Quantcast

Landing gear loads?

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

SVSUSteve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
3,904
Location
Evansville, Indiana
+1 on Paz' book on landing gear.

Lateral load, which would include turning, landing in a crab, and groundloops;
Tire/wheel/brake spin up reaction load;
Towing loads;
Level landings;
Tail low landings;
One wheel landings;
Your gear has to keep the prop and airframe off the pavement in the face of flat tires, flat struts,

Paz covered 'em all.

Billski
If anyone needs something specific out of it, let me know. I have a copy.
 

Fly More

Active Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
39
Location
Washington State
On the subject of landing gear loads, hoping someone can help here:

I'm following the LSA ASTM for my scratch built project and am struggling with the gear loads. I'm a professional aerospace engineer, and I still can't figure it out.

What are they getting at with the variable "h" noted below? It says "drop height" - but for what? a test? and what is the little "m"? I can find no reference to it elsewhere in the doc. Can anyone give an example? Thanks.

Landing Gear ASTM.jpg
 

zenvair

New Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2020
Messages
1
On the subject of landing gear loads, hoping someone can help here:

I'm following the LSA ASTM for my scratch built project and am struggling with the gear loads. I'm a professional aerospace engineer, and I still can't figure it out.

What are they getting at with the variable "h" noted below? It says "drop height" - but for what? a test? and what is the little "m"? I can find no reference to it elsewhere in the doc. Can anyone give an example? Thanks.

...
Maybe reading Jozef Pauliny's Master's Thesis will help:

 

Heliano

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
111
Location
Campinas, SP, Brazil
Fly more, the variable named m seems to be same as h. The ASTM text is a little confusing. The drop height is function of W/S, which in turn is directly proportional to the stall speed. The higher the stall speed, the higher the drop height. Drop height is related to the vertical speed on touchdown. The idea is: the higher the stall speed, the higher is the possible vertical speed on touchdown. Hope it helps.
 

wsimpso1

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2003
Messages
7,643
Location
Saline Michigan
I do not know the LSA standard... According to FAR Part 23 h = 3.6* SQRT(W/S) where W is max airplane weight in pounds and S is wing area in ft^2. H is in feet. I would expect the LSA rule to be similar, but can not be sure. As Heliano pointed out above it is intended to be set by stall speed of the airplane. The faster you are going when the wing lift sags away, the faster you will hit and the drop hieght is intended to reflect that.

Paz' book gets into all of this stuff in much more detail, derives useful equations for forces in the gear system, which in turn let's you design to the loads of your particular ship. Those of you hoping to do a Wittman leg will most likely need to do some more homework on tapered spring leg energy absorption and deflections. I worked up a model in Excel that lets any one design load up and deflect through iterations until it has absorbed the energy involved. We can talk about how to do this if anyone wants to talk in detail about it.

Bill
 

Dana

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 3, 2007
Messages
9,621
Location
CT, USA
...you design to the loads of your particular ship. Those of you hoping to do a Wittman leg will most likely need to do some more homework on tapered spring leg energy absorption and deflections...
If you want a Wittman type gear wouldn't you just figure out the loads and speeds and give those numbers to Grove or whoever is making the gear? They're the experts, after all.
 

wsimpso1

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2003
Messages
7,643
Location
Saline Michigan
If you want a Wittman type gear wouldn't you just figure out the loads and speeds and give those numbers to Grove or whoever is making the gear? They're the experts, after all.
Robbie Grove and Harmon Lang are experts at manufacturing high quality landing gear components of landing gear designs already in existence or of parts to your drawings. I know that the Grove website says they will design a gear leg to your needs, but Robbie Grove personally was clear that they do not design landing gear legs. Following the picks on Grove's website, they ask you to specify the gear leg dimensions. Harmon Lang has a similar set of instructions for specifying the gear leg to them. In neither case are the weights, wing loadings, drop hieghts, contact speeds, or other design parameters even mentioned. They both told me to supply a drawing and they would then quote or no-quote. Grove builds only 7075 legs and Lang builds only alloy steel round rod legs. Maybe that has changed, but I am skeptical that these small manufacturing houses have become full service landing gear design firms.

Billski
 
Last edited:

Fly More

Active Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
39
Location
Washington State
Thanks all - it looks like the LSA ASTM in this area is just a copy of the old part 23, which is much more descriptive and clear. I can figure it out from there.

Yes - planning to use Grove - but the landing gear is only as good as what it is bolted too!
 

Heliano

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
111
Location
Campinas, SP, Brazil
One last remark about the ASTM requirement: It assumes that ef x d is the same for rubber shock absorbers and spring shock absorbers (rubber rings and blade-type) but our humble experience does not exactly match that. Rubber shock absorbers seem to absorb more energy than a cantilever-type, metal blade legs. I would like to hear from any of you with related experience.
 

Fly More

Active Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
39
Location
Washington State
One last remark about the ASTM requirement: It assumes that ef x d is the same for rubber shock absorbers and spring shock absorbers (rubber rings and blade-type) but our humble experience does not exactly match that. Rubber shock absorbers seem to absorb more energy than a cantilever-type, metal blade legs. I would like to hear from any of you with related experience.
Pazmany gives steel spring efficiency of 0.5 and rubber of 0.6 - so he thinks you are right.
 

SVSUSteve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
3,904
Location
Evansville, Indiana
If anyone needs anything more out of the Pazmany landing gear book, let me know, I have the forum's reference copy. Sorry for the delay in replying...we have been swamped at work the past few months.
 
Top