Aircraft Stabilizer Sacrificial Surfaces Engine Burst
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional gas turbine engine configurations are not adaptable to alternate aircraft architectures, limiting the implementation of favorable wing and fuselage configurations, and pose survivability issues due to potential engine failure fragmentation.
Innovation Solution
The aircraft features a propulsion system with angled gas generators and a burst zone containing sacrificial control surfaces, where the gas generators are oriented at angles relative to each other and the fuselage, and the horizontal stabilizer includes frangible connections to maintain control and stability in case of engine failure.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Adaptability or versatility
If gas turbine engines are mounted in alternate locations to enable specific wing and fuselage configurations, then aircraft architecture flexibility is improved, but engine survivability deteriorates due to potential fragmentation from engine failure
Solution Approach 1:
The horizontal stabilizer is segmented into a structural box portion and sacrificial control surface portions. The sacrificial portions are positioned within the burst zone and can break away during engine failure, while the structural box remains intact to maintain aircraft control. This segmentation allows the stabilizer to both occupy the burst zone for architectural flexibility and survive engine failure.
Solution Approach 2:
The control surfaces are extracted from the main structural box of the horizontal stabilizer and positioned as separate sacrificial elements within the burst zone. This extraction allows the critical structural box to be protected from fragmentation while the sacrificial control surfaces absorb the impact of engine failure.
2Adaptability or versatility
If control surfaces are positioned within the burst zone to enable favorable wing and fuselage configurations, then aircraft design flexibility is improved, but control surface integrity deteriorates due to exposure to engine fragmentation
Solution Approach 1:
Different portions of the horizontal stabilizer have different structural qualities. The structural box has high strength and rigidity to maintain control, while the sacrificial control surfaces have lower strength and are designed to break away. This local differentiation allows the stabilizer to both access the burst zone and maintain overall integrity.
Solution Approach 2:
The sacrificial control surfaces are designed as disposable elements that can be sacrificed during engine failure. These surfaces are positioned within the burst zone and will break away under impact, protecting the more critical structural box while accepting their own destruction.
3Reliability
If a robust structural box is created to protect primary control surfaces, then control surface protection is improved, but device complexity increases due to additional structural requirements
Solution Approach 1:
The structural box combines the vertical stabilizers, primary control surfaces, and support structures into a single integrated rigid framework. This merging provides comprehensive protection for critical control elements while avoiding the complexity of separate protective structures for each component.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
An aircraft includes a tail extending from a fuselage. The tail defines a structural box having first and second vertical stabilizers that support a horizontal stabilizer. The tail includes at least one sacrificial control surface and at least one primary control surface. The primary control surfaces maintain aircraft controllability in the event that the sacrificial control surface becomes inoperable.