Calculating Mass MoI of Aircraft Accurately

  • Thread starter Thread starter SubZer0
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Aircraft Mass
AI Thread Summary
Calculating the mass moment of inertia (MoI) for aircraft requires careful consideration of component masses and their distribution. It can be approached by breaking the aircraft into pieces and transforming each into point masses, or by integrating over the entire mass. CAD software can assist in these calculations, but often misses critical components like fasteners, cockpit instruments, and equipment, leading to inaccuracies. Additionally, factors such as fuel mass and distribution are frequently overlooked in CAD models. Accurate mass property calculations are complex and often necessitate specialized expertise within engineering teams.
SubZer0
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

Just a quick question about calculating the mass MoI for aircraft (accurately). Is the whole of the aircraft broken up into pieces, the mass calculated for the component, and then transformed into a point mass? Or the integral calculated over the entire mass of the aircraft as point masses?

Is there any CAD software out there that will do this from models?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
CAD software should "do" the basic calculations , but the answers may be significantly wrong because of "missing mass" in the models. For example CAD models often don't include all the fasteners joining the various parts, and hundreds or thousands of nuts bolts and rivets can add up to a lot of mass. For an aircraft they probably wouldn't include the mass of things like the cockpit instruments and controls, and maybe not even "bought in" equipment like the passenger seats (not to mention the mass of the passengers!).

The CAD models would probably not contain the mass of fuel, hydraulic fluids, etc, either, and the mass distribution of the fuel between the various tanks will not be constant.

Calculating mass properties accurately for "real" engineering structures is non trivial and often labor intensive - in fact in the company I work for there is a specialist department that does that one task and nothing else.
 
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top