Skip to main content

A mathematical model of an active control landing gear for load control during impact and roll-out

NASA-TN-D-8080 · NASA (NTRS) · 1976

Public domain · NASA (NTRS)Technical Reports

Overview

A mathematical model of an active control landing gear (ACOLAG) was developed and programmed for operation on a digital computer. The mathematical model includes theoretical subsonic aerodynamics; first-mode wing bending and torsional characteristics; oleo-pneumatic shock strut with fit and binding…

Publisher
NASA (NTRS)
Document
NASA-TN-D-8080
Year
1976
Pages
73
Chapters
7

Key points

  • A mathematical model of an active control landing gear (ACOLAG) has been developed for load control during impact and roll-out.
  • The model includes theoretical subsonic aerodynamics, oleo-pneumatic shock strut characteristics, and closed-loop hydraulic control.
  • Simulations showed that the active control landing gear can achieve 20-30% reductions in wing force during landing impacts compared to a modified passive gear.
  • These reductions in wing force could significantly increase the fatigue life of the aircraft structure.
  • The model was validated against experimental data, confirming its effectiveness in predicting loads and motions during symmetrical landings.
Frequently asked questions
What is the purpose of the mathematical model developed in this document?

The purpose of the mathematical model is to control loads applied to the airframe by the landing gear during impact and roll-out.

What are the key components included in the mathematical model?

The model includes theoretical subsonic aerodynamics, first-mode wing bending and torsional characteristics, oleo-pneumatic shock strut features, and closed-loop hydraulic control.

How much reduction in wing force can the active control landing gear achieve?

The active control landing gear can achieve 20-30% reductions in wing force during the impact phase of landing.

What benefits does the active control landing gear provide?

The active control landing gear can lead to substantial increases in the fatigue life of the aircraft structure due to reduced wing forces.

Was the model validated, and how?

Yes, the model was validated by comparing computed results for the passive gear with experimental data, confirming its predictive capability.

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A EQUATIONS OF MOTION This appendix presents the equations of motion for the physical system shown sche matically in figures 3 and 4 for the rigid-airframe option and the rigid-fuselage-elastic wing option.

Rigid-Airframe Option The equations of motion for the rigid-airframe option in the body-axis system and the gravity-axis system are presented in this section.

Airplane center-of -gravity (composite m a s s center) motion in body-axis system

p.5Lt sin a - 0.5(Df + Q) cos a - 0.5% + FG x cos (6 + a ) - FG z sin (6 + a )

1- (mf + mw + mh)g sin (e + a )

Xc,b =

mf + mw + mh

-0.5% - 0 . 5 h cos a - 0.5(Df + Dt) sin a - FA,^^ + (mf + mw)g cos (6 + a )

'ic,b = mf + mw Airplane center-of -gravity motion in gravity-axis system

zCpg = zc,b cos (8 + a ) - xC,b sin (6 + a )

Hub motion in body-axis system

FG,Z cos (6 + a ) + FG x sin (6 + a ) + FA,^^ + mhg cos (6 + a )

'ih,b = ~~ ~~ . .

mh APPENDM A Hub motion in gravity-axis system

sh,g = zh,b cos ( e + a) - x h b sin (e + a,)

Y Wing-mass -center motion in gravity-axis system 2w,g = xc,g + $dew sin , X c w + (3) + b2dcw cos j X c w + 8 ; - 2

'iw,g = Zc,g + i d c w cos :~kcw + 8 ) - e d,, sin (XCw + e'i

Fuselage -mass-center motion in gravity-axis system

xf,g = xc,g - Qdcf sin (Xcf + 0) - e ' 2dcf cos ( X c f + e )

Wing-gear -interface motion in gravity-axis system . 2

xwG,g = j;'c,g + edcwG sin (&cwG + e ) + e dcwG cos (XcwG + 0 )

Shock-strut motion in body-axis system g b = zwG,g cos ( e + a ) + x w ~ , g sin (e + a ) - zh,g cos (e + a ) - xh,g sin (e + a ) - e - 2 zSs Pitch angular acceleration about airplane center of gravity

-

- 0 . 5 h d c t + 0.5Dfdcf + 0.5Qdct + 0 . 5 L W d c ~ , ~ cos a, - 0. 5LwdCW,Z sin a, s i n a, - F ~ , ~ ~ d l - 0.5DwdCW,Z cos a, - 0 . 5 D ~ d ~ ~ , ~ + F ~ , x d 2 cos ( e + a,)

- F ~ , z d 2 sin ( e + a,) + Mn

~- - e = - I - .* -.

IYY 3 5

I

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A Wheel angular acceleration about hub Brake -control sensor -mass acceleration about hub Rigid -Fuselage -Elastic - Wing Option The equations of motion for the rigid-fuselage -elastic -wing option in the body-axis system and the gravity-axis system are presented in this section.

Airplane center -of -gravity (composite m a s s center) motion in body-axis system

r0.5Lt sin a - 0.5(Df + Dt) cos CY - 0.5% + FG,X cos (e + CY) - FG,Z sin (0 + a )

- (mf + mw + mh)g sin (e + a )

1 i

~ ~ - -- ~- - - Xc,b =

mf + mw + mh

+ mfg cos (e + a ) - Fn cos 0 -0.5Lt cos a - 0.5(Df + Dt) sin CY - F w ~

Zc,b = - . . . . .

mf Airplane center-of -gravity motion in gravity-axis system

xc,g = xc,b cos (0 + CY) + Zc,b sin (e + CY)

!ic,g = Zc,b cos (0 + CY) - xc,b sin (0 + CY)

Hub motion in body-axis system + i d c e sin Ace - i 2 d C e sin h c e

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A P r i o r to shock-strut stroking Subsequent t o shock-strut stroking Hub motion in gravity-axis system Wing-mass -center motion in body-axis system FG,X cos (0 + a ) - FG,Z sin (0 + a ) - (mf + mw + mh)g s i n (0 + a ) - 0 . 5 F w ~ - 0.5(Df + Dt) cos a + 0.5Lt sin a

.. I

i

~~ ~ + &dew + 8dr-e sin Xce - d2dce COS hce Xw,b = mf + mw + mh P r i o r to shock-strut stroking cos (0 + a ) + FG,X sin (0 + a ) + (mw + mh)g cos (0 + a ) -0.5Lw + F,B

.. =w,b = rG9z ~ + Bdew

mw + “h Subsequent to shock-strut stroking - 0.5Lw + F,B + m,g cos (e + a ) zw,b = + 6dew m W 3 7

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A Wing-mass -center motion in gravity-axis system

xw7g = xw7b cos (0 + a) + zw,b sin (e + a)

Zw,g = zw,b cos (0 + a) - xw,b sin (e + a)

Fuselage -mass-center motion in gravity-axis system

xf,g = xc7g - gdcf sin (Xcf + e) - h2dCf COS (Acf + e)

zf,g = zc,g - idcf COS (Xcf + 6) + d2dCf sin (Xcf + 6)

Wing-gear -interface motion in body-axis system

FA,^^ - 0.5Lw + F,B + mwg cos (8 + a)

- - ~ ~ _ .. _ - ‘wC,b = - + &(dew + &G) mW Shock-strut motion in body-axis system Motion of elastic axis a t spanwise location of wing m a s s center: P r i o r to shock -strut stroking Subsequent t o shock-strut stroking

FA,^^ - 0.5Lw + F,B + mwg cos (8 + a )

iew,b = mW

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A Motion of elastic axis at spanwise location of wing m a s s center relative to fuselage Rotational motion of wing about elastic axis and relative to fuselage: P r i o r to shock-strut stroking Subsequent t o shock-strut stroking Wheel angular acceleration about hub Brake -control-sensor acceleration about hub Pitch angular acceleration about airplane center of gravity

1-0.5Qdg + 0.5Dfdq + 0.5Dtdq + 0.5Lwd5 cos a - 0.5Lwdg sin a 1

sin (0 + a ) + Mn

J

IYY I

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX B DESCRIPTION OF LANDING GEAR The landing gear simulated in this paper was originally designed for a small a i r plane having a g r o s s m a s s of approximately 2268 kg (5000 lbm). (See ref. 7.) The gear is a cantilevered type with a conventional oleo-pneumatic shock strut. The tire is a 0.69-m (27-in.) diameter type I (smooth contour) which was inflated to 221 k P a (32 psi).

(150 lbm) and the unsprung m a s s i s 59 kg (131 lbm).

The m a s s of the landing gear is 68 kg *2 Sketch (d) The important geometric characteristics of the landing-gear shock strut are illus trated in sketch (d), and the program input parameters are as follows: Shock strut:

Pneumatic area, A2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.00535 m 2 (0.05762 ft2)

Hydraulic area, A 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.00437 m 2 (0.04708 ft2)

Primary orifice area, A0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.00005 m 2 (0.00056 ft2)

Pressurized pneumatic volume, V2 . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0010 m3 (0.03545 ft3)

Charging pressure, po,a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299.9 kPa (6264 psfa)

Bearing separation f o r fully extended shock strut, I1 . . . . . 0.16828 m (0.5521 f t )

Axial length from hub to lower bearing for fully extended

shock strut, 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.6785 m (2.22604 f t )

Mass of airplane acting on each main gear, W1 . . . . . . . . . 1094 kg (2411 lbm)

Unsprung gear mass, W2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 kg (131 lbm)

I

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX B

Fully extended length of shock strut, lss,e . . . . . . . . . . . 0.9674 m (3.174 ft)

Friction coefficient (upper bearing), pss,u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.15

Friction coefficient (lower bearing), pss,i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.15

Volume between piston and cylinder, V3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o m3 (0 ft3)

Area between piston and cylinder, A3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 m 2 (0 ft2)

Specific weight of hydraulic fluid,

. . . . . . . . . . . 8226 N/m3 (52.36 lbf/ft3)

yH

. . 0.00862 N-sec,’m2 (0.00018 lbf-sec/ft2)

Dynamic viscosity of hydraulic fluid, p~

Mass density of hydraulic fluid, p~ . . . . . . . . . . . 838 kg/m3 (1.626 slugs/ft3)

Volume of hydraulic fluid in fully extended strut, VH . . . . -0.0014 m3 ( ~ 0 . 0 5 ft3)

Wheel and tire:

Wheel flange diameter, df . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.39053 m (1.28125 ft)

Width of wheel rim, ww . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.227 m (0.745 f t )

Unloaded diameter of tire, d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.686 m (nominal 2.25 ft)

Maximum width of undeflected tire, w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.245 m (0.805 f t )

Unloaded rated inflation t i r e pressure, pr . . . . . . . . . 482.63 kPa (10 080 psf)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . 220.6 kPa (4608 psf)

Unloaded t i r e inflation pressure, po

P r e s s u r e -rise parameter, K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.66

Vertical-force coefficient, C z . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.02

REFERENCES

Design Formulation and Analysis

1. Wignot, J a c k E.; Durup, Paul C.; and Gamon, Max A.:

AFFDL-TR-71-80, Vol. I, U.S. Air

Volume I. Analysis.

of an Active Landing Gear.

(Available f r o m DDC as AD 887 127L.)

Force, Aug. 1971.

A Feasibility Study of Active Landing

2. Bender, E. K.; Berkman, E. F.; and Bieber, M.:

(Available f r o m DDC as

Gear. AFFDL-TR-70-126, U.S. Air Force, July 1971.

AD 887 451L.)

Mechanical Properties of Pneumatic Tires

3. Smiley, Robert F.; and Horne, Walter B.:

NASA T R R-64, 1960. (Super

With Special Reference t o Modern Aircraft Tires.

sedes NACA T N 4110.)

4. Tung, C. C.; Penzien, J.; and Horonjeff, R.: The Effect of Runway Unevenness on the

NASA CR-119, 1964.

Dynamic Response of Supersonic Transports.

A Study of the Dynamics of Airplane Braking Systems as Affected

5. Batterson, Sidney A.: NASA TN D-3081, 1965.

by Tire Elasticity and Brake Response.

An Experimental

6. Milwitzsky, Benjamin; Lindquist, Dean C.; and Potter, Dexter M.:

(Supersedes

NACA Rep. 1248, 1955.

Study of Applied Ground Loads in Landing.

NACA T N 3246.

Analysis of Landing-Gear Behavior.

7. Milwitzsky, Benjamin; and Cook, F r a n c i s E.:

NACA Rep. 1154, 1953. (Supersedes NACA TN 2755.)

Sixth ed. Ronald Press Co., c.1936.

Engineering Aerodynamics.

8. Diehl, Walter Stuart: Takeoff and Landing Analysis (TOLA) Computer Program.

9. Lynch, Urban H. D.: Capabilities of the Takeoff and Landing Analysis Computer Program.

Part 1:

(Available f o r m DDC as

AFFDL-TR-71-155, Pt. 1, U.S. Air Force, Feb. 1972.

AD 741 942.)

loads induced / A loads

Input loads

f o r total

response analysis

'eedback

Shock strut

Perturbation

Airframe

.loads

response

, ,

-Tire

-

~~

Flexible airframe

Operational loads

0 Steering

0 Thrust reversal

and braking

0 Aerodynamic

0 Asymmetric

0 Modal frequencies impact

0 Modal displacements

Figure 1. - Variables considered significant for analyzing active control landing gear systems.

S e r ie s - hy d rau 1 i c

Parallel-hydraulic

Series-pneumatic

cont ro 1

control

control

m Sensor

Electronic /e=l-J

Figure 2.- Active control concepts for airplane landing gears.

X Y (into paper)

Gravity axes

Body axes

Shock- s t rut

FG, Zl

Figure 3. - Definition of axes and forces for rigid-airframe option.

Y (into paper)

Yb(into paper) g

zg

Body axes Gravity axes

---- Motion due to first wing

Shock-strut

bending and torsion

Figure 4 . - Definition of axes and forces f o r rigid-fuselage --elastic-wing option.

Fluid motion

1 1 1

Pressure force

t t t

Direction of motion

t

A2

A1

S - 1

*1

(a) Passive gear phase. Compress (b) Active gear phase. Low- (c) Active gear phase. High-

ing with wing force less than pressure operation; compress -

pressure operation; extending;

limit force. ing; wing force greater than

wing force less than limit force.

limit force.

Figure 5. - Operational phases of series-hydraulic active control gear.

Y (into paper)

Yb(into paper)

"T; '

Figure 6. - Rigid-airframe configuration used for study, (Dimensions a r e not to scale.)

I

0 Experiment (ref. 7) - .7 - 7 103

- TOLA

-6 - 5 -' Strut Strut Strut force, stroke,

16 c

force, Ibf ft kN - 3 - 2 - 1 - 0 Time, sec (a) Time histories of shock-strut force and stroke.

Figure 7.- Comparison of computed results obtained from ACOLAG and TOLA with experimental data for a vertical drop onto a flat stationary surface. 8 = Oo; iC,, = 2.7 m/sec (8.8 ft/sec); k c , , = 0 m/sec (0 ft/sec).

.7 I x lo3 0 Experiment ( r e f . 7 )

- TOLA

-

.20

- - -- -ACOLAG

.6 .16 .5 5

i

~ Vertical ground force 1 6 p e r gear,

12 L-

I - .2 - 2

8 r I

- .I - 1

4 1 I I I I 0 - 0 0 .05 .10 .15 2 0 .25 T i m e , s e c (b) Time histories of vertical ground force and t i r e deflection.

Figure 7. - Continued.

0 Experiment (ref. 7) -3.5 TOLA

-----

ACOLAG -3.0 - 2 . 5 -2.0 Mass-center acceleration, g u n i t s -1.5 -1.0 - .5 Tinre, sec (c) Time histories of mass-center acceleration.

Figure 7. - Concluded.

I I I I I

-2 Figure 8. - Comparison of computed results from ACOLAG and TOLA for landing-impact simulation.

0 = 10.5O; kc,, = 2.7 m/sec (8.8 ft/sec); kc,, = 45.7 m/sec (150 ft/sec).

32 -

- TOLA - . I I x lo3

_ _ - -

ACOLAG

- .20

r F o r c e

24 -

.16 Main gear Main gear 16 - strut force, s t r u t force, Ibf liN Time, sec (b) Time histories of shock-strut force and stroke.

Figure 8. - Continued.

cn w .20 .16 .12 Vertical Vertical 16 - T i r e ground f o r c e ground f o r c e deflection p e r gear,

I

p e r gear, p e r gear, lbf m e t e r s kN l i .OI t

. oi

- 1 I I 1 I - 0 ( ( .05 .10 .15 .20 2 5 Time, s e c (c) Time histories of vertical ground force and t i r e deflection.

Figure 8. - Continued.

-

-3.0 TOLA

----

ACOLAG

-

-2.5

I I I I I

.5 0 .05 .10 .15 2.0 .25 Time, sec (d) Time histories of mass-center acceleration.

Figure 8. - Concluded.

Active gear

----

Passive g e a r

- 5 j6

, I Wing w i n g force, 1 6 L force,

-I4

kN I lbf - 3 I I

12 c

I , -I 2 8 L - 1 4 L I - 0 Wing displacement, meters

- Active gear

32 - - - - Passive gear

- I x io3

.7 Control flow rate, Control flow rate,

-428 l/min (-113 gal/min) - 4 5 8 l/min (+121 galjmin)

.2c 6 - 6 .16

5 -I 5

4 - 4 Strut .12 Strut force Strut 16 ' Strut per gear,.

ft stroke, force lbf meters per gear, .3 -3 kN .OE .2 . 0 4 .1 1

1 0 0

C a Time, sec (b) Time histories of shock-strut force and stroke.

Figure 9. - Continued.

I T x 103 .6 -5 3 Vertical groucd 4 Vertical .4 T i r e force ground deflect ic per gear, p e r geai force kN ft per gear, lbf .3 .2 2 .1 0 0 ) Time, s e c (c) Time histories of vertical ground force and tire deflection.

Figure 9. - Concluded.

-9 x lo3

- Active gear

----

Passive g e a r

- 3 6 -401 - -8

; A i r -7

; ‘ I

I I

I 1 36 %reduction ‘ I in wing force -6 I I I I I I I I Tolerance I I I I -5 Wing force, lbf -4 5 % i n c r e a s e in - I wing displacement -3 -2 - 1 I I I I I I 0 .04 .08 .12 .16 .20 .24 .28 0 Wing displacement, iiieters I I I I I I I I I I I 0 .1 .2 . 3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0 Wing displacement, f t (a) Wing force as a function of wing displacement.

i !

Figure 10.- Comparison of computed results for modified passive and active gears for a vertical drop onto a vertically oscillating surface. 8 = 0 0 . , z c,g = 2.7 m/sec (8.8 ft/sec); xc,g = 0 m/sec (0 ft/sec).

Q,

- Active gear

- -- - Passive g e a r

.24 2 0 .16 Strut Strut - Strut force per f o r c e stroke, p e r gear, gear, Ibf m e t e r s .12 kN 16 .08 .04 0 0 (b) Time histories of shock-strut force and stroke.

Figure 10. - Continued.

.28 - .9

-40 -

- -9 x lo3

- Active g e a r

- - - - Passive gear

-36 - .8 - - 8 .24 - ; - \

,’ ‘\

-32 - . I - -7 .20 -28

- .6 * -6

-24 .16 T i r e Vertical -5 Vertical . 5 T i r e deflection ground ground deflectic force -20 per gear, force p e r gea: p e r gear. meters p e r gear, kN .12 .4 f t -4 Ibf -16 .3 -3 -12 .08 -2 .2 -8 .04 .I -1 -4 0 0 Time, sec (c) Time histories of vertical ground force and t i r e deflection.

Figure 10. - Concluded.

Q, N

-9 lo3

- Active g e a r

- - -- Passive g e a r

-8

J -7

-36 - 3 2 ‘c

!

i Wing force, kN Wing displacement, m e t e r s

I I I

I I I I I I I .I I .8 .9 1 . 0 .3 .4 . 5 .6 0 .1 .2 Wing displacement, ft (a) Wing force as a function of wing displacement.

Figure 11. - Comparison of computed results for modified passive and active gears for a landing impact onto a smooth runway surface. 0 = 10.50; kc,, = 2.7 m / s e c (8.8 ft/sec); kc,g = 45.7 m/sec (150 ft/sec).

Active g e a r

- - - -

Passiv.e g e a r

36 “1 .24

Control flow rate, Control flow rate, 4 4 7 I/min (+118 gal/niin) -360 Q/min (-95 gal/nim) - Control flow rate,

1 -397 U m i n (-105 gal/min)

S t N t Strut force per force per gear, kN stroke, gear, Ibf (b) Time histories of shock-strut force and stroke.

Figure 11. - Continued.

-

-40

---- Passive gear

- 8

-36 .24

-

-32 I

-

2.0

-

-28

- .6 - 6

-24 -

.16 Vertical ground force per gear, !04 (c) Time histories of vertical ground force and t i r e deflection.

Figure 11. - Continued.

- 2 0

-500 -

- Control flow rate

- 6 x I O - ' - -12 X 10

----

Control flow -8 -4 Control 4 flow rate, gal/min

.30 L

1 I I I 1 .15 2 0 .25 0 .05 'lo Time, s e c Figure 12. - Time histories of control flow rate and control flow for landing impact of .active gear onto a smooth runway surface. 0 = 10.50; zc,g = 2.7 m/sec (8.8 ft/sec); xc,, = 45.7 m/sec (150 ft/sec).

-32 7 x lo3 Active g e a r

-----

Passive g e a r I I -24 I I 4 5

-20 -

Wing force, lbf -' 3 -12 i- I

I

- 2

I

- 1

- 4 t I /

I I I I I I I

-

0 .04 .08 .12 .16 .20 .24 .28 0 Wing displacement, m e t e r s

L I I I I I

I I I I I 0 .1 .2 . 3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0 Wing displacement, ft (a) Wing force as a function of wing displacement.

Figure 13. - Comparison of computed results for modified passive and active gears for a landing impact onto a sinusoidal runway surface. 0 = 10.5O; iC,, = 2.7 m/sec (8.8 ft/sec); x c t g = 45.7 m / s e c (150 ft/sec).

40 r Active gear

_ - - - - -

Passive gear

I

Control flow rate, -

- Tire bounce

3 6 1 .24 .1154 ( min (-305 gal, m n )

r I

Strut Strut gear, kN meters

12 I- .08

.04

0 6I 0

Time, sec (b) Time histories of shock-strut force and stroke.

Figure 13. - Continued.

.28 Active gear .24 I I .2(

- -28

-

- 8 6 .6 \

-24 -

.16 \ - 1 .5 - 5 \ Vertical T i r e ! T i r e Vertical \ ground deflection deflection ground \ force -20 r p e r gear, per gear, I f o r c e per \ per gear, meters -4 ft - : 4 gear, Ibf

kN .12 -

-16 + - 3

i .3

-12 - .2 - 2

- -8

- 1

-4 -

- I-

0 O (c) Time histories of vertical ground force and t i r e deflection.

Figure 13. - Concluded.

- -1.00 lo3 -4 -

- Active gear

- -.75

_ - - - Passive gear

- -.50

- -.25

- 0 W i n g force, lbf - .25

- I I .50

I l l I .75 1.00

I

1 I I I I 1.25 0 .5 1.0 1.5 2 . 0 2.5 Time, sec (a) Time histories of wing force.

Figure 14. - Comparison of computed results for active and passive gears f o r a landing roll-out after traversing a vertically discontinuous bump. f3 = 00; zc,g = 0 m/sec (0 ft/sec); Xc,, = 44.5 m/sec (146 ft/sec).

-4 103

- Active Sear

_ _ - - Passivc g e a r

-201 -16

4 -3

-12

I

Vertical Vertical ground q round force, Ibf

force, liN - - 2

I

I

- -1 - 4 I I I I 0 0 .s 1 1.5 2 2.5 Time, sec (b) Time histories of vertical ground force.

r 4 m Figure 14. - Concluded.

t- ’

I Y NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON. D.C. 2 0 5 4 6 P O S T A G E A N D F E E S P A I D N A T I O N A L A E R O N A U T I C S A N D OFFICIAL BUSINESS S P A C E A D M I N l S T R A T l O N

PENALTY FOR P R I V A T E USE $300 SPECIAL FOURTH-CLASS RATE

U S M A I L

BOOK

2 3 8 001 C 1 U A 76012.3 S 0 0 9 0 3 D S

D E P T OF T H E A I R Fl-iRCf

AF I.;’E4PUNS L A d O R A T O R Y

A T T N : T E C H N I C A L L I B R A R Y S t l L 1

K I R T L A N O A F B NM 8 3 1 1 7

POSTMAgTIR If Undeliverable (Section 158 Post;il Rfnniinl) Do N o t Return

‘‘The aeronautical and spate activitiqs of the United States shall be

conducted so as t o contribute . . . t j the expamion of human knowl

edge of phenomena in t h e atmosphere and space. T h e Administratio%

shall provide for the wzdest practicable and appropriate dissemimtion

of information concerning its activities and the results thereof.”

-NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ACT OF 1958.

NASA SCIENTIFIC AND TbCHNICAE PUBLICATIONS

TECHNICAL REPORTS: Scientific and TECHNICAL TRANSLATIONS: Information

published in a foreign language considered

technical information considered important, to merit NASA distribution in English.

complete, and a lasting contribution to existing

knowledge.

SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS: Information

TECHNICAL NOTES: Information less broad

derived from or of value to NASA activities.

in scope but nevertheless of importance as a

Publications include final reports of major

contribution to existing knowledge.

projects, monographs, data compilations, TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS :

handbooks, sourcebooks, and special

Inforpation ,re$eiving limited distribution

bibliographies.

because of preliminary data, security classifica

tion, or other reasons. Also includes conference

TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION

proceedings with either limited or unlimited

PUBLICATIONS: Information on technology

distribution.

used by NASA that may be of particular

-

CONTRACTOR REPORTS: Scientific and interest in commercial and other-non-aerospace

technical information generated under a NASA applications. Publications include Tech Briefs,

contract or grant and considered an important Technology Utilization Reports and

contribution to existing knowledge. Technology Surveys.

Details on the availability of these publications may b e obtuined from:

SCIENTIFIC A N D TECHNICAL INFORMATION OFFICE

N A T I O N A L A E R O N A U T I C S A N D S P A C E A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

Washington, D.C. 20546

Source & rights

Source: ntrs.nasa.gov. Public-domain U.S. Government work (17 USC §105) — freely reproducible.

Permanent URL — we don’t break links.

Report a problem or request removal

Document details

Doc number
NASA-TN-D-8080
Publisher
NASA (NTRS)
Year
1976
Pages
73
File size
2.8 MB
Chapters
7