File D 52.

56 / 17

AIR SERVICE IN
(AVIATION)

PUBLISHED BY THE CHIEF OF AIR SERVICE, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Vol. IV February 15, 1922 No. 303

DISCUSSION OF AIRPLANE TIRES

AND WHEELS
(MATERIAL SECTION REPORT No. 1SO)

Prepared by Engineering Division, Air Service

McCook Field, Dayton, Ohio ~
September 8, 1921 ~\"I>~
~ - .. ·\
~\f,S <'.{ '
~, v,~-' . () (\,.~\~
~ '1--:) ~
~ . . . ; ~\ i~
\" {i-.Q~ -~
~v
~f,S '!..~
~

WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1922
 J

CER'l'IFICA'l'E: By direction of the Seeretary of War the matter contained herein is published as adm inistra.tive
information and is required for the proper transaction of the public business.
(2)

J
 DISCUSSION OF AIRPLANE TIRES AND WHEELS:
·..._y
The tires and wheels used on the undercarriage of air- WHEEL DESIGNS.
planes present a somewhat different problem from auto-
In general, the clincher wheels are of two types: The
mohile tires and wheels. The wheel on an airplane is
English or Palmer type and the standard clincher type.
simply used in taking off and in landing. In the air it
The English or Palmer type has a special rim contour,
acts as a parasitic resistance and affects adversely the
a special type of spoke lacing, and the wheel hub is offset
performance of the airplane. The airplane wheel must
rather than centered. All of these features can be seen
have a high strength-weight ratio, must be of sufficient
in the accompanying diagram.
diameter to p ermit landing on rough ground, and large
The standard clincher type has a rim of the S. A. E.
enough to sustain the impact load· dne to average pancake

I
contour, has the hub centered, is not cross laced as in the
landings. This has led to the exclusive use of R wire wheel.
abov e, and the spokes are tangential to the hub.
'l'he tire should also have a high strength-weight ratio,
together with a high resistance to side thrust to ·prevent
rolling off of the rim. The wear, which is an important
consideration in automobile tires, is not so important in
airplane tires, as the actual mileage is very low. There- ·
fore the tread is thin, but the carcass must be strong and
light weight. The function of an airplane tire is also
that of a shock absorber, and the tire defiects considerably
under load, which causes severe rim cutting if the tire
is not properly designed.
When the American program of aircraft construction ,P/f'tJ/'tJJE~ ST!PA/lfHT S/0.F /i'/#
was started in 1917, there was only meager information
and knowledge available as to the requirements and
p erformance of the several wheels and tires to be used
on airplanes of different weights. The chief source of
information was the reports of actual service performance
in Europe during the aeronautical development resulting
from the World War. In view of the desire and need for
interchangeability of parts with English and French
planes, the current European practice was literally
copied without any testing in this country. While this
procedure was warranted in the face of the needs of the
time; nevertheless it forced an " undesirable " on the
aeronautic industry of the United States in the shape of
clincher tires and wheels.
Due to low scale of production of airplanes and, there-
.fore, lack of funds for experime-q.tal purposes, the clinchers
h av e persisted, although changes are under way at present
to adopt straight side tires and wheels throughout, or at
least on all except the smallest sizes. This movement
was in large part due to the Tire and Rim Association, ENGLISH OR PAJ./'?EH /i'JH
with the active cooperation of the Engineering Division FIG. 1.-Sections or wheel rims and tire beads.
of the Air Service.
At the present time the clincher wheels and tires RIMS.
most commonly used are : 26 by 3 inches ; 26 by 4 inches; A discussion of the merits of the two types of wheel
650 by 75 millimeters ; 700 by 100 millimeters; 750 by 12fi design would be concerned first with a consideration of
millimeters ; 800 by 150 millimeters; 900 by 200 milli_ rim contours. The Palmer type supports the tire bead
meters. only at the toe and the upper part of the heel. There
It will readily be seen that the European wheels, as are numerous claims made regarding the superiority of
indicated by the metric dimensions, were standardized the performance of such a rim design when there is a Ride
with respect to the wheel diameter. This may or may load on the tire and wheel. The fact that the heel of the
not be of advantage in the field, but it certainly has the exe bead is not supported, is supposed to permit of some
advantage of standardization, which is of considerable flexibility to the bead when the tire is under a side load,
assistance to both the wheel and tire manufacturer. The and thereby lessen the chance of blow-out due to rim
American sizes, indicated by the English units, have not cutting. Nothing has ever been shown to indicate that
been standardized in any way, clue probably to the lack such an effect really occurs, and it is the opinion of the
of activity or development along aeronautic lines np to writer that th ere is not a great deal of reliability in such
th e tim e of America's e ntry into tl1 e war. c laims.
87800- 22 (3)
 ;;

'Ti&iNt;ENTll'IL.. SPoJ<E
/flTT,#ICHMEHr .4T lftlB

SPOKES /'/OT CHOSS·Lf1C£D

FOR .SIDE T!ili'U.ST
FIG . 2.-Standard clincher wheel.

1'/IID!l9l SPOI(£
/tfTT~CH/1'1£/VT l'IT tiUB

$POKES Cl?tJJ.f- l.H C £"a

rDli' SIDE rHHVS'T
FIG. 3.-Eng!ish or P almer wheel.
 5
The standard clinch er rim permits of a firm seat of the
bead from the bead h eel to the toe at all points. This
head seat seems to be a much more reasonable arrange-
ment of a tire b ead and certainly ·admits of a maxi.mum
in bead support . In th e case of sudden side loading, it
would be more satisfactory if the bead could be so seated
on the rim as to i11Sure more or less freedom, but it i~ a
question if such a condition h as been attained in the
Palmer type of rim.
WHEEL LACING.
The Palmer type of cross lacing of the wheel spokes is a
feature which should be incorporated in airplane wheels.
It permits of strong bracing for side thrust, which, in
the case of airplane wheels, is very necessary. In the
American sta ndard clincher wheel there is no cross lacing
of the spokes, and the desirable feature of bracing for
side thrust is neglected.
SPOKES C/10.SS L/11C£D
J:'Pli' S I DE TH If 11.f_T
_ _ __
FIG . 4.-New straight side wheel:
HUB ATTACHMENT.
There are two general methods of attaching the spokes
to the hubs, radially and tangentially.
The radial attachment is self-explanatory in that the
spoke is attached directly to the hub flange and extends to
th e rim in a straight line. vVhen a load is applied to such a
spoke, it functions as a column with both ends fixed, and
th e load normal to the column axis, or as a straight ten-
sion member depending upon its position in the wheel.
In the tangential attachment the spoke extends from
the wheel rim to a point tangent to t he hub. The tan-
gential type of lacing makes the wheel heavier than th e
radial type, because this method necessitates a 90° bend
in th e spoke at the point of attachment to th e hub. This
type of lacing is similar to t he method of hub attachment.
87800-22-- 2
in the case of automobile wheels. If an airplane wheel
were driven- that is, if movement to the plane were
transmitted by gearing through the wheels, there might
be some just ification for the use of the tangential method,
but such is n ot the case, and, in addition, this type of
attachment prohibits any possibility of cross-lacing for
side thrust, therefore, all things considered, it is believed
that for use on airplanes, the radial type of spoke attach-
ment is superior to the tangential method.
The Palmer type wheels all have a considerable offset
to the hub , the idea being, it is presumed , to increase the
bracing effect for side thrust. No doubt the construction
is theoretically correct, but a stress analysis of several
wheels of this type showed a considerable eccentricity
which would not add to the general efficiency of the wheel
in service. In the case of a wheel with the hub centered,
there would be no eccentricity, but the effect of bracing
for side thrust would be slightly less than in a wheel of the
Palmer type.
RADIAL SPOKE"
ATT,qCH/'1£"NT /117 . HVS
TIRES.
Airplane tires differ from automobile tires in weight and
tread construction. The carcass is composed of plies of
frictioned cord fabric laid in the usual way. There is no
cushion or breaker strip used, and the tread is of high-
grade tread stock of t inch thickness. The side walls and
the bead are constructed in essentially the same manner
as automobile tires. ·
PHYSICAL TESTS OF WHEELS.
Accurate information regarding the performance of the
wheels used, both in the field and in the laboratory, was
necessary and essential for the general development of
new 'Yheels and tires, and more important still for the
information of the designer. It was with these facts in
/
/.
 6
view that extensive laboratory tests were run on all the avail-
able clincher wheels and tires, as well as all available sizes
of the new straight side type of the proposed new schedule.
The physical tests in the lab9ratory were confined largely
to static loading to determine the wheel deformation under
load and the ultimate load of the wheel.
The testing machine and the nature of the test rigging
were about as follows:
An Olsen 50,000-pound capacity test machine was used .
A 4-inch dirt surface in a suitable container was placed on
the stationary head of the test machine and the wheel to
be tested was placed upon it in a vertical position. The
tire, deflated , was allowed to remain mounted on the wheel
during the test. An axle was motmted in the huh and
the load was applied to the wheel from the pulling head
of the test machine through stra.ps to the axle in the wheel.
This test rigging is shown in figme 5.
There are several very good reasons wlJy the wheel was
mounted on a tightly packed dirt surface. The earlier
methods of wheel testing required that a wooden block be
fitted to the wheel rim at the load point. In this case, the
wheel failure would evidence itself by the rim bending
at .the ends of the fitted wooden block. The breaking load
of the wheel varied with the length of the block fitted to
the rim. In the case where the wheel, without the-tire,
was simply mounted on the head of the test machine,
the first failure was in a distortion of the rim contour
and finally a rim failure at the load point. Neither
of these fail mes was typical of a wheel failure in ser-
vice, and it was with this point in mind that the final
test rig was decided upon. With the tire on the wheel,
but deflated, and the whole supported by a tightly
packed dirt surface , a failure was obtained which resem-
bled in every way .the failure which was observed under
service conditions.
In obtaining information regarding the wheel defonna-
tion under load, radial measurements were made from the L
hub to the rim at various stages of the static test for break-
ing load . In general , the distortion of the wheel tends
from a circle to an ellipse, with a slight lowering of the hub
below the in tersection of the main axes of the ellipse.
This tendency is slight but will probably explain why all
;
of the spokes, except those immediately in the plane of
the load point, are under a tension load.
I
The main determinations made in this series of tests are l
indicated in the following table : FIG. 5.-Sta Lic test rig foe a irpl ane wheels and tires .

Physical features of airplane 1cheels.

\'
'

750 by 125 800 by 150 1 bvsi·nch. 44 by 10

26 by 4 inch 28 by 4inch. millimeter. m1llimeter. 36 , inch.

Gap;c ofri1n ... . ...... _....... _... ... . .. .. . ..... .. .... . .... ___ ... inches._ 0.080 o.095 0.092 0. 125 0.125 0.175
Gage of spokes .... . ..... . .. . . . ..• .. . . .... .. ........... . ......... do .... 0.112 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.135 0.150

~;~ffi?fi-f:;i;l~):·:-i:::-iiiifff iii i:·:·:·:·:·:·i:.i:·i:.iiiii:·:-/tult~ ~

j j
40
8
7.500
9. 5
52
10
i.500
ll
64
12
10.000
12
6-1
15
13. 000
12
80
25
18. 000
33
80
66
33. 000
74

~ ~!~~t~~uii?ciei.·.:::::::::::: :: :::::::::: :::: :: :: :::::::i~ 6. C 5.G 7.2-5 7. 25 6. 75 9. 63

1. 5 1. 5 2.38 2. 38 2.56 3.19
·Method ollacing . ............. ........ . . . . .. •... . ..... .. ... _____ ...... .
Tangential Ra.dial. Radial. Radial. Radial. Radial.
Type of wheel. .. . ............. . .. . • . . ... _.. _............... ___ ....... . Standard Straight Palmer. Palmer. Straight Straight
clinch er. side. side. side.

DESIGNERS' LIMITATIONS. thus, the factor for the wheels on a training plane is 7.0,
In the design of airplanes to Government specifications, while the factor on the wheels of a two-seater pursttit
a certain factor of safety is prescribed. This factor varies plane is 4.6. To a&•ist the designer in this phase of bis
with the part of the plane and also with the type of plane; problem, the following table was compiled:
 7
WHEEL LOADING. Maximum grees of tire deflection, and the contour of the tire at these
allowable
plane weight points is plotted. From a study of these contours, it is
per wheel
Size. (pounds). possible to check the tire and rim construction to obtain
44 by 10 inches.......... . ...................... 6,500 the maximum in tire performance. ·

~;ob{:2~clitJ .................. ....... 4, ooo
SOO by 150 millimeters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
750 byl25millimeters..... .. .. . . ................
-ioobby l?O nuh·llimeters}- __ . _. _____ ... _.. _. . __. _.
28 y 4 inc es ... .. . .
26 by 4 inches.. ... ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
If the above maximum allowable weights are closely
followed b y the d esigner, satisfadory performance is
assured, as these limits are indicated not alone in the
laboratory, but in the field as well.
EQUIPMENT IN SERVICE.
It is interesting to note how closely the above table for
maximum wheel loading checks with the load per wheel
on a number of service airplanes.
The following table was compiled in determining if the
various sizes of wheels and tires were overloaded:
Attached are load-deflection cmves for all of the present
sizes of tires, at pressures of 50, 65, and 75 pounds, and
2, 500 from these one can safely interpolate for any intermediate
1, 800 pressure.
One point to bear in mind when using load-deflection
l , 200
curves is that the tire deflection, when the plane is resting
1, 000 normally on the ground, should be about 20 p er cent.
This figure was arbitrarily chosen as a result of recommen-
dations made by the various tire manufacturers with refer-
ence to tire life for different degrees of normal tire deflec-
tion.
In designing undercarriages for airplanes, it is n ecessary
to use the load-deflection curves in conjunction with the
table showing the maximum allowable plane weight per
wheel, if the greatest efficiency is to be obtained from the
combination of wheel and tire.
CLINCHER VS. STRAIGHT SIDE.
A discussion of the relative merits of the above types has
been exhaustively treated in connection with the manu-

Weight Recom-
Name. Type. Weight. Wheels. per Tire s ize. m ended
wheel. weight.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -11 - - - - -- - -- - ------ - - - - - -- - - -- -1--- -
Pounds. Pounds. Inches. Pounds.
I
Standard E-1.. •.. .... .... .... . . ..... .. ........ .... ·single Seater ................... . ..... . 1,190 2 595 26 by 3 600
Thomas Morse S4C ........ , ... . ....... . .. . ..•..... l. .... do ............ . . . .. . . . . ... . .... . . . 1, 374 2 *687 26 by 3 600
~~~gJ;J~.f~~~~~e_._-_·_: :: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : J ~'~~d~~~~~r_._-_:::::::::::::::::::::::::
2,600
2,050
1,960
2
2
2
1,300
*l,g~
26 by4
26 by 4
26 by 4
1, 000
1, 000
1, 000

t~; ~: ~:~:~;B//\\//'.'. // J;~t:~~tt'.//'.\'.///\ * 1,030

2,060 2 26 by4 1,000
]i{illimeters.
2,600 2 * 1,300 700 b y 100 1, 200

+
2 350 2 1, 175 700 by 100 1, 200
2 750 by 125 1, 800

IF!EI
4;000 *2,000

~ifL ·1
Le Pere Triplane ..... . ........................... Multi-seater . ............ .. . ..... . .... .
XB-1-A ..... . ............. . .... . •. . . . .. .. ..... .... Two Seater. .. . . ... .. • .... . •.. ...• .. . .
Armored Triplane .. .. ... . ... . ..................... , Multi-seater. ..........................
!
4, 800
2, 645
3,660
2,140
7,130
2, 994
9,740
2
2
2
2
4
2
4
* 2,400
1,325
*l,~O
1, 070
1,780
1, 497
2, 435
750 by 125
750 by 125
750 by 125
750 by 125
750 by 125
750 by 125
900 by 200
1, 800
1,800
1; 800
1,800
1, 800
1,800
4, 000
14, 450 4 3,610 900 by 200 4,000

::::::::::'.::::: : :: :: ::::::::::: : :::::J:: ::::::::::::::: : : : :::: ::::::::::

I 1
.
10,000
10, 000
4

2 1
2,500
5, 000
OOJ,44,~bry.~oo10 4, 000
6, 500

NoTE.-The (*) indicates that the wheel is overloaded with respect to the recommended m aximum wheel load. The most serious of these are
the DH- 4, the D-9- A, and the Le Pere, all of which are at present using a larger size tire than indicated in the above.

PHYSICAL TESTING OF TIRES.
'fhe laboratory test of tires is concerned chiefly with
determining the most satisfactory operating load and
pressures. The tests involved in determining the quality
of the material used in a tire are sufficiently well known
to require little explanation. The quality of the tread
stock , t ire cords, and cements, the construction of the
h eads, including wire reinforcements, are all indicated
to insure a tire of high quality, so that the chief problem
to the designer is one of satisfactory and efficient tire
operation.
In testing for " load-deflection" data, the test rigging is
essentially the same as in determining the breaking load of
the wheel. The wheel and inflated tire are mounted
directly on the stationary head of the test machine.
Stations are marked on the tire at the load point and along
the side wall of the tire to the rim in the plane of the load.
The location of the stations is determined at various de-
facture of automobile tires. The conditions are essentially
the same for the airplane ti.res, but they are much more
aggravated than in the case of automobile tires.
The chief cause of failure in ser vice of clincher tires has
been blowouts due to rim cutting. In every case of blow-
out, due to reasons other than an airpl ane crash, more than
90 per cent of the failures are typical blow-outs. Another
feature well worth mentioning is that in the case of a blow-
out of a tire motmted on a Palmer wheel with the offset
hub, the blow-out occurred on the side of the wheel on
which the hub is offset. Of course, the chief cause of rim
cutting is under-inflation , and as practically all airplane
tires must be slightly under-inflated, this condition will
always obtain as long as clincher tires continue to be used .
The p eculiar feature about Palmer tires, mentioned above,
is believed to be partly due to the eccentricity in the
wheel, shown by the stress analysis of a wheel of this type,
al though the chief cau se h ere is also u nderinflation

/
 8
- I -
.. . ~ - ~ .. -- - - -
- -- -- -

I
'

LoAD-0.EFLEcrtor;
rO/f
IJJRPL/1!'1£ ll.RES
ST11/'IOAR1JSizes

lltR PJrESSVRE
- so#

'

-,... " - L) ... "-

,,. ...
,,,
,,,. ,.,.,
- "
r

,,,. ...
-
- .... "
... ...
,__
I.II
,,,. 1.

,....
... ,... "
.... -
... ....
, ....
...
.. - ,.
,,. ,....
.. -
~ r

.,. .... - - ... -- - - ~ · L•

-
I;
,....
,........ ~

- - - - - _·- ,....

....
........ - ........ - ·-
- -
- -
,
,.... ....
-
JO 10 30 ~ so 6(1 -,o 80 90 '"o
TIHE DEFLECT/ON- PER Cr#r
FIG. 6.
 9

0'90-0£FLcCTI OIY
rOR
/11RPL/1/YE "liKcS
Si~IVDl9RD S1z£.s
. -.
/7;1? /1,£.SSI/RC
65#

- ,,.
.. ...,
];'

LI
"'
LI
LI
1,1

"'
LI

....
1,1

"
.,_ ·~
V
V y
V
...
~
,. ....
,., .,,._
V
, ,,.
V
V
.,. .,, .....

.,. , ,.... .... ....

,. ..
.,
,,...
:.,,
,,.

I
~
.,. ....
,,.
., ,....

- ....
.,,,

-
-
-
ljf, i'l-'I I~
-
.. l..
"'"
• Ii ~
'IF
...-
-~ ;u:::

c;,

- - .
~
IJ

- ... - -
t...
...
-- I;
~

/0 20 J() 4() .50 60 70 80 9o /CO

TIRE DEFL EC TIOIY-/ltrCcnr

/
FrG . 7.
 10

I
I
I
I
-

Lo~o
DEFLECT/Off
FOR
ri1RPLIU1E li"HES

S TAHDAl?D £zE.s
r/11? PR£.S.S()/?£
75#

,I
Ill
-

, ,
..,

., ,I
V
/
., ~·· II
,., ·~
!,1

.... "'-
""
,, .... "
.. l/
l/

....
,

Ul
~
...
...:I
I , ~
., ....
.,
A V
.... -
- ....
,
,,
-<1 , l/ " •
0
, 1....

, ,,. ....
-
...:I
,
,/
.., V .... ... '
... .,
~
"'
... ...
/
., l,1
., " - ,. ,..,
- -
~

.,;
Lr

- -
- -
,i,,
,,.. t..,,
'
,, - --
~
- -- -
,-
t..,,

- - -
... -
L,

....
...
- I
I
I
-
10 to 1"'J JOE 4Q SO 60 70 80 90 /OQ
,,H DEFLECT/ON- PEH CE/'IT
FIG . 8.
 11
Straight-side tires will remed y this trouble due to rim
cutting, and the only other objectionable phase would be
that of rolling the tire off the rim, in the case of a sudden
or h eavy side load. This condition can be overcome by
the use of a good steel in the rim, and by the proper design
of the straight-side bead with steel wire reinforcing.
Another consideration in favor of the adoption of straight-
side tires is that of ease of handli~g. A clincher ti.re is not
easy to mount even on the smaller. sizes, and in the larger
sizes it is extremely difficult. It has been noted that usu-
ally four men are necessary to properly mount a 900 by 200
millimeter ti.re on a rim. In the case of the straight-side
tire, one man very often can completely mount even the
largest size ti.re of th e straight-side type. No case requires
more than t wo men.
... PROPOSED STRAIGHT-SIDE SCHEDULE .
In view of all difficulty experienced in the maintenance
of the clincher tires and wheels in the fi eld , a program of
r straight-side wheels and tires was laid out, which is be-
lieved to incorporate the good feat m es of both the clincher
and straight-side types, @ cl eliminates the bad features
of both. In laying out the program, t he following were
borne in mind:
R B :IS.
A one-piece rin{ with a drop center, as shown in fig-
ure 1, was chosen for lightness, simplicity, and ease of
manufacture.
LACING OF SPOK ES .
A type of lacing should be used which would permit of
cross bracing for side thrust as far as possible.
HUBS.
The hub should be centered to overcome ·a ny ecce n-
tricity due to offsetting th e hub in bracing for side thrust.
The si zes included in the pro.,.ram
0
are the 3 4 5 6 7
8, 10, and 12 inch sizes, and th e wheel dian1~te;. i~ k~pt
constant at 20 inches. The resulting tire sIZes are: 26 hy
3 inches, 28 by 4 inches, 30 by 5 inches, 32 by 6 inch es,
34 by 7 inches, 36 by 8 inches, 40 by 10 inches, and 44
by 12 inches. In view of the difficulties consequent to a
complet e sch edule change, it was decid ed to attempt to
change only t hose sizes with which the greatest tro uble
was experienc ed. With t his end in view, the 28 by 4
inch, the 32 by 6 inch , and the 36 by 8 inch sizes have been
selected for preliminary tests. The 28 by ,1 inch and the
36 by 8 inch have successfully passed laboratory and·
ser vice tests, and from the data obtai ned from these t ests
it has been possible to make any necessary changes in the
wheel design of t he remaining wheels in th e proposed
schedule.
One new whee\ worthy of special mention, is a 44 by 10-
inch wheel and tire used at present on the Glenn Martin
bomber, of the type which has only two wheels in the
undercarriage. The wheel is laced in essentially the
same way as the proposed type, but the rim embodies the
truck wheel feature of th e removable side ring for ease
of mounting and removing the ti.re . In fact, t he rim is a
truck rim which has been machined down to a thickness
of 0.175 inch. Its other featuree are indicated in the fore-
going table of " Physical features of airplane wheels." '
'/
/.
/
File D 52.56 / 17 / Addendum McCOOK FIELD REPORT, SERIAL No. 1699

AIR SERVICE INFORMATION CIRCULAR

(AVIATION)

PUBLISHED BY THE CHIEF OF AIR SERVICE, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Vol. IV September 15, 1922 No. 303 (Addendum)

(MATERIAL SECTION REPORT)

Prepared by Engineering Division, Air Service

McCook Field, Dayton, Ohio
July 27, 1922

WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1922
 {
. . 'l~ ~·:,· ;;
CERTIFICATE: h ~ '.frfr~ction of the Secretary of War, the matter contained herein is published as administrative
information and is required for the proper transaction of the public business.
(2)
ADDENDUM TO INFORMATION CIRCULAR, VOL. IV, NO.
303---DISCUSSION OF AIRPLANE TIRES AND WHEELS.

PURPOSE. PROCEDURE.
To rl ete nnine tb e load p er square in ch o[ tire conta ct on Th e wh eels wilh i nflat ed tires mo un ted on lh cm we re
th e suppo rtin g surface and its relation to the supporting mounted on th e sta tion ar y head o[ a n Olsen tes ling ma-
lo:1d and t ire inflation . ch ine. Soapslo ne was scattered o n pa.per b et ween the
support ing surface and the tire to r eco rd the d iagram of
CONCLUSIONS.
tire contact \vith supporting smface. The contact diagram
The load which a tire will carry depend s upon the area of each t ire was obtained for d eflections of 25 and 50 p er
of contact and the inflation pressure , a nd is eq ual to the cent at inflation pressure of 50 and 65 pounds. The area
product of th e a rea in square inch es by the inflation of th e tire contact diagram s was obtained b y means of a
pressure in pounds per square inch. The area of con tact planimeter , and t he pressure p er square inch on the
is the same for eq ual tire d e fl ections regard less of the diagram was obtained from th e load supported b y th e
inflation pressure, b ut th e load carried by the tire wi ll be tire and the area of the diagram. ·
greater fo r the sam e area of contact as the press ure is
RESULTS OF TESTS.
increased .
The d e fl ection of the tire is principally a flattening of Table 1 gi ves th e resul ts of tests and calculations ob-
the tread, and bears a simple m athematical relation t o the tain ed in t his series of ex p eriments.
area ·of co ntact. The area of co nta.ct i s n.n ellipse eq ual In the case o[ airplane tires s ubj ected to load t h ere is
always an increas e in t be inflation press ure as a result of
to 1rAB.
- 4- -, 1n which. A n.nd B n.rc th e rn n.1or
. n. ncI mrnor
. axes
tire d e fl ection. \Vhi le this i_n crease i s n ever ve ry large,
of the ellipse. Th e length o[ these axes can be app roxi- it is a rn e:::.s urable quant ity , an d t h e fo llowin g table shows
mn.ted closely from th e form"t1 la for th e ch ord subtended the gen eral tendencies of pressure ch ange in _t h e several
by the ar c of the segment of a circle. The length of th e tires tested :
chord is · equal to twice the sq uare root of the deflection
multiplied by th e difference between the diameter an d
Presstu e
the d eflection, or
Size. Initial at 50 per
A=2.Jh (d-h) pressure. cen t de-
flection.
d for the major axi s is equal to th e outside diameter of the
wall and tire. d for the minor axis i s equal to the diameter
28 X 4 .. ..........................•.... . ........ . .. fi5 70
of the t ire. 32 x 6 .... ., ••. .... • • . . .. . •• ... . . . • . . . . ..• • . .. . . .•. uo 65
The loads for th e 54 b y 12 ti re calculated on this basis 3~~L::::::::::::::·· ···· ······ ··· ·::: .. ...... . 50
60
55
65
for a 50 per cent d e fl ection o[ the tire wou ld be 10,000, 4,1 x 10. · ·· · • · ·· · · · · · · · ·· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·· · · · · · · 65 70
12,000 , a nd 14,000 pound s fo r 50, 60 , and 70 pounds p er I - - - - - - -- --------'---------
squ a re in ch iuflat.ion p ressures, res ped ive ly . Ju Tab le J t.he column next to la8t, is h ead ed " Load
APPARATUS. recom m ended in d esign ers' handbook. ,, This Yalue is
obtained from 1he load-de fl ec ti.on cun·es for each size tire
Th e standard 11-h eel a nd t.ii·e test rig 11·as used in all cases, a t th e clefl.ecti on and inflation pressures n oted . The last
with the fo llowing ch ange : A sh ee t of pa p er was p laced column is t,he load p er square in ch calculated from ar ea
betwee n tbe tire a nd th e supporting sur[ace . P owd ered ol cont.act di agram a nd th e reco mmend ed loads . It r an
soapstone was scatte red 0 11 the pape r to pe rmi t o[ obt.ain - b e see n that. th e calculated or ser vi C'e press ures a re a lmost
iug th e con tact diagram of th e t.ire wh e n t he load was id enti ca l to those obtained in the laboratory , and these
applied . These contact diagrams were obtai ned for in- pressures are ·not excessi ve and arc well within th e work-
flation pressu res of 50 and 65 pounds and fo r t ire de fl ec- ing lirni ts of the tire:
tions of 25 and 50 p er cent.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS.
MATERIALS.
It will be seen from Table 1 t hat the load per square
The wheels and tires used were the n ew straight-side -inch of contact on th e supporting surface, as d etermined
type of the foll owing sizes: 28 b y 4, 32 by 6, 36 by 8, and b y the contact diagram , is the same as the inflation pres-
44 b y lO. sure of the tire. The load per inch of tread width is con-
5477- 22 (3)

siderably higher for high inflation pressures than for low
pressures and varies with the different sizes of tires. It
is not a satisfactory basis for calculating the load which
a tire will carry.
The last two columns in Table 1 are included for general ·
consideration. Previous to the laboratory d eterminations
as obtained above, it was felt that it was necessary to
indicate a " maximum allowable plane weight per wheel "
for the guidance of designers. These limits were chosen
4
from the load-deflection curves previously d eveloped in
this report, after deciding in a more or less arbitrary way
that a normal tire deflection of approximately 20 per cent
would per.m it of satisfactory tire performance.
It will be seen that the load per square inch of contact
diagram area calculated from these maximum loading
limits for designers ch ecks very closely with t h e .loading
per square inch of contact diagram area as d etermined in
the laboratory.

TABLE 1.

Load
Load per recom- Load per
L
.Area

3
contact Short L1t~fer square mended square
Air Deflec- L d
'fire. pr~ssure tion °~ '.
(pounds) . (per cent). (po1.1., ds ).
diagram a.xis of
diagram
tread
width
inch in de-
co:..l!ct signers'
inch,
recom-
i~~ih;)~ (inches).
(pounds). (poll.llds). h and-
book.
mended.

- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - ------ - -
28 X 4 ... .. ..... ......••....... •.................... 50 25 1,300 23. 4 3.0 433 55. 5 1,200. 51. 5
28 X 4 .... ... . ... . . . ........... ......... . ......... . . 50 50 2,400 45.1 4.6 520 53. 5 2,400 53. 5
28x 4 .. ·····- · ·· · ·· ·· · · ···· · ·· · · · · ·· ····· · · · · ····· · 65 25 1,560 23.1 3. 4 462 67.5 1 600 69.0
28 X 4 •................ . • .................•......... 65 50 2, 900 44. 0 4. 5 645 66.0 3;400 77. 0
32 X 6 ....... ...... . .•..... . .............•...•...•.• 50 25 2,200 43. 0 4.4 503 50.0 2,000 46. 5
32x6 ...... . ..... .. - .. . ................ . ...... . ... . 50 50 4,700 87. 0 6.9 684 54. 0 4, 500 52. 0
32 X 6 . .... - •.• • .• .•. •• •. · · ··-· ······· · ·· · ··· • ••••• • 65 25 2, 600 39. 3 4.3 612 66. 2 2,500 63. 0
32x6 .................. . ... . ............. . ........ . 65 50 6,000 86. 3 6. 4 942 69. 5 5 500 64. 0
36x8 ...................... . ..................... .. 50 25 3,600 69. 4 6.6 544 52.0 3:500 50.5
36x8 ......... . ... . ........ . ....... . .............. . 50 50 8,000 136. 9 8.9 900 58.5 7, 200 52. 5
36 X 8 ..... . . . . . . . .... . ...... -······ · -······ · - ·· · · ·· 65 25 4,900 73. 5 6.6 740 66. 6 4,000 55.0
36 x8 .......... .... ........ .. .... .. .. : .......• .. . • . 65 50 10,000 140.6 9.0 1,120 71. 2 8, 750 62.0
44x 10 .............................. . ...... . . .... .. 50 25 5, 000 93.4 7.1. 704 53. 5 6, 000 65.0
44 X 10 .................... . ................ ..... .. . 50 34 8, 320 150. 2 9.1 913 55.5 9, 000 60.0