission as both a passenger compartment and producing
profile, weight and weight fraction higher lift than conventional aircraft fuselage
determination, wing loading determination, has the potential to decrease the wetted area and
airfoil selection, thrust loading determination, improve L/D.
3
 HARIJONO DJOJODIHARDJO, MUHAMMAD ANAS ABD BARI

4 Statistical Studies for the search of From statistical study and identification of
Reference Aircraft Configuration and Design favorable N+3 characteristics, a Baseline
Specifications (Reference) Conventional Business Jet Aircraft

Fig.2: Market Statistical analysis

Table 1: A selection of business jet aircraft candidate's for RC-BJ and QB-BJ (RC-BJ) is selected. Without
study loss of generalities, statistical
analysis carried out for the
selection of candidate RC-BJ in
the class of 18 passengers has
led to the selection of
Gulfstream 550.
This result is a preliminary
outcome of the design study
exhibiting various
characteristics of DB-BJ,
BWB-BJ and JW-BJ [14],
while Fig. 6-8 exhibits
ergonomic and configuration
design study of lifting body
fuselage. Further detail is
elaborated in [9].
The selected RC-BJ will be
utilized as a reference for and
post assessment of the
conceptual design efforts. For
such purpose, a host of business
jet aircraft data has been
compiled and summarized in

4
 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN STUDY OF QUAD-BUBBLE BUSINESS JET

Table 1. a reference can be identified. Statistical analysis

The design of QB-BJ configuration for for the search of the baseline or reference
business jet will start with the survey and aircraft is carried out by considering various
statistical analysis of the current medium size relevant parameters such as Passenger capacity,
business jet available in the market. A statistical Range, TOGW, Take-off and Landing distance,
analysis is carried out to find the spread of data Wing Loading, L/D, Engine Power, Service
and determine an acceptable target aircraft Ceiling and rate of climb. From such statistical
design specification, whereby various analysis, a list of baseline parameters for the
performance and design parameters of the reference aircraft(s) is tabulated in Table 1.
baseline business jet aircrafts were determined Following the design procedure and
and listed. The state of the art and progress of application of Quad Bubble concept, the first
conventional Business Jets as found in the trial result of the DB-BJ has the characteristic,
market are also considered. compared to the RC-BJ, as exhibited in Table 2,
This comprehensive statistical study produced which exhibits the characteristics of the
some candidate business jets to be utilized as candidate Reference Conventional Business jet
reference design requirements and objectives, (RC-BJ) in the first column. These data will be
in-lieu of market study. The design parameters used as a reference for determining the Design
Table 2 :RC-BJ, DB-BJ, BWB-BJ and JW-BJ Requirements and Objectives (DR&O) in the
parameters present conceptual design of Quad-Bubble-
Business Jet (QB-BJ).

5 Design Mission
To reach our mission statement goals, the idea
of a long range business aircraft was chosen. By
looking at long range business aircraft currently
in production and choosing attributes that are

and performance specifications of several

business jets were compiled and organized
systematically. One of these candidate business
jets is selected as the conceptual design target,
subject to further overriding considerations.
The analysis includes the review, classification
and structured grouping of the aircrafts‟
specification and performance such as number
of passengers, maximum range, takeoff gross
weight, empty weight, cruise speed, service
ceiling, takeoff distance and landing distance.
The specification and performance of these Fig. 3: Mission profile; (Top) Conventional one for
aircrafts was plotted in graphs to facilitate first estimate; (Bottom) Recommended profile for
fuel-efficient aircraft [15] in successive iteration.
identification of potentially appealing
characteristics or performance. A tolerance of
25% was set for the potential points. Aircrafts believed will contribute to improvements, the
with the specification and performance within design missions are identified:
the tolerance point are tabulated. By inspection,  12 – 18 Passengers + 4 Crew
the baseline aircraft or aircrafts to be chosen as  Cruise Altitude at 40,000ft

5
 HARIJONO DJOJODIHARDJO, MUHAMMAD ANAS ABD BARI

 Cruise Speed 0.80 Mach reduces the aircraft design‟s reliance on larger
 Range of 12,501 km and more congested terminals and, thereby,
 Takeoff Field Length 800-850 m improves turnaround time and decreases wait
 Landing Field Length 1700-1800 m times.
Mission profile utilized in the present It is not reasonable to expect the designed
conceptual design is illustrated in Fig. 3. The aircraft to operate at the full design mission at
first iteration refers to conventional one, while all times. Therefore, the typical operating
in the successive iteration, the mission profile mission is chosen to carry 12-18 passengers,
recommended for environmental concern [14] is with 4 crews, over approximately 12000 km.
utilized.A high operating ceiling has many This mission allows for travel between many
benefits. By choosing a cruise altitude of greater transcontinental cities. As a reference, a flight
Table 3: Comparison of several Airfoils considered for QB-BJ

than 40,000 feet (although within green aircrafts from London to New York is 5577 km.
altitude requirements), the business jet will While this mission does not fully utilize the
operate above the majority of air traffic altitude aircraft‟s capabilities, the short takeoff and
allowing for higher speeds and a cruise/climb landing capacity will allow for more
method, increasing altitude as the aircraft opportunities for shorter range flights in a given
becomes lighter from burning fuel. This method time frame. Typical Mission Profile is
improves the overall efficiency of the
engines and decreases fuel burn. Timely
flights are a desirable characteristic that
consumers desire in a business jet. High
cruise speed directly correlates to the
flight duration. Therefore, a cruise
speed of 0.80 Mach is chosen as a
baseline based on statistical data of
combined high speed and fuel
efficiency. Also considering cruise
altitude acceptable by environmental
regulation, cruise velocity for 10 years
to come can be assumed to be the
Fig. 4: NACA 64A-010 10% chordwise pressure distribution along
similar to the RC-BJ. A range of 12500
km is a typical design mission range for the
aircraft. illustrated in Fig. 3 .
Destination flexibility is also important for a The bottom figure on the other hand provides
desirable business jet solution. With a takeoff a recommended fuel-efficient flight profile in
field length of 800-850 meter and a landing comparison with the traditional one that would
field length of 1700-1800 meter, these aircrafts minimize emission and the fuel consumption.
will have access to many small airports; this Although this profile will increase the aircraft
6
 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN STUDY OF QUAD-BUBBLE BUSINESS JET

Fig.5: NACA 64A-010 10% airfoil lift and pressure distribution from XFLR5 [10]

performance, it is not currently being utilized coefficient is 0.85. The QB-BJ will have
due to several constraints that need to be somewhat better L/D compared to RC-BJ for
considered in parallel with the fuel efficiency. meeting the DRO. With that, six airfoils meet
Among them are the weather, safe aircraft this requirements however only those that is
separation, tactical and operational demands of classified as laminar flow airfoil are considered
airspace boundaries. Putting these constraints as in Table 3. Among them, the thinnest
aside, this is the preferred flight profile for the
Table 4: Wing Loading Determination using from Stall
QB-BJ in 10 years to come. Velocity and Landing Distance [9]

6 Airfoil Selection Wing Loading,

Constraints Remarks
For 2D airfoil selection in the conceptual W/S (N/m2)
design, a basic and simple approach was Stall Velocity 1380.3 Moderate
adopted by analyzing chosen airfoil using Landing distance 1 714.7 Low
Airfoil Investigation Database [16] and on-line Landing Distance 2 1400.0 High
Airtool software [17], which are interactive XFLR5 3889.7 Highest
database and programs. Eppler, Liebeck, NACA possible super-critical airfoil is selected in order
airfoil series were analyzed for the QB-BJ to reduce critical Mach number and to reduce
conceptual design. The airfoil selection process drag divergent Mach number. Thus such choice
was focused on the airfoil characteristics to will allow the aircraft to fly in the higher part of
achieve favorable pressure distribution, the transonic range while avoiding the presence
maximum lift coefficient and lift-to-drag ratio. of shock wave on it, thus avoiding undesirable
The required L/D is 25 and maximum lift drag rise as well as environmental noise
propagation. By inspection, the
P&W P&W P&W P&W
Engine Candidates
Honeywell
Canada Canada Canada Canada NACA 64A-010 10% was
TFE731-2 selected for current conceptual
PW300 JT15D 535A 530
Thrust [lbf] 3500 4750 3045 3400 2887 design of QB-BJ as in Fig. 4.
Thrust [N] 15575 21137.5 13550.25 15130 12847.15 The lift and pressure
Bypass ratio 3.34 4.5 3.3 2.55 3.7 distribution from XFLR5
Dry weight [kg] 333 563 290 317 280
analysis of such wing profile is
TFSC [lb./hr/lbf] 0.5 0.675 0.56 0.44 0.44
presented in Fig. 5. In view of
Table 6: Engine Candidates the criticality of the wing
design, further iteration should
7
 HARIJONO DJOJODIHARDJO, MUHAMMAD ANAS ABD BARI

be made for its improvement to achieve the off is 12138.8 N with the intended range for this
desired and optimum aerodynamic and overall aircraft of 12500 km.Transport aircraft which
performance. travel in this range is categorized as long haul
aircraft and it falls under the transport aircraft
7 Wing Loading category.
According to the design requirements regulated
The wing loading is computed based on two by FAR, the number of engines required for
constraints: aircraft which falls under the transport aircraft
i. Stall velocity, Vstall category must be more than one engine. Hence,
ii. Landing distance two engines are selected to meet this
The typical stall for RC-BJ =51.44 m/s
Cruise altitude, hcruise= 12192 m requirement, which incidentally similar to the
Air density at cruise altitude = 0.302 kg/m3 number of engines of the RC-BJ. Thus the thrust
required per engine is 6069.4N. An engine with
From Table 4, the lowest wing loading is chosen high By-pass Ratio (BPR) and low Thrust
in order to obtain the maximum wing area for Specific Fuel Consumption (TSFC) is
maximum takeoff gross weight. Also, when the recommended for selection. By considering
wing loading decreases, the thrust required per safety factor and quantitative inspection from
unit wing area reduces as well. Besides, a lower relevant candidates as in Table 6, among others,
wing loading is more favorable because the it is found that the Pratt & Whitney Canada
weight per unit area reduces; hence the need of JT15D meets these requirements at significantly
more lift to counter the weight follows similar lower weight and therefore selected for current
behavior. Thus, the wing loading for the QB-BJ conceptual design phase of the QB-BJ.
design is taken to be 714.7 (N/m2).
9 Requirements on Cabin and Fuselage
8 Thrust Loading and Engine Selection aerodynamic and structural Design
The determination of the thrust loading is based The fuselage serves a multitude of functions and
on two constraints: Take-off Distance and Rate should meet various requirements. Since it
of Climb. The results of the thrust based on houses the cabin, it should meet safety,
these constraints are tabulated in Table 5 as passenger and crew members well-being and
follows: airline requirements. The configuration and
Table 5: Calculated thrust cabin lay-out should be acceptable to the
passengers, and there are also psychological
Thrust
Constraint Parameters Ratio (T/W) aspects considerations.
Required [N]
Take-off distance 2081.71 0.0254 The Quad-Bubble (or D8) configuration
basically follows “tube and wing”
Rate of Climb 12138.75 0.4104
configuration, and as such will follow closely
Thrust loading based on rate of climb has been the structural design considerations of [1-4, 18].
selected because the engines to be selected later Aerodynamically, the fuselage should be
should produce the
thrust required at all
points in the flights,
which is critical
during take-off and
requires largest
thrust. The
maximum thrust
TMax required during
climb just after lift- Fig. 6: Considerations for fuselage cross-section, shell/web junction tension flows, torsion shear flow
from vertical tail load, and landing gear load, adapted from [4,16].
8
 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN STUDY OF QUAD-BUBBLE BUSINESS JET

designed to carry some lift (lifting body

considerations) and have less drag.
The dimensions of the cabin are dictated by an
aerodynamically optimized shape in which
compromises are made concerning the
efficiency of the structure.

Fig. 7: Gulfstream G550 Cabin Compartment

Arrangement
Following the philosophy of D8 transport
aircraft, the airframe structural and weight
Fig. 7: Gulfstream G550 Cabin Compartment
models treat the primary structure elements as
Arrangement
simple geometric shapes, with appropriate load
distributions imposed at critical loading cases. Fig. 8: QB-BJ Cabin Layout (Top and back view)
The fuselage is assumed to be a pressure vessel
with one or more “bubbles”, with added
bending loads, and sized to obtain a specified
stress at specified load situations. The wing is
assumed to be cantilevered or to have a single
support strut, the resulting fuselage, wing, and
tail material volumes, together with specified
material density, and then gives the primary
structural weight. The secondary structural
weights and non-structural and equipment
weights are estimated via statistical studies
Fig. 9: QB-BJ cabin with seats (front view)
following historical weight fractions.
Following D8 philosophy, the fuselage is addition the geometry also considers cabin
modelled as a side-by-side “Double-bubble” design requirements as previously mentioned
pressure vessel with an ellipsoidal nose end-cap and ergonomics.
and a hemispherical tail end-cap, which is
subjected to pressurization, bending, and torsion
Table 7: Conceptual Fuselage Dimension [9]
loads. Due considerations are given to the
placement of the landing gear which could Description
Table Dimension
[]: Conceptual Fuselage Dimension [9]
reduce the bending load at the wing-fuselage Length 25.00 m
junction. Width 3.54 m
Fuselage cross-section, shell/web junction Height 2.31 m
tension flows, and torsion shear flow from
vertical tail load should be given careful
considerations, with an optional bottom fairing. 10 Cabin Initial Weight Estimation
Following the structural design philosophy of
Drela [1-4] for the fuselage design, the
conceptual design of QB-BJ arrives at The initial weight estimation is carried out
configuration shown in Fig. 6 and Table 7. In based on best and conventional estimate. The
results are shown in Table 8.

9
 HARIJONO DJOJODIHARDJO, MUHAMMAD ANAS ABD BARI

by general premises having impact on all of the

Table 8: Initial weight estimation scenarios as well. These are the continuous
No Weight Total Weight growth of human being‟s dimensions known as
[kg] [kg] acceleration, enhanced in-flight safety and
Pilot 2 80 160
Flight Crew 2 70 140
Crew Hand Carry 4 7 28
Crew Luggage 4 15 60
Passenger 18 80 1440
Passenger Hand 18 7 126
Carry
Passenger 18 25 450
Luggage
Total 2404 Fig. 10: Schematic of Weight Distribution along the
Center Cabin Body

11 Cabin Sizing medical facilities (Eelman, [19]).

In the design of the present QB-BJ
configuration for 12-18 passengers with first
The pressurized cabin of the QB-BJ was class quality, the aisle width, seat pitch and seat
designed considering combined bending, shear width will be based on the typical passenger
and torsion from aerodynamic
loads. In comparison to the Table 10: Weights Arrangement due to Payload along the fuselage and CG
calculation
conventional circular fuselage, it
was predicted that the non- Quantity Unit Total Distance from ∑
conventional fuselage requires Weight Weight nose datum
higher structural strength (kg) (kg) (m)
Pilot 2 80 160 1.59 254.4
because of large bending stresses
Passenger 18 80 1440 11 15840
on the skin. For cabin passenger Flight Crew 2 70 140 11 1540
compartment sizing, we refer to Crew Hand 4 7 28 11 308
Drela‟s approach [1-4]. The carry
derivation of key requirements Passenger 18 7 126 11 1386
for cabin development follows Hand carry
the methodology as described in Crew 4 15 60 10.74 644.4
Luggage
the following development. Passenger 18 25 450 10.74 4833
Taking cabin standards Luggage
displayed in Fig. 7 as a Engine 2 290 580 12.38 7180.4
reference, standards for the QB- Wing 2 206.92 413.83 11.12 4599.81
BJ cabin are tailored according 3397.83 36586.01
to the requirements of the specific scenario. The compartment safety, comfort and airline
main geometric standards (such as class ratios, requirements. For the Aisle height, reference
seat pitch, seat width, aisle width, toilets per will be made to the RC-BJ in Fig. 7. Thus, the
passenger, and stowage spaces) are influenced passenger compartment for this QB-BJ
on the one hand by the relevant characteristics configuration can be defined as shown in Table
of the different scenarios, but on the other hand 9. Figs. 8 and 9 depict the cabin lay-out of the
present QB-BJ conceptual design.
Table 9: Passenger Compartment for QB-BJ
Configuration
12 Center of Gravity
TableDescription
9: Passenger CompartmentDimension
for Business Jet
Seat Pitch
BWB Configuration
1.016m Computation of the center of gravity distance of
Seat Width 0.711m
Aisle Width 0.711m
the center body proper yields a value of 10.77 m
Cabin height 1.829m from the nose datum. Fig. 10 exhibits the
skeleton of the Weight Distribution along the
10
 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN STUDY OF QUAD-BUBBLE BUSINESS JET

Center Cabin Body. This center of gravity

excludes sections 2 and 3 which are located
between the inboard and tip of the QB-BJ wing
sections.
The location and length of the Mean
Aerodynamic Center (MAC) of the QB-BJ wing
is important because the wing is joined to the
fuselage in this area so that careful
considerations of the relative position (or
alignment) of entire wing MAC with the aircraft
center of gravity should be taken into account in
the conceptual design. This provide first Fig. 12: V-n diagram for (Solid) QB-BJ and (dotted)
estimate of the wing position to attain the RC-BJ
required stability characteristic. As first estimate
for a stable aircraft, the calculation was done [15], the lift coefficient of lifting-body designed
such that it follows Raymer‟s [12] approach and fuselage and the nacelles can be appropriately
depicted in Fig.13; this will be followed by estimated. Based on typical fuselage angle of
further iteration. attack at cruise of 3 o, the lift coefficient is
estimated to be 0.07. Based on centre of gravity
13 Lift Distribution estimation from previous analysis, it is found
that the CG positon is at front of the
The fraction of the aircraft lift coefficient at Aerodynamics center (AC) with moment arm of
cruise can be summarised as follows: 0.61m. An assumption is also made that the AC
is located at about quarter-chord of the wing
CL  CLwing  CL fuse  CLtail  CLnacelle which is a typical value for a subsonic aircraft.
The moment arm for the horizontal tail on the
other hand was found to be 13.87m. Using this
data and appropriate estimate of the tail
aerodynamics and the longitudinal stability
analysis [9], the CL-tail can be estimated to be -
0.068. With these values, the wing coefficient is
then calculated and found to be 0.284. For
validation, the CL-wing was analysed by using
XFLR5 software and it is found that the value is
0.320 which suggest the calculated value is
relevant. The lift distribution is depicted in Fig.
11.

14 Detailed Analysis

14.1 Static Margin (S.M) Estimate

The estimation of the static margin for the QB-

BJ is crucial in order to determine the stability
Fig. 11: Lift Distribution for QB-BJ at cruise of current conceptual design. Stated in terms of
S.M, S.M>0 is favorable for stability criterion.
At cruise, the total CL was calculated to be From [9], it was calculated that the S.M for the
0.295. With such information and considering QB-BJ is 1.08 which indicate that the aircraft is
suggestion from [1-4], the CL-fuse was found to stable. Although this value been considered as
be 0.065. Using the data from From Saltzman

11
 HARIJONO DJOJODIHARDJO, MUHAMMAD ANAS ABD BARI

Table 11: Summary of QB-Business Jet Configuration and Performance in Comparison with RC-BJ

Intended QB-BJ Conceptual

Parameters Unit RCBJ
Improvement Phase Outcome
Parameters Unit
No. of Passengers Person 18.00 18.00 18.00
No. of Passengers
Range km Person
12501.00 12501.00 12501.00
Range
MTOW kg km
41276.91 35952.00 29576.98
MTOW
Cruise Altitude m kg
13716.00 11500.00 12192.00
CruiseSpeed
Cruise Altitude km/h m
926.00 926.00 926.00
Cruise
Wing Speed
Span m km/h
28.50 29.38 36.01
WingArea
Wing Span m^2 m
115.00 109.60 82.77
Wing Angle
Sweep Area degree m^2
27.00 25.00 30.00
Sweep
Fuel Angle
weight kg degree
23362.00 23362.00 5665.00
Fuel
CL max weight kg
1.35 1.00 0.85
CLmax Distance
Take-off m 1801.30 1700.00 1700.00
Take-offLength
Fuselage Distance m m
26.16 26.00 25.00
FuselageWidth
Fuselage Length m m2.39 3.54
FuselageHeight
Fuselage Width m m2.39 2.31
Fuselage
Landing Height
Distance m m
844.30 800.00 800.00
LandingT/W
Take-off Distance m0.34 0.40 0.41
Take-off
Thrust T/W
at cruise N 20199.00 20199.00 17259.95
Thrust at cruise N
Table 11: Summary of QB-Business Jet
normal in various commercial aircrafts, one can Configuration and Performance in Comparison
determined according with RC-BJ
to the mission profile and
conclude that it is too stable which would render FAR regulation. According to Sadraey [20] and
maneuverability. More refine and detail Raymer [12], the envelop was constrained by
iterations are currently under progress for better aerodynamic limit curve and structural limit
performance. line. Meticulous and careful judgement was
initiated into the calculation for the QB-BJ and
14.2 Flight Envelope also RC-BJ for comparison purpose as depicted
in Fig. 12. Initial estimate suggest that the QB-
The V-n diagram of flight envelop was BJ posses better performance compared to the
RC-BJ. However for a transonic fying aircraft,
0.77 m drag contribution from
the wave is an issue
that need to be
considered. Therefore
further iteration is
currently in progress to
enhance performance
30
o
especially to reduce
18 m 0.73 m
this drag while
maintaining the aircraft
aerodynamic
efficiency.
7.88m

3.83 m 15 Summary of
1.77m Preliminary
CG
10.77 m
1.62 m
Conceptual Design
25.0 m
Refined weight
Fig. 13: QB-BJ Conceptual Design phase dimension [9] estimation and detailed

12
 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN STUDY OF QUAD-BUBBLE BUSINESS JET

calculations have been made based on lifting

surface method on both QB-BJ and RC-BJ
planform wing. Hence, it can be concluded that
the QB- configuration is able to generate lift
over wing span higher compared to
conventional aircraft as represented by the RC-
BJ. The conceptual QB-BJ has Quad-Bubble
fuselage section that allows wide-body-like
cabin. The design of QB configuration, similar
to and inspired by the design philosophy of
Drela [1-4], contributes towards significantly
lower weight and fuel burn of the overall QB-BJ
configuration. Overall, the QB-BJ as conceived
has met or rated better than the intended
improvement in comparison to the RC-BJ.
Refined computation is currently in progress.
Fig. 14: Three-view Impression of QB-Business Jet
References
aerodynamic analysis using CFD are
Fig. 12: Three-view Impression of QB-Business Jet [1] Drela M, Development of the D8 Transport
progressively carried out [10]. Table 10 exhibits Configuration, AIAA2011_3970, AIAA
the arrangement of weights based on Appl.Aero.Conf, 2011
conventional payload and engine along the [2] Drela M, An Integrated Approach to the Design-
fuselage. Optimization of an N+3 Subsonic Transport, MIT,
The preliminary dimension of the QB-BJ is [3] AIAA 28th Applied Aerodynamics Conference, June
2010
depicted in Fig. 13 along with the CG [4] Drela M, Development of the D8 Transport
estimation. The Lift distribution along the QB- Configuration, AIAA 29th Applied Aerodynamics
BJ is exhibited in Figs. 11, which has been Conference, 2011
meticulously computed using XFLR5 [10] and [5] Greitzer E M, N+3 Aircraft Concept Designs and
elaborated in [9]. A three-view impression of Trade Studies, Final Report, Vol.1, MIT, 2010
[6] Djojodihardjo H, Aircraft Trailing Vortices - Cirrus
QB-Business Jet Configuration conceived is Cloud Interaction and Green Aircraft Technology: An
exhibited in Fig. 14. Table 11 compares the QB- Overview, Proceeding of the 2013 IEEE International
Business Jet Configuration and Performance Conference on Space Science and Communication
with RC-BJ. (IconSpace), 1-3 July 2013, Melaka, Malaysia.
[7] NASA (2012) , Green Aviation - A Better Way to
Treat the Planet, green_aviation_fact_sheet_web-
16 Conclusions Accessed 2 December 2012
The QB-BJ configuration was compared in [8] ICAO (2010), ICAO Environmental Report 2010,
Chapter 2: Aircraft Technology Improvement,
Table 2 to the design baseline aircraft, RC-BJ, http://legacy. icao.int/icao/en/ env2010/Pubs/
which is similar to the characteristics, EnvReport 2010/ ICAO-Env Report 10-Ch2-en.pdf,
specifications and performance to the candidate accessed 30 March 2013.
Conventional Business Jet chosen in the [9] Djojodihardjo H and Bari M A A, Aerodynamic
statistical study. In the aerodynamic analysis, Analysis and Design of a Double-Bubble-Inspired
the conservative estimate of the L/D ratio of the Aircraft Configuration, UPM Aerospace Engineering
Department Internal Report 2014, to be published.
QB-BJ configuration is 25, which is 1.34 times [10] XFLR5 software, http://www.xflr5.com/xflr5.htm,
higher than a typical conventional business jet Accessed on 20th June 2014.
aircraft represented by the reference RC-BJ. [11] Djojodihardjo H and Kek A L W, Conceptual
More detailed comparison could be made in Design And Aerodynamic Study Of Blended Wing
the computational approach and a simulation of Body Business Jet, paper ICAS 2012-112
[12] Raymer D P, Aircraft Design: A Conceptual
flow on the simulated QB-BJ aircraft section by Approach, 2nd Ed. AIAA, USA, 1992.
section. In the theoretical approach, preliminary

13
 HARIJONO DJOJODIHARDJO, MUHAMMAD ANAS ABD BARI

[13] Djojodihardjo H and Kim E F, Conceptual Design it as part of their paper. The authors confirm that they
and Aerodynamic Study of Joined-Wing Business Jet give permission, or have obtained permission from the
Aircraft, Journal of Mechanics Engineering and copyright holder of this paper, for the publication and
Automation 3 (2013) 263-278. distribution of this paper as part of the ICAS2014
[14] Djojodihardjo H and Ibrahim F, Internal Report, proceedings or as individual off-prints from the
Comparative Study of Double-Bubble, Blended- proceedings.
Wing body and Joined-Wing Business Jets,
Aerospace Engineering Department, Universiti Putra
Malaysia, June 2013.
[15] NATS and the Environment Report, 2009,
http://www.nats.aero/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/
NATSEnvironmentPlan.pdf, accessed 27 June 2014.
[16] Airfoil-Investigation-Database-Comparing-Airfoils,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/95113469/Airfoil-
Investigation-Database-Comparing-Airfoils
[17] Airfoil Tools. http://www.airfoiltools.com/, accessed
on 20th June 2014.
[18] Greitzer E M, Design methodologies for
aerodynamics structures weight and thermodynamic
cycles, Final_Report, Vol.2, MIT, March 2010
[19] Eelman S, Airlines magazines, “Scenarios of
European Airport Capacity and the Implications for
Aircraft Technology in the Year 2020”, Accessed
12th December 2010, <http://www.aerlines.nl/ index.
php/2005/scenarios-of-european-airport-capacity-and
-the-implications-for-aircraft-technology-in-the-year-
2020/>
[20] Sadraey M, Aircraft Design: A systems Engineering
Approach, Chapter 5, Wiley Publication, 2012.
faculty.dwc.edu/sadraey/Chapter%205.%20Wing%2
0Design.pdf, accessed 27th June 2014.

Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank Universiti
Putra Malaysia (UPM) for granting Research
University Grant Scheme (RUGS)
No.9378200, and the ministry of higher
education ERGS: 5527088 ; FRGS:5524250
under which the present research is carried
out.

Contact Author Email Address

Harijono Djojodihardjo. Professor, Aerospace
Engineering Department, Faculty of
Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400
UPM Serdang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.
Email address: [email protected]

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

14