REPORT 1278 EFFECT OF INTERACTION ON LANDING-GEAR BEHAVIOR AND DYNAMIC LOADS IN A FLEXIBLE AIRPLANE STRUCTURE’ By Praxeis B, Cox and SUMMARY ‘The effects of interaction between a landing gear and a flexible airplane structure on the behavior of the landing gear and the Toads in the siructure have Been studied by treating the equations of motion of the airplane and the landing gear as @ coupled system. The landing gear is considered to have nonlinear characteristics typical of conventional gears, namely, velocity. aquared damping, polytropic air-compression springing, and exponential tire force-deflection characteristics. For the case where only two modes of the structure are considered, an equioa- lent three-mass system is derived for representing the airplane and landing-gear combination, which may be used to simulate the effects of structural flexibility in jig drop teste of landing gears. As examples to illustrate the effects of interaction, numerical caleulations, based on the structural properties of two large air- planes having considerably different mass and flevibility charac- teristics, are presented. For the partiowlar cases considered, it was found that the effects of interaction, can result in appreci- able reductions in the magnitude of the landing-gear force, particularly when the flexibility of the airplane structure is large and the natural frequency is small. Thus, neglect of interaction effects, that is, the use of the landing-gear forcing function for a rigid airplane, in a dynamic analysis of a flexible airplane can lead to the caleulation of excessive loads in the airplane struc- ture, In the case of one of the airplanes considered, the structural loads calculated from the interaction solutions are greater than those for a completely rigid airplane treatment (rigid struc- ture subjected to rigid-body forcing function) because the effects of dynamic magnification more than overcome the reduction in landing-gear force due to interaction. In the ease of the second airplane, because of the relatively large natural period of the structure in comparison. with the duration of the impact pulse, the dynamic magnification factor is appreciably less than, unity. This effect, coupled with the reductions in landing-gear force due to interaction, results in structural loads that are less than those for a rigid airplane. INTRODUCTION In the design of landing gears it is usually assumed that tho airplane is rigid body and development tests are "supesods NAGA Teele Note 3 by Franc, Cook and Benamin Dicky, 0 Bassas Mauwinexy frequently carried out in a drop-test jig with a landing gear attached to a concentrated mess. In so doing, it is tacitly assumed that the interaction between the motions of the Ianding gear and the deformations of the airplane structure has little or no effect on the behavior of the landing gear. Also, load time histories obtained on a rigid-body basis are often used as the forcing function in e dynamic analysis to determine tho inertia loads and stresses in flexible airplane structures, again under the assumption that tho behavior of the landing goar is independent of tho offects of airplane flexibility. Although it has been recognized that this assump- tion is not altogether valid, the errors involved have not been considered particularly significant in the past because: (a) ‘The errors were thought to be on the conservative side and (b) until comparatively recently main landing gears have generally been located very close to the nodes of tho fundamental bending mode of the wing, and the airplane therefore closely approximated a rigid body insofar as the behavior of the landing gear is concerned. However, the trend toward increased size of airplanes, the disposition of Jarge concentrated masses in outboard locations in the wings, the use of thinner wings, and the development of unconventional configurations tend to increase the flexibility of the airplane structure and reduce the natural frequencies of vibration. ‘These characteristics tend to eause an increase in the amplitudes of tho oscillatory motions of the landing- gear attachment points relative to the center of gravity of the flexible system during impact so that the effects of intor- action are increased, both with regard to the behavior of the landing gear and the dynamie loads in the structure, par~ ticularly when the natural period of the fundamental mode of the structure approaches the time duration of the impact pulse A number of analytical studies and some simplified model tests (rofs. 1 to 5) which have been made to evaluate the effects of structural flexibility on landing-gear londs have indicated some reduction in landing-gear force due to the effects of structural deformation. However, in view of the fact that these previous investigations considered only rather highly idealized linear-spring landing gears with cithor no damping at all or viscous damping, a further study of the effects of intereotion between the landing gear and 619620 the airplane structure has been made with a more realistic representation of the landing gear. In tho present analysis, as in reference 6, the landing gear is considered to have velocity-squared damping, polytgopic air-compression spring- ing, and exponential tire force-deflection characteristies, as is the case with conventional oleo-pnoumatic landing gears in current use. ‘The particular purposes of this investigation are to evaluate tho effects of interaction on the behavior of the landing gear and to study the errors introduced into the calculated loads in the structure (applied loads, accelerations, bending moments, and sheers) when a dynamie analysis is made on the basis of applying the Ianding-gear forcing func tion for a rigid body to a ficxible airplane. For these pw poses, case-history studies, based on the structural properties of two Innge airplanes having considerably different mass and flexibility characteristies, are presented. In order to cover a range of parameters, the landing gear of each airplane was assumed to be located at three arbitrary spanwise positions in addition to its original location. Only symmetrical impact conditions are considered. ‘The basic anelysis of the landing gear and the airplane structure as a coupled system is presented in general form. In the numerical examples presented, however, the system is simplified by considering the motions of the airplano in its first two structural modes only. With these restrictions, the combination of airplane and landing gear can also be represented by an equivelent three-mass system which may be used in jig drop tests of lending gears to simulate the primary effects of structural flexibility. A similar type of concentrated-mass system was used in the study of the hydrodynamic impact of a flexible seaplane in reference 7. SYMBOLS 4 gravitational constent EK, lift factor, Leg Wer Lue total lift force (half the airplane) t time after initial contact + time variable of integration T time to maximum landing-geer force v time efter maximum landing-gear force Vy, vertical velocity at initial contact Wir total weight (half the airplane) a circular frequency of sine pulse a circular frequency-of cosine pulse » any variable 2, value of any variable at end of pth interval sub- sequent to beginning of numerical integration procedure A pneumatic area of shock strat ‘Ay hydraulic area of shock strut, AA, ‘A; intemal erose-sectional area’ of shock-strut inner cylinder Aq net orifice aree of shock strut, A.-4, ‘A, area of fixed opening in orifice plate ‘A, cross-sectional area of motering pin or rod in plane of orifice Ce Py Pr,(2) nm a Ps eo te a We ES te & REPORT 1278—NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS orifice discharge coefficient vertical component of foree in shock strut subso~ quent to beginning of shock-strut deflection vertical foree applied to tire at ground unsprung mass below shock strut constants in tire force-deflection relationship polytropic exponent for air-compression process shock strut air pressure in shock strut when fully extended mass density of hydraulic fluid air volume of shock strut when fully extended shock-strut stroke duration of impact pulse angle between shock-strut axis and vertical weight of unsprung mass below shock strut vertical displacement of lending-gear attachmont point from position at initial contact vertical displacement of axle from position at initial contaet isTaIpUTED STRUCTURE generalized coordinate for nth mode angle of twist of transverse station modal function for torsion in nth mode vertical displacement of elastic axis from position at initial contact modal function of elastic axis for bending in mth mode vertical displacement of stat position at initial contact modal function of station mass centers for coupled ending torsion in nth mode modal amplitude of landing-gear attachment point for coupled bending-torsion in nth mode chordwise distance between clastic axis and station mass center swing span bending moment vertical component of applied landing-goar foreo natural frequeney of first deflection mode polar moment of inertia of wing cross section about station mass center polar moment of inertia of wing cross section about clastic axis radius of gyration of wing station about clastic axis lift force per unit length of span mass per tnit length of span generalized mass for nth mode (half tho airplano) cireular frequency of nth mode generalized forea in nth mode shear natural period of nth mode chordwise distence botween clastic axis and any arbitrary point chordwise distance between clastic axis and landing- gear attachment point spanwise distance from airplane centor plano to any: ‘transverse station n mass conters fromEFFECT OF INTERACTION ON LANDING-GEAR BEHAVIOR 621 Ye spanwise distanco from airplane center plane to landing-gear station 2 vortical displacement of any point from position at, initial eontact: % —__vertieal displacement of Ionding-geer attachment point from position at initial contact % vertical displacement of axle from position ot initial contact, ia, virtual displacement of generalized coordinate of nth mode 81, virtual work in nth mode EQUIVALENT THREEMASS SYSTEM dg _vertical displacement of eenter of gravity of spring- connected masses from position of initial contact k spring constant Ly lift foree acting on mass m, Z, lift foree acting on mass m, ‘m, mass acting directly on landing gear m, elastically supported mass : natural frequency of vibration of spring-connected « deftection of spring W, weight of mass acting directly on landing gear W, weight of clastically supported mass. 2% vertical deflection of landing-gear attachment point 2, vertical deflection of elastically supported mass 2% vertical displacement of axle from position at initial contact Asnoprvanac A total wing area (half the airplane) ‘Ac Wing area assumed concentrated at station ¢ G, lift coefficient C;, Tift coefficient ot instant of initial contact Cr, Iift-eurve slope 7 flight-path angle ‘ve light-path angle at instent of initial contact e mass density of air Vi, landing speed of airplane Subscripts: a aerodynamic f Janding-gear attachment point ¢ Janding-gear station i any spanwise station ” pertaining to the nth mode 0 zero or rigid-body mode 1 at instant of initial shock-strut motion r tant of maximum landing-gear force maz maximum ‘Tho use of dots over symbols indicates differentiation with respect to time or 7. All translations are positive downward (eee figs. 1 to 3). ‘The absolute value of any torm () is indicated by |( )f ANALYSIS In order to study the behavior of a landing gear and 9 flexible airplane structure as mutually interacting elements of a coupled system, the equations for the landing-gear force aro combined with the equations of motion of the structure. ‘Tho motions of the structure are treated by the ‘mode-superposition approuch, wherein the deflections of the structure are expanded in terms of its natural modes of vibration. The effects of interaction between the landing gear and the structure are introduced by expressing the Janding-gear foree in terms of the motions of the landing-gear attachment point and the wheel axlo (or unsprung mass) rather than as an arbitrary funetion of time, Becauise conventional oleo-pneumatic shock struts do not begin to deflect until some finite timo aftor initial contact of the tire with the ground, the impact is treated in two parts, namely, the phases prior to and subsequent to the beginning of shock-strut deflection, where the initial conditions for the second phase are determined from the terminal conditions for the first phase. In the first part of the analysis, the equations for the Innding-gear force are presented. ‘Then, the deflections of ‘the structure are expanded in terms of coupled modes and the resulting equations of motion for the system are presented in goneral form. For the purpose of indicating the quanti- tative effects of interaction, however, the system used in the numerical trend studies has been simplified by restricting consideration of the structural deflections to the first two modes of the expansion. Within tho framework of this two-mode treatment, itis also shown that the airplane struc- ture can be represented by an equivalent system of spring- connected concentrated masses, which may be used to simulate the effects of structural flexibility in jig drop tests of landing gears. -ANDING-GEAR FORCE ‘An analysis of the behavior of tho conventional type of oleo-pneumatic landing gear was presented in reference 6. In this study the mass above the landing gear wes considered as a rigid body; the system treated therefore had two degrees of freedom and is schematically represented in figure 1. The analysis of the landing gear considered the velocity-squared damping of the metering orifice, the air-compression springing of the shock strut, the nonlinear force-deflection charac- teristics of the tire, and the internel shock-strut friction forces. Calculated time. histories of the lending-gear forces ‘and the motions of the system were in good agreement with experimental data obtained in drop tests, Tn the present study the rigid mass is replaced by a flexible airplane structure, but the treatment of the Innding gear is essentially the same a8 that in reference 6. However, since conventional Ianding gears are inclined forward so 2s to minimize normal forces and bending moments due to the conibination of vertical and drag forces, it will be assumed that the resultant force on the landing gear lies along the axis of the shock strut so that strut bending moments and resulting internal friction forces are neglected in the present enalysis. Tn view of the fact that conventional oleo-pneumatie shock struts are preloaded with air and therefore do not begin to deflect until some finite time ¢, after initial contact of the tire with the ground, the impact must be treated in two phases. In tho first phase, since the strut is effectively rigid,622 ut (@) System with two degrees of freedom. REPORT 1278—-NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMOTTEE FOR AERONAUTICS o () Schematic representation of shock strut, Browne 1.—Dynamieal aystem (tigid airplane) considered in reference 6. the Innding gear hes only one degree of freedom and the motion of the complete system of tho landing gear and airplane is governed by the foreo between the tire and the ground. This ground foree arises from the deflection of the tire and, in general, may be written as Fr =F ree) « the exact variation depending on the particular tire force-deflection characteristics. Prior to the beginning of shock-strut deflection st) (1a) since 4=2,. (This relationship is exact when the landing gear is vertical and holds very closely when the goar is inclined.) ‘Tho shock strut starts to deflect at the timo ¢, when the force exerted on the airplane by the shock strut becomes equal Fe Fr le) to the air-pressure preloading force in the strut. At this instant the free-body equation for the unsprung mass of the Tending gear is akg, + Prg(@r,)=Pagte 008 0+ We ‘Equation (2) provides the relationship between the ter- ‘minal conditions for the first phaso of the impact which, in conjunction with the solution of tho equations of motion for the complete system prior to shock-strut doflection, deter mines the time ¢- when the shock strut begins to deflect and, ‘thus, the terminal values of the variables for the first phase of the impact. ‘These values then serve as the initial conditions for the socond phase of the impact. ‘After the shock strut bogins to deflect, the landing gear ‘has tivo degrees of freedom, sinco the motions of the landing- gear attachment point and the motions of the unsprung mass aro no longer the same. Tho equation for the vertical (t=t) @EFFECT OF INTERACTION ON LANDING-GEAR BEHAVIOR componentof theforee transmitted to the airplane by the land- ing gear aftor tho shock strut starts to deflect is (sve ref. 6) afip Pt Aes) Jose zt) where epee =co8 8 080 ‘The equation of motion of the unsprung mass is mat Fr(ed=FrtW. (zt) “ In equation (@) the first term represents the hydraulic force in the shock strut, whore the factor (5 indicates the chango in sign required between the compression and exten- sion strokes. (During the extension stroke of the shock strut, because of the action of the rebound check valve or “gnubber” incorporated in most landing gears, the not orifice area A, will generally be smaller and the orifice discharge coefficient C, will be different from the values which apply during the compression stroke.) The second term of equa- tion (3) expresses the air-compression forea in the strut, based on a polytropic pressure-volume relationship. In equation (4), the force arising from the deflection of the tire may bo expressed as Fy,(2,)=ma" for the usual types of pneumatic tires, where m and r are constants for each regime of the tire-deflection process (see ref. 6). [RQUATIONS OF MOTION OP THE AIRPLANE Differential equations of airplane structure —In the mode- iperposition approach, the structure is considered to deflect in its natural modes of vibration and the total displacement of any point in the system is the sum of the displacements of the point in all the modes considered. With this approach the motions are separated into funetions which depend only on the space coordinates and funetions which depend on the time variable, In the case of a landing impact the process is discontinuous at the instant t, when the shock strut begins to deflect. In first phase of the impact the shock strut is effectively s0 that the motion of the unsprung mass of the land- ing gear is essentially the same as the motion of the landing- gear attachment point and tho force transmitted by the Janding gear to tho airplane is tho vectorial sum of the ground foreo due to tire deflection, the inertia reaction of the unsprung mass, and the weight of the unsprung mass. In the second phaso of the impact, the motion of the un- sprung mass is not the same as the motion of the landing- gear attachment point and the foreo applied to the airplane is governed by the relative motion between the landing-gear attachment point and the unsprung mass, as given by equation (3). ® Reference pone __-*Poot of frce eppcaton [cca (@) Coordinates along elastic axis () Coordinates at any transverse station, (6) Coordinates at landing-gear station. ‘Fiovan 2—Coordinates for eirplane structure. ‘The notation employed in the analysis is indicated in figure 2. A typical transverse station located at ® span- wise distance y from the airplane center plane is considered. ‘The mass per unit length of span is designated by m. ‘The translation of the clastic axis at the station is denoted by 1; {ris the translation of the station mass center; «is the chord wise distance between the station mass center and the elastic axis; and g is the angle of twist of the station. ‘Tho trans- lation of an arbitrary point located at a chordwise distance 2 from the clastic axis is designated by 2. ‘The spanwise distance from the center plane of the airplane to the landing- gear station is indicated by y,. ‘The translation of the Janding-gear attachment point, or foree-application point, is designated 2,; the distance between the landing-gar attach- ment point and the elastic axis is denoted by 2,. In the most general case, the expansion of the deflection of the structure in terms of its natural coupled modes of vibration may be written as wy, t)= Zao) ©) and ,0=FpetOela) ©2d. where the subscript m denotes the order of any mode, dy is the generalized coordinate in the nth mode, and w, and % are the corresponding modal funetions for bending and torsion, respectively. For later use it is convenient to introduce expressions for the displacements at other points in the structure. Since the translation of the station mass centers is given by T=w-heg, it follows thet Hew Der) o where the modal function t=w,-tep,. ‘The translation of any arbitrary point along the chord is given by 2=w-+zy; therefore, aay =Ziaa(e@) ® where the modal function 2,—=w,t29_. The translation of the landing-gear attachment point is given by g=w-+2,@; therefore, 212,40 = Daal Dial) ® where the modal amplitude &—=wet2/r0 By application of Lagrange’s equation and the orthogo- nality relationships between coupled modes, it ean be shown, (Gee, for example, refs. 8 to 10) that the equation of motion for the airplane in the nth mode mey be written as Mutat Mycolt=Q, — (n=0,1,2, - - (0) where My is termed the generalized! mass for the nth modo and Qa is tho generalized force, as determined from virtual- work considerations. For a continuous system, aoe mace 2 [mein dt [my =f mca PP Levy In practice the spanwise mass distribution is often approxi- mated by breaking up the distribution into. discrete masses which are concentrated at a finite number of stations along the span. With this approach equation (11) may be written as Myx Zi(maea + 2masseafeac MEF 2) Dima tLe’) ia where the subscript i denotes any spanwise station. For n=0 (rigid-body mode), since 1=t>=1 and ~=0, Mom f"m dy Zam REPORT 1278—NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS ‘The relationship between Qu and the externel forces can be determined by application of virtual-work principles, ‘By dofinition, the work done in the nth mode by the general- ized force acting through a virtual displacement of the gon- eralized coordinate of the mode is equal to the work done by the external forces acting through virtual displacements of their points of application in the mode. ‘Thus, the virtual work.done by the generalized force in the nth modo is STV .= Oat (a2) Tn the case of an airplane during landing, the external forces are tho distributed lift forces L(y), the distributed weights gm(y), and the force F transmitted by tho landing gear. The virtual work done by these external forces in ‘the nth mode is therefore givon by IWem—(fP"Laaresdy~of.” miss y+ Fanta) 0n( f°" Len dy—of-” mts dy +Ft.) ‘Equeting equations (12) and (13) gives the following relationship for Qx: Qn (" Len dy af” min dv FE.) ‘Therefore, the equation of motion of the structure in the nth mode is (a3) Metin +} Mywogty? Fie [Len dvto mba dy (n=0,1,2,...) (14) For the rigid-body mode (n=0), since wp=0 and 29=fo= b= 1, equation (14) becomes Meie= — foamy subject to the initial conditions and If the airplane is assumed to be freo of oscillations at the timo of initial contact, (0)=4,(0)=0 (neo) ‘At the instant of initial contact, the airplane may be accelerating, thet is, 49(0) #0, if the total lift is not exactly ‘equal to the total woight. Consideration of the balance of forees on the unsprung mass as a free body leads to the following equation for the force applied to the airplane byBFFECT OF INTERACTION ON LANDING-GEAR BEHAVIOR the landing gear at the instant of contact: —w, | 2O_. ro=w, [401] Substitution of this relationship into the equation of motion for the rigid-body mode gives wf ** L— gm)dy O-—trem, —— —Ki)g where a so that FO)=-K,Wy ‘With this definition of F(0) and the initiel conditions for the modes m0, equation (14) applied to the instant =0 ives Om aa(af” mre dy-[" Le dv+HaM.t,) (x0) This relationship indicates that, in general, a finite static deflection in the flexible modes will be present at the time of initial contact. At any subsequent time the deflection will be equal to this initial static deflection plus an addi- tional deflection aq, which varies with time; that is, ‘This substitution permits equation (14) to =—F+EWe — (nx0) (15) subject to the initial conditions 44,0) (0) =0 In tho remainder of the report, for the sake of simplicity of notation, the subscript ¢ will be dropped, with the under- standing that a, represents the time-varying part of the displacement of the nth mode, so that equation (18) is written as Myay + Masi (FLEW ia If the external forces are specified solely as functions of time, the equations of motion for each mode of the system are uncoupled and can be solved individually. However, whon tho external forees depend on tho motions of the sys- tem, as in the caso of the landing-gear force during a landing impact, the relationships between the externel forces and the motions in the modes serve to couple the equations of motion so that they must be solved simultaneously. Furthermore, in the caso of landing impact, since the process has two (60) (150) 625 phases, as previously discussed, the equations of motion for each phase must be solved separately, whero the initial conditions for the second phase are the same as the terminal conditions for the first phase. ‘Motion prior to beginning of shock-strut deflection. — Since the shock strut is effectively rigid in tho first phase of tho impact, the force transmitted by the landing gear to the airplane, F in equation (1a), is equal to the ground force Fy,(c;) less tho inertia reaction of the unsprung mass and tho weight of the unsprung mass, as may be seen by consider- ing the unsprung mass as a free body; thus, Fist,=Fr (etm —We so that the motions of the system during the first phase of the impact are governed by the following set of differential equation: Miio=— (Fo) + m+ WeolKi-W) Miart+Myota=—[Fy,(2)-+m.8+W Eel est) Metin} Mig? tg =— [Fy (29) +m 2+} WW, (16) where and the mth mode is the highest mode considered. ‘The initial conditions for equations (16) are the conditions at the instant of initial contact, namely, and 4,(0)=4,(0)=0 (n x0) As previously indicated, the first phase of the impact terminates at the time t, when tho force in tho shock strut becomes equal to the airpressura preload force. ‘The ter- sainal conditions at this instant, as determined by considar- ation of the unsprung mass as a free body, aro given by equation @), namely, ig + Fr (e1)= Pope 008 04+ Ws ‘Tho solution of equations (16) in conjunetion with equa- tion @) permits the dotermination of tho time & when tho shock strut begins to deflect and the values of the motion variables ot this instant; these values then serve es the initial conditions for the second phaso of the impact. Motion subsequent to beginning of shock-strut deflec- tion.—In the second phase of the impact the foreo trans- mitted by the landing gear, F in equation (15a), is the ver- tical component of the shock-strut foree Fy,, as given by626 REPORT 12/8—NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR ABRONAUTICS equation (8). ‘Thus, the motions of the system during the second phase of the impact are governed by the following set of differential equations: Moiio=— (Fy, +W.)—Weu( Ke) Mit Myoytag=—Fr,+¢ KW Mint Metta —(Fret Fein | (7) OD and where Fr le—tu tb) as given by equation (8); and 2 Zyinte ‘The first m equations of equations (17) represent the mo- tions of the airplane structure in its first m modes, whereas the last equation of the sot is the equation of motion of the ‘unsprung mass of the landing gear as previously given by equation (4). The initial conditions for equations (17) are the terminal conditions for equations (16) 9s previously discussed. Tn view of the fact that the Ianding-gear foreing term Fy, is highly nonlinear, analytical solution of the sys~ tem of equations (17) does not appear possible, so that it is necessary to resort to numerical-integration or analog methods. ‘The preceding section has presented tho equations of motion for a flexible airplane coupled to a lending gear, which permit calculation of the motions of the system during a landing impact with consideration of as meny modes as may be desired. For the study of the effects of inter- action between the lending gear and the structure, however, it appears that the primary effects of structural flexibility on the behavior of the landing gear can be represented by considering only the first deflection mode in addition to the rigid-body mode." This simplification, which greatly reduces the amount of computational work, is felt to be justified for the purposes of the present investigation since both theoret- ical considerations and experimental data indicate that the higher modes should have relatively little effect on tho Janding-gear performance. With this assumption the equa- ina namic anal sone nto srsare da to eatin of th lgher med can tbe aprenintnd by eeitng tho epoch ode fnriaay, to the ong {anton detained te log gear copied wih te ribo ad et bean ‘ote, This procoiareshoad bee considerate imprement over the eo og bay ‘rete tunetlonsse bcs for eapaseeltnsn cos whee fending atahmeny ‘ot xprene appreciable dedesons ati he tas etar f he tions of motion reduce to Meio= — [Fr (2))+ meet Woo Ke—1)) (18a) st) Mii t Murer UFr (0) + mad} WK) ash) and Moio=—(Pr,+W)—Wod Ee) (198) Mert Myotay=—(Fr,+ KW fF (Ct) (0b) mvt Fr (ed=Fr,+% (296) where ee dotauk, and mej tPrq(e7)=Po, 008 04+W, (tb) The solution of equations (18) and the determination of the conditions at the time t, when the shock strut begins to deflect, which serve as the initial conditions for equations (19), are treated in appendix A. With these initial condi- tions, equations (19) may be solved by numerical integration or analog methods. From tho time-history solutions for tho motions of the system thus obtained, the accelerations and inertia londs at any point in the structure can be calculated from tho equa- tions presented in appendix B. [RQUIVALENT THRED.3fASS SYSTEM It is of interest to note that the equations of motion proviously given not only represent the distributed system of tho airplane but can also be used to define oquiva- lent systems of spring-connected masses, whore the number ‘of masses above the landing gear is equal to the number of modes considered. For the particular case where two modes are considered, the equivalent system is one containing three masses, one of which is the unsprung mass of the Ianding gear. ‘Tho uso of such a three-mass system provides a rela tively simple means for simulating the primary effects of structural flexibility in actual drop tests of landing gears in 1 drop-test jig. In the equivalent threo-mass system (seo fig. 3), m, ropre- sents the mass to which the landing gear is directly attached and m, is the elastically connected mass. ‘The displacement of m, relative to its position at the instant of initial contact is denoted by 27; the displacement: of m, is designated =, whereas the displacement of the axle or unsprung mass my is2. The spring constant of the elastic member is denoted by k. Separate lift forces L, and Z, will be considered to act on the masses m, and my. In order that the threo-mass aystom represonts the airplano properly, 7, 2u my, and, of course, the landing-gear charac- teristics must be the same for the two systems, so that theBYFECT OF INTBRACTION ON LANDING-GEAR BEHAVIOR = °¢ woe Fioune 3.—Equivalent three-mass system for representing flexible ‘airplane and landing gear 627 landing-gear force is the same; and m,, my k, and the appliod lift forces must be determined from the relationships betweon the equations of motion for th three-mass system and the equations of motion for the airplane, Consideration of the forces acting on each mass as a free body (see fig. 3) leads to tho following equations of motion for the thro-mass system: Prior to beginning of shock-strut deflection, (ph mai, —Ree— 2) +L — (Wr We) (202) Fr Ce) (st) mart onptm) + L+L)— AW AW) =—Fy,(2) (ob) where Mig +P r,(@s,)=DagAa 008 0+ We Subsequent to beginning of shock-strut deflection, Fy, (21a) mértmért (LtL)—(WitW)=—Fy, (>t) (21b) =FrtWe ro) mee —2) +L, W = tbat Frye ‘Phe problem is to determine the relationships betweon 1m, my, k, Ly, and L, for the airplane so that equations (20) are equivalent to equations (18) and equations (21) are equivalent to equations (19) with the requirement that the motions of the landing gear for the three-mass system be the same as for the airplane, that is, 2pm do- bak and that 2, be the same in both systems. Sinco equations (19¢) and (210) are identical, they need not be considered further in evaluating the unknown constants for the three- ‘mass system, ‘It is apparent that equations (200) and (20b) as well as equations (212) ond (21b) can be written as may 2) +L—WeF (22a) maptmact L+L)— (WW): (2b) where FHFy,(2,)+mda—Wy and ame, Sh) eute, (>t) Similarly, equations (182) and (18b) and equations (198) and (19b) can be written as Mela} Wee Ki—1)+ We F (230)628, 8 aE tact EWP ‘Thus, the problem is reduced to determining the constants for tho’ three-mass system so as to make equations (22) identically equivalent to equations (23). This may be done in any of several different ways. For example, since the structure is taken as linear, let (23b) 2m dy- bap where A is constant to be determined. Substituting for zr and 2 in equations (22a) and (22b) and eliminating 4 between these equations gives 4B E GAN ac Ly— WARM L, en whereas subtracting equation (22a) from equation (22b), with the same substitutions, gives ert b+ EG that Zt 0 (25) Equation (24) is directly comparable with equation (23b).. Combining equations (23a) and (23b) s0 as to climinate F and to make the coefficient of d equal to unity gives the following equation with which equation (26) may be directly compared: ah a Het OT Maks Ma In order to evaluate the constants for the three-mass sys- tem, each term in equations (24) and (25) is set equal to the corresponding term in equations (23b) and (26), re- spectively. ‘This procedure gives six simultaneous equa- tions, the solution of which yields the following expressions for the constants in the threo-mass system: +E—i)9=0 (26) y+ My 7) LAl=KiWur 3) Mite? Mt Met nme 0) m_Mabt mM nm, 9) en) REPORT 1278 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTRE FOR APRONAUTICS = Mit? Laks (pes 38) and MMe Ka Gare” ce) here (28) and With tho foregoing substitutions, equations (22) aro tially equivalent to equations (23); thus, the threc-mass system with the specified values of m,, my, k, Ly and L; can ‘be considered to be equivalent to the airplano in its first two modes during both the first and second stages of tho im- pact, Equations (27) and (28) are required to sntisfy tho equations of motion for the airplane as o rigid body, whereas equations (29) to (34) are required for proper representa~ tion of the airplane in its first flexiblo mode. With this ap- proach the structural properties of the airplane are defined by threo parameters: the total mass above the landing gour ‘Ms, the mass ratio m,/m,, and the natural frequency «1. ‘Phe solution of the equations of motion during the first, phase of the impact and the determination of the conditions at the instant of initial shock-strut deflection ¢ are treated in appendix A. With these conditions as initial conditions, the equations of motion for the second phase of the impact can be solved by numerical-integration or analog methods. ‘From the time-history solutions for the motion of the Uree- ‘mass system, the inertia loads and bending moments at any point in the airplane structure can be calculated by uso of the equations in appendix B. SOLUTION OF EQUATIONS OF MOTION In view of the fact that tho equations of motion subsequent, to time & are highly nonlinear and therefore cannot be solved in closed form, it is necessary to resort to numerical- integration or analog methods, Various numorieal- integration procedures are given in roforences 11 to 13. Appendix A of reference 6 illustrates tho application of several such methods to the problem of the impact of Innding gear attached to arigid mass. Ono of theso methods, ‘which may be termed the “quadratic procedure,” was used to obtain thoso numerical results presented in this report which could not be obtained analytically. In this procedure, which involves a step-by-step solution of the equations of motion, the following difference equationsEFFECT OF INTERACTION ON LANDING-GEAR BEHAVIOR (rof. 11, p, 16) based on a quadratic variation of displace- mont over successive finite time intervals are used to replace the derivatives in the equations of motion: and jpn beeen a? where d, is the value of any variable at the end of the pth interval subsequent to the beginning of the process end At fs tho time intervel. ‘Tho difference equations of motion obtained by substituting these expressions into the differ- ential equations of the system then become essentially extra polation formulas which permit calculation of the displace- ments to come from the values of displecement slrexdy calculated, the whole procedure starting out with the initial conditions of the process; that is, the conditions at the instant t=t, when the shock strut first begins to deflect. With the displacement time histories thus calculated, the velocities and accelerations are then determined from the foregoing difference equations. CALCULATED RESULTS AND DISCUSSION (CASES CONSIDERED In ordor to investigato tho offects of structural flexibility on tho behavior of the landing gear end the loads in the air- frame, several case-history studies are presented which cover ‘a rango of airplane mass ratios m,/m,. ‘The calculations are based on the structural properties of two large airplanes having considerably different mass and flexibility character- istics, Airplane A is representative of « four-engine propeller- driven World War TI bomber having a gross weight of 47,200 pounds and.a natural frequency of vibration in the first coupled bending-torsion modo of 3.37 cycles per second. ‘The structural characteristics used for airplane B are repre- sentative of a present-day swept-wing six-jet-ongine bomber haying a gross weight of 125,000 pounds and a natural fre- queney of 1.29 eyeles per second in the first coupled bending- torsion mode. ‘The landing-gear characteristics used for airplane A were based on the manufacturer’s data, whereas for airplane B, becauso information was not available, the shock-strut characteristics were chosen so as to yield a landing gear which is essentially a scaled-up model of the landing gear of airplane A. ‘The pertinent numerical date for airplanes A and B are given in tables I and IL, respectively; tho modal functions for the first coupled bending-torsion mode aro plotted in figure 4. ‘Tho main landing gears of airplane A were located in the inboard engine nacelles very close to the nodes of the first coupled bending-torsion mode; in the case of airplane B the 629 19 agli %-001F (0) ~00%5 Teo BON 300" 400500" 600700 ‘toon in. Loy 0 105 B00 300400 500 6007S BOO Shoten, in (@) Airplane A. () Auplane B. ‘Provan 4.—Modal functions for bending and torsion. landing gear is of the bieycle type and is located in the air- plane center plane. ‘The position of the landing gear (since it determines tho value of the modal amplitude ) in con- junction with the values of Me and M, governs the value of the mass ratio m,/m,for each case. (See eq. (31).) In order to represent a broader rango of mass and flexibil- ity effects, the calculations for euch airplane were made for four mass ratios corresponding to three arbitrary Ianding- gear positions in addition to the original landing-gear location. In practice, of course, a change in landing-gear location would probably necessitate a modification of the ‘wing structure and result in some change in the modal characteristics and, thus, the mass ratio, ‘The main pur- pose of the calculations, however, is to indicate the offect of mass ratio on the behavior of the system, and the exact locations of the landing gear which correspond to the mass ratios used aro of secondary interest. In the calculation of the mass ratio m,/m, tho landing- gear force was assumed to pass through tho mass center of the landing-gear station. Since the modal characteristics630 used were for the complote airplane including the unsprung mass of the landing gear m,, it was assumed that the un- sprung mass was rigidly connected to tho mass m, in the equivalent three-mass system, as in the first phase of the impact, so that 5 m__ Ma! nm, Me where My, Mf, and & include the effects of the unsprung ‘mass as part of the airplane mass distribution. ‘The mass ratios considered and the corresponding landing-gear locations are as follows: ‘Ano A Apne 8 ‘Tasdlgartetiont— |ataszati| Lanter geriomtien ot Jaren, iar 7 a8 | Ssteage: att REPORT 1278—NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTBE FOR ABRONAUTIOS ‘When the landing gear is located at the node of the first flexible mode, this mode, of course, is not excited and, since higher modes are not considered in tho numerical calculations, tho airplane behaves as though it were a rigid body, its motion being governed by equation (23a). As might bo expected, the farther away the landing gear is from the nodes, tho Inrger is the effective flexibility of the system and, thus, the mass ratio. In tho calculation of the time histories of tho motions of the system, the lift force was assumed to bo constant during the impact and equal to the total weight of tho airplano, that is, K:=1. This assumption corresponds to the con- dition that L=W, and Ly=WrtWe in the equivalent three-mass system. ‘TABLE 1 CHARACTERISTICS OF AIRPLANE A () Structure {Data taken from ret. 8] ‘TABLE I.—CHARACTERISTICS OF AIRPLANE B ° |—. 9084 = 0038 =: ootgs ois ols? 00188 61. 038, 1.607 3.365 () Shock strut [Manufacturer's data} 0.163 oz 0.00173 0.2507 30, 523, 1026 (© Unsprung mase [Manufacturer's data] 700 ‘Beinch smooth contour 70 86, 309 Lae Wy, b.. ‘Tires (one per landing gent). ‘ire pressure, Ibjsq in 1m, Itt (@) Structure ([Wnpublished data} win | Wy % 0 | 100. 534 00170 sa |e oo = 0001s? yes | 3020 =! ogo204 252 | 22177 335 | “2.560 a0 | 2557 soe | 773 sss | 3 260 sz | Sos wo | Laas 840 520 () Shook strut [Walues estimated from generalized eurves of ref. 6) 17, 900 0.585 0.7005 30, 628 (©) Vasprung Mase [Manufacturer's dats) 2,300 50x10 280, 180 1.21EFFECT OF INTERACTION ON LANDING-GEAR BEHAVIOR On the basis of the calculations in reference 6, the shock- strut orifice discharge coefficient C, was assumed as 0.9 and the polytropic exponent n for the air-compression process was taken as 1.12, EEPECT OP INTERACTION ON BEHAVIOR OP SYSTEM ‘Time-history solutions for the motions of the system during impact at an initial vertical velocity of 10 feet per second have been made for the eight configurations previously mentioned. Figures 5 to 8 show the variation during im- paet of tho more important quantities, such as the landing- gear force F, the responses a/g, ds/9, 21/9, 2,/9, tho landing- gear-motion variables, and the accelerations at the mass centers of soveral stations along the span. Comparison of the calculated results for the flexible cases with those for tho airplane os a rigid body (or landing gear at nodes, ‘m,lm=0) indicates that the interaction between the flexible structure and the landing gear can result in an appreciable reduetion in the applied landing-gear force (and thus, the nodal acceleration), the lergest reductions occurring at the highest mass ratios. Furthermore, the reductions in Janding- gear foree at the higher mass ratios are greater for airplane B, because ofits lower natural frequency, than for airplane A. Consideration of the calculated time histories of the mo- tion of the landing gear indicates how the interaction be- tween the flexible structure and the lending gear affects the loads produced in tho landing gear. Because of the fi bility of the structure, tho landing-gear attachment, point deflects upward relative to the nodes, or instantaneous center of mass of tho system, as the applied force builds up and the deceleration of the lending-gear attachment point is greater than in the case of the rigid airplane. ‘Thus, tho downward velocity of the shock-strut outer cylinder is more rapidly dissipated and the displacement of the outer cylinder is smaller throughout most of the impact. The tire deflection is also smallor; however, because of the high stiffuess of the tire, the decrease in tire deflection is smaller than the decrease in outer-cylinder displacement. ‘The net result is a reduction in strut stroke during that part of the impact when tho maximum force occurs and an sccom- Panying reduction in the strut telescoping velocity. Since the maximum landing-gear force is primarily due to the hydraulic resistance in the strut (because the strut stroke, and thus the air-compression foreo, is generally small at the time of maximum telescoping velocity), the decrease in telescoping velocity results in a decrease in shock-strut forces. Tn the case of airplane A with landing gear at station 07, the effect of interaction is a marked change in the shape, as well as in the magnitude, of the time histories, Because of tho superimposed vibrations of the structure, the shock- strut telescoping velocity (sce fig. 5) has acquired an os- 900166 631 cillatory character with two peaks of the same amplitude. However, since the second telescoping-velocity peak occurs when the stroke is large, the superposition of the high air- compression force on the hydraulic-force results in a total- force time history the second peak of which is much higher than the first (see Force-time curves, fig. 5) and which is also higher than might be expected from the results for the smaller mass ratios, which have a considerably different appearance. In the case of airplane B, because of the lower natural frequeney, this double-peaked characteristic docs not appear even for the largest mass ratio, all mass ratios yielding time histories similar in shape, the maximum force decreasing in a regular manner with increasing mass ratio. The extent to which tho first flexible modes of airplanes A and B are excited by tho impacts may be observed by examining the time histories of ai, @, and &. As may be expected, the higher the mass ratio, the greater is the degree of excitation. From the ealeulated values of do/g and diy or 2,/g and ,/g, ‘the acceleration at any point along the span may be com- puted by means of the equations in appendix B. Figures 6 ‘and 8 show timo histories of the acceleration at the mass centers of several stations for each of the landing-gear loca- tions considered. Because of the combined effects of the changes in the landing-gear forcing function and in the degree of excitation of the flexible modes, a given change in landing gear location may result in an increase in acceleration at some stations and a reduction in acceleration at other sta- tions. ‘Figures 5 and 7 also show time histories of the acceleration 3,lg which would be experienced by the elastically connected ‘mass m, in the equivalent three-mass system, as in a drop test, ‘The reduction in acceleration with increasing mass ratio is evident. As previously indicated, if such a drop test, were made, the measured accelerations 3,/g and 3,/g could be used to calculate tho accelerations and stresses that would result at any point in the corresponding airplane structure ‘by means of the equations presented in appendix B. ‘Figure 0 (8) presents a summary graph showing the effects of structural flexibility end interaction on the maximum Ianding-gear force for the various configurations considered. As previously indicated, the reductions in landing-gear force are greater for aizplane B than for airplane A because of the lower natural frequency of airplane B. For the range of mass ratios representative of existing and proposed large air- planes, for example, values up to about 0.5, reductions in landing-gear force up to between 15 and 20 percent may be possible. Along the same lines, figure 9 (b) shows the effects of interaction on the acceleration response of the Ianding-gear attachment point and on the acceleration of the elastically connected mass in the equivalent three-mass system.eo SOLLAVNOWRY HOA SULLMOKOO XUOSLATY TVNOULYN—BLET tAIOdeNEoN ON LANDING-GBAR DERAVIOR 633 jperect OF INTERACT! ecelgction ‘* — station © Py t 2 1 z “ime ofter contact, S86 (@) Tanding gear station 245+ {Landing gene at station 307+ certs at variun sation song ine 272 (6) Banding gear at tation rovan 6—Time histories of of sinplane A.eo SOMMYKOMAY YOK GULUOWTOO XHOSIAGY TYNOMLVN—82e1 dIOdeHEFFECT OF INTERACTION ON LANDING-GEAR BEHAVIOR 635, +6 celta Fs ry ———— Stetion 0 i \ 7 = i \ Stolen 252 oa Station 586 | \ a Stoton 040 _\ | the 4 Zo ,| a| @ 5 a ei a Tine cfr conte, se (0) Lending gear ot station 0 (0) Landing goa at tation 420, (©) Landing eae at sation SOL Fioume 8:—Time histories of aceslerations at various stations along the epan of airplane B.636 REPORT 1278—NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS _ Bee 8, 42337 cos Airplane 8, £=129 eps Lending-geor location pone Alrgione 8 1 Abredes 1 Atta, (ehh boa (ndetboay TL Siofon TE Staton © TM Stofon 245 Station 420 BZ Statin 307 ML Slollon 504 @ o t 2 3 Moss rt, mm a x 20) sgh 1g} ah 12h to} i sa a Lendng-gear toeaton — iegione A Bieplone 8 5 1 Atnedes TAL nades fantir) (ga boon 4} I Station «IE Station 0 4} HI Station 245 Z_ Stoion 420 2| IE Stolion 307 SE Sitoion 504 al o ° t 2 3 4 ° t = Mass ratio, mim Moss ralio, mm (@) Landing-geas force, (0) Accelerations of landing-gear attachment point and elastically connected mass. Fiavan 9.—Bifeots of interaction.EFFECT OF INTERACTION ON LANDING-GHAR BEHAVIOR In the usual procedures of dynamic analysis of landing Joads it is customary to neglect the offects of interaction on tho landing-gear forcing funetion and to determine the dy- namic loads in tho structure by ealculating the response of the structure to the forcing function which would be obtained the airplane were 2 rigid body, this rigid-body forcing function being either calculated or, more frequently, de- termined on the basis of drop tests of the landing gear with a rigid mass, In practice, either the actual rigid-body foro- ing funetion or some simplified analytical approximation of it (ee, for example, fig. 10) is used. __ In order to evaluate the errors introduced by neglect of eraction effects, the root bonding moments and shears determined from the interaction solutions for airplanes A and B are compared in figures 11 and 12 with those deter- mined by ealculating the response of the various eonfigura- tions to tho rigid-body forcing functions previously presented and to simple analytical approximations to the rigid-body foreing functions. "These bending moments and shears are total values duo to both inertia and aerodynamic forces, the latter being included to permit comparison with the steady- fight values, For reference purposes, figures 11 and 12 also show the root bending moments and shears which would be expetionced by a completely rigid airplane. sxot Lending-geor fore, F tb 3 ° tt z ‘Tae otter contact, see 912.08 radians/eecond; 827 radians/eccond. Froure 10. (0) Airplane A, 637 ‘Tho calculation of the response of systems with two de- grees of freedom to predescribed forcing functions is treated in appendix C. The response of the various configurations to the rigid-body forcing funetion was calculated by applica- tion of the numerical-integration procedure previously described, whereas the response to the analytical forcing functions was obtained in closed form. ‘The rigid-body forcing functions for airplanes A and B and their approxima- tions are shown in figure 10. In the caso of airplane A, tho rigid-body forcing function was approximated by # pulse composed of sine and cosine segments; for airplane B, a simple sine pulse was used. ‘The equations for calculating the inertia moments and shears from the response of the system are given in appendix C; simplified expressions for caleulating the moments and shears due to the aerodynamic forces are given in appendix D. From figures 11 and 12 it ean be seen that the bending ments and shears calculated from the response to the |-body forcing funetion are larger than those determined from the interaction solutions, the differences being greater for the higher mass ratios where the effects of interaction result in a groater reduction in the magnitude of the landing- gear foreing function. From these particular examples, it, appears that neglect of the effects of interection on the landing gear foreing function can lend to overconservatism in design not only of the landing gear but also of the structure, 2oxot Lenaing-oer foros, Fb 1 \ H4=0105 see \ ° tt 2 3 ‘Teme ofteccontoct, eee () Altplano B. 9=12.57 radians/second, body forcing functions and simple anslytical approsimationa.638 REPORT 1278—NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTED YOR AERONAUTICS 4x08 0x10 q A Landing g2or ot ston 0 - y wal. Landing ger ot stoion 0 aol gh aos loxto® -20} Lending ger a sttion 245 o| A 4 igi oiane 1 Ta EE tion i epee iy foray g —-— response to holt-sine-half-cosne 3 pul id Fro 10° Lending geor ot station 307 ° T 2 3 “Tene ater contact, see (@) Bending moments. Froume U.—Dynamie loads in airplane A. particularly for very flexible configurations with high mess ratios. AS might be expected, there was relatively little difference in the loads calculated from the response to the analytical approximations and from the response to the rigid-body forcing funetion. Tt is of interest to note that in the case of airplane A the loads calculated from the interaction solutions are greater than those calculated for the completely rigid airplane, whereas, for sirplane B, the converse is true. ‘This result for airplane B is due to two factors: (a) the dynamic amplifica- tion factor is less than unity becauso of tho relatively large natural period of the airplane compared with the duration of tho impact pulse (t[t,=U.3), and (b) there is considerable reduction in the magnitude of the landing-gear force because of the effects of interaction. In the case of airplane A, the natural period is of about the same duration as the impact pulse (f/ta1.1) so that the dynamic magnification factor is considerably greater than unity and more than overcomes the effect of the reduction in lending-geer foree. From the preceding results, it can be seen that the effects of structural flexibility are twofold; namely, (a) a change in wagh 40108 Landing gear ot stotion 245 erm 2% Le : iid arpone z Inracon son & aspen Yo #4 16 x10% g ‘Landing geor at 4 a { ie ° i : ayo tte rosacs hastens fo she pus = Response tog body forelog funetion — Respent fo sine pulse ol 16 x10% ‘Landing gear ot stotlon 508, 12 8 al a a a ae ae re) 0 pee meee ele ae co ees commas ‘Tine after conioet, see “Time offer contac, see (®) Bending moments. ©) Shears ‘rove 12-—Dynamie Ionds in airplane B. Ficure 12—Coneluded. ‘CONCLUSIONS ‘Tho effects of interaction botween a landing gear and a flexible airplane structure on the behavior of the landing gear and the londs in the structure havo been studied by treating the equations of motion of the airplane and the Innding .gear as a coupled system. ‘The landing gear is considered to have nonlinear characteristics typical of conventional gears, namely, velocity-equered damping, polytropic air-compression springing, and exponential tire foree-defleetion characteristics. For the case where only two modes of the structure are considered, an equivalent throo-mass system is derived for representing the airplane nd lIanding-gear combination, which may be used to simu- Into tho effects of structural flexibility in jig drop tests of Innding gears. As examples to illustrate the effects of interaction, numeri- cal calculations, based on the structural properties of two Inrgo airplanes having considerably different mass and fiexi- bility characteristics, are presented. In order to cover range of parameters, the landing gear of each airplane was assumed to be located at three arbitrary spanwise positions in addition to its original location. For the particular cases considered, it was found that 1. The effects of interaction can result in appreciable reductions in the magnitude of the landing-gear force, particularly when the flexibility of the airplane structure is 4366766142 Jarge and the natural frequency of the structure is small 2. Neglect of interaction effects, that is, the use of the Janding-gear forcing function for a rigid airplano in a dynamic analysis of a flexible airplane, can lead to the calculation of excessive londs in the airplane structure. 3. Tn the case of one of the airplanes, the structural loads calculated from the interaction solutions are greater than those for # completely rigid airplane treatment (rigid strue- turo subjected to rigid-body forcing function) because of the fact that the effects of dynamic magnification more than overcome the reduction in landing-gear force due to inter- action. In the ease of the second airplane, because of the relatively large natural period of the structure in comparison with the duration of the impact pulse, the dynamic magnifica- tion factor is appreciably less than unity. ‘This effect, coupled with the reductions in landing-gear foree due to interaction, results in structural loads that aro Tess than thoso for a rigid airplane. It thus appears desirable to con- sider the effects of interaction in dynamic analyses of Ianding loads for lange airplanes, particularly when tho landing-gear ‘attachment points experience largo deflections relative to the ‘mass center of the airplane. Lanouey Arnonaurican Lasonatony, Nariowat Apvisory Cosnurres vor AzRonaurics, ‘Lanatay Freup, Va., May 5, 1956.APPENDIX A CONDITIONS AT BEGINNING OF SHOCK-STRUT MOTION Since the shock strut does not begin to deflect until the preloading force imposed by’ the intornel air pressure is overcome by the inertia forces, the shock strut is essentially rigid during the interval between the instant of initial contact with the ground and the beginning of shock-strut motion at some time ‘=t,. During this interval, since the deflection of the tire is essentially the same as the displacement of the landing-gear attachment point, the system used in the numerical calculations to represent the airplane and landing-gear combination has only two degrees of freedom, namely, the rigid-body or zero-mode displacement. and the deflection in the first flexible mode, the higher modes being neglected. ‘The purpose of this appendix is to consider the motions of the system prior to the beginning of shock-strut deflection in order to determine the conditions which exist at the instant the shook strut frst begins to move; these motions then servo as the initial conditions for the equations of motion of the system during the main part of the impact. For this purpose it may be reasonably assumed thet the tire foree- deflection relationship is linear for the relatively small range of deflection prior to the beginning of shoek-strut motion ancl that, therefore, Fy,(z,)=m’e,. In order to avoid a step jump in the time-history solution at the timo ¢, the constant m’ should be determined so that m’ay= mor (an) pusrmipurEp sxerEnt Prior to time #, the equations of motion for the airplane and landing gear are given by equations (18) with initial conditions: 2{0)=04(0)=a4(0)—=0 240)=04(0)=Vr, 4(0)=0 Since a»=2=%, equations (18) can be writen as Mido=—m! 25—m,2,— We Er—1) (A2a) ag Mico? “m’) 2tWK,—1) (A2b) B® Cg u_ ‘The exact solution of equations (A2) can be shown to be n{ Vo (GE i where o—MesttMetm,) D=EKi-)g ! Ot} Mots Bc Mid 246 E Myo? @ G=M(Met-m,)+mMe! otoEEFECT OF INTERACTION ON LANDING-GEAR BEHAVIOR 641 By successive differentiation of equation (A3), the higher derivatives of z,(t) are found to be i —aip{ Vr,l(A?—C) cos At~(B*—C) cos Bi-+-D (G9 sin Bt—-(2Z°) sin aj} (ag) H0=ze{ Vy,[B@'—C) sin Bt—A(A~0) sin At] +D((B—C) cos Bt—(A*—C) cos aa} (As) z e{ Ve {B'B'—C) cos Bt—A%A!—C) 008 Al]-+D[A(A*—0) sin At—BUB—C) sin Ba} (a6) At the timo t,, the equation of motion of the unsprung mass of the landing gear as a freo body is given by equation (2) which, with Fy,=m’e, may be written as ag, 25,= Pape 008 8+ We (a7) Substituting for 2,, and 2,, in equation (A7) gives a relationship between f, and m’: eae Mr [AGS wet sin te 28 on sin Bt 4.0 [952 n’—mg ons At— FEE (n'—m,B9 008 Be+m'C (am) ]}-m 0s 0+, (A8) Because equation (A8) is transcendental in both ¢, and m’ (m’ being involved in the coustants A and B), in order to obtain an explicit solution for t, or m’, some approximation to the trigonometric terms is necessary, the order of tho approximation, depending on the accuracy required. For the determination of and m’ it will generally be sufficient to assumo first-order approximations for the trigonomotzic terms where only the first terms of their sories expansions are used. With these approxi- ‘mations the solution of equation (A8) for tis G(puye 008 0+ KWe) ks mM MV, (49) As indieated previously, m’ cannot be chosen arbitrarily but must be determined in accordance with équation (A1), which may be written as mime, ‘The first-order approximation for 2, obtained from equation (A3), is t4=V de (aio) With these substitutions equation (A9) may be written as GF (asAa 008 eka an Me and the equation for m’ becomes atm | Se one ET (a2)642 REPORT 1273—NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTHE FOR AERONAUTICS ‘The first-order approximations for the derivatives of 2, at time ¢,, from equations (A4) to (A6), are 3,=Vy,—Dt a1) 8;,= Vr {CA BM —D (ais) and = (Vr, Dt {0-4 BY} With the values of z and m’ calculated from equations (A11) and (A12), the values of z ey 7 calculated from equations (A10), (A13), and (A14), respectively. ‘These values provide two-thirds of tho initial conditions for the process subsequent to the beginning of shock-strut deflection (eq. 19). ‘The remaining initial conditions, for example, 9, doy, nd de, ean be obtained by manipulation of the differential equations (A2). ‘From equation (A2b) it can be seen that omaha (Bem) 2,44 sens Gon) En pe mn! apc May,t Wie KeV) Me __ Pave 005 64+ Wil Kr—1) + +m!) 5, dy PED) | (A16) By differentiation, ! i] (ai7) where, from equation (A2a), (18) Differentiating equation (A2a) gives (aio) ‘The substitution of equations (A18) and (A19) and the initial conditions previously determined (2, 4, and %,) into equations (A16) to (A18) provides the remaining initial conditions for the second phase of the impact. RQUIVALENT THREE MASS SYSTEM ‘The equations of motion for the equivalent three-mass system prior to the time t, aro equations (20) with initial conditions 2(0)=2,(0)=0 2,0) Vy, and 2,(0) Since it has been shown that equations (20) are identically equivalent to equations (18) for the distributed eystem when the relationships between the constants of the two systems are as defined by equations (27) to (34), it follows that equations (Aa) to (A16) are equally valid for the three-mass system when the constants aro redefined in accordance with equations (27) to (84). ‘The redefined constants, in terms of the properties of the three-mess system, may be written as came Metm) Many+m) D= (K-19