Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology

Practice of Shock-Absorber Design: Steps in the Design of an Oleo-Pneumatic Undercarriage Leg

F.E. Burger
Article information:
To cite this document:
F.E. Burger, (1949),"Practice of Shock-Absorber Design", Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, Vol. 21 Iss 12 pp. 384 - 385
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb031839
Downloaded on: 21 June 2016, At: 18:10 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 84 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2007),"Innovation diffusion: a stakeholder and social network view", European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 10 Iss 2 pp. 176-200 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/14601060710745242
(2010),"Restructuring the employment relationship in South Eastern Europe?: Total quality-based changes on managers' careers and job security", Employee Relations, Vol. 32 Iss 3
pp. 310-327 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01425451011038816
(2010),"Six Sigma project selection: an analysis of responsible factors", International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 1 Iss 4 pp. 280-292 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/20401461011096069

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:402912 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write
for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book
series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Downloaded by University at Buffalo Libraries At 18:10 21 June 2016 (PT)

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the
LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.


Practice of Shock-Absorber
Design
Steps in the Design of an Oleo-Pneumatic
Undercarriage Leg
By F. E. Burger
I N a previous article (Ref. 1) the present author
outlined some fundamental considerations of
general practice. In the present paper the in­
tention is, in effect, to take some pages from a de­
signer's notebook and explain in detail the pro­
cedure by which the dynamic characteristics of
a leg are determined. A description of one of the
author's own designs will provide a suitable area
of reference, and although certain of the geo­
metrical calculations will apply rather specially to
this, the remainder of the working will be quite
general in its application. In particular, the orifice
calculations—a vitally useful aspect which has
not previously been treated in a practical fashion
—have been compared with drop-test results
over a range of differing designs and sizes of
shock-absorber and show very good agreement
with them; certainly good enough for a close
initial approximation, and in the style of leg de­
scribed here and in other simple fixed orifice de­
signs, sufficiently accurate to allow of dispensing
with dynamic tests provided that tyre and oleo
relationships do not diverge too far from the
conventional.
Air Compression
The previous article showed how from con­ cent.
siderations of the stated reaction factor, adiabatic
compression of the air column, and the ground y1/1 gives,
handling qualities of the aircraft, the compression
ratio of the leg became 4:1 and the inflation
height was usually set at 1/2, at which setting the
leg extension under static load conditions estab­
lished itself at 1/3 of its total travel. The equations which by substitution in equation (6) results in,
Downloaded by University at Buffalo Libraries At 18:10 21 June 2016 (PT)
for rapid compression of the air are,
and,
The type of leg which we shall consider as an
example is that illustrated diagrammatically in
FIG. 1, in which the air and oil chambers are
separated from one another. In this instance
equation (2) may be more conveniently stated as,
Since the proportions of the leg are more often
than not determined by the physical requirements
of the plunger tube, it is useful to derive an ex­
pression relating the air chamber bore to the
diameter of the plunger and to the other practic­
ally determined dimensions. The stroke of the leg
will have been calculated cither from expression 8
in reference 1, or settled by other considerations.
If 'Q' and 'q' denote the volumes of the air cham­
ber with the leg extended and closed respectively,
it is clear that under isothermal conditions,
It can also be shown that the diameter of the
air cylinder bore is—from a consideration of ex-
384
REFERENCES TO LITERATURE
(1) Burger, F. E. Theory of Shock-absorber Design. AIRCRAFT
ENGINEERING, Vol. XV, No. 168, February. 1943.
(2) Hadekel, R. Shock-absorber Calculations. Flight (The
Aircraft Engineer), Vol. XIX, No. 7, July 25, 1940.
pression 4 and of the geometrical data—given by
the equation,
Energy Absorption
The oleo-tyre combination and the effect
which relative tyre softness has on shock-
absorber efficiency has been discussed in refer­
ence 1 and taken into account in the energy equa­
tion formulated therein. Hadekel (Ref. 2)
showed how reaction factor, drop height and (8) reduces to,
relative tyre softness could be related in a simple
nomogram based upon the fundamental equation,
in which the oleo efficiency 'η 1 ' is taken as 80 per the nomogram which is reproduced in FIG. 2.
cent and the tyre efficiency 'η 2 ' is taken as 47 per
Rearranging equation (1) with respect to Orifice Calculations
where K is the expression for relative tyre softness ate
as evaluated in reference 2.
LANDING GEAR
Notation
(Other than that explained in context.)
pT =Dynamic load fully to compress the tyre
Pn =Air pressure in shock-absorber at load nW
P0 =Inflation pressure of shock-absorber
P8 — Air pressure in shock-absorber at static load
Py =Air pressure in shock-absorber at any given
point in the stroke
n =Load factor
r =Lever arm ratio (articulated struts)
b =Equivalent length of air column at static
load
l =Equivalent length of air column at zero load
b/l =Inflation height
y1 = Shock-absorber2 travel
h =Drop height (V L/2g)
W =Aircraft weight
η1 = Shock-absorber energy absorption efficiency
η2 =Tyre energy absorption efficiency
VL =Vertical velocity of descent of aircraft
E =Total energy at touchdown, fully airborne
E8 — Energy absorbed by shock-absorber
Et = Energy absorbed by tyre
If the inflation height is fixed at 1/2, equation
which may be solved for 'VI'. Alternatively it may
be evaluated in terms of 'VL' or 'n' by means of
Designers have shown much ingenuity in de­
vising orifice arrangements, and such complexi­
ties, whether or not they yield any improvement
in general or special performance, tend to pro­
hibit the use of straightforward methods of calcu­
lating their sizes. The author, and others, have
satisfied themselves that in the great majority of
cases little point is served by departing from the
employment of simple fixed orifices. The present
writer decided to attempt to evolve an expression
of extreme simplicity which would give an accur­
forecast of sizes for fixed orifices, and com­
parisons with test results have shown the method
to be of very reasonable accuracy. In this deriva­
tion the following notation is used:
V = Maximum closure velocity of oleo leg
(ft./sec.)
A =Area of annular oil chamber (ft.2)
V1=Maximum velocity of fluid through
orifices (ft./sec.)
a =Orifice area for closure stroke (ft.2)
k =Orifice discharge coefficient
P = Maximum fluid force sustained by
piston (lb.).
Two assumptions are made; the first is that
the flow through short orifices is fully turbulent
and has a discharge coefficient of 0·5, and the
second is that the maximum closure velocity of
the leg is half that of the vertical velocity of de­
scent of the aircraft at touchdown. Measure­
ments of leg closure velocity for normal tyre-oleo
combinations show this latter assumption to be
approximately true, but in cases where the com­
bination varies greatly from normal an appro­
priate factor can be introduced.
From considerations of continuity of flow,
The dynamic pressure in thefluidis,
Aircraft Engineering

Downloaded by University at Buffalo Libraries At 18:10 21 June 2016 (PT)
from which,
hence,
It will be noted that the fluid force used in this
expression has to be isolated from combination
with the air load. Since the air column pressure is
varying continuously to an adiabatic law during
compression we have to decide at which point in
the stroke this shall be determined. Plottings
from cathode ray oscillograms show the maxi­
mum fluid pressure to occur at about one-third
of the stroke in normal designs, and it is at this
position that the separation may be made.
Equation (3) gives a direct determination of the
air load at any specific point in the stroke; at
one-third stroke,
Py = 1·45P0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . (13)
A Specific Design
An actual design taken through its various
stages of calculation is always helpful. Here it
is proposed to describe the shock-absorber de­
signed for the Miles 'Messenger' and 'Gemini'
aircraft. The photograph (FIG. 3) shows the unit
assembled and also broken down into its com­
ponent parts. It will be remembered that these
undercarriages are of the articulated type, the
former fixed and the latter retractable, with a size
of oleo common to both aircraft. The gross
weight of 2,400 lb. is divided between two wheels
for the purpose of the energy calculation, and the
tyres are Dunlop 6 in.-6i in. inflated to 30 lb./in2.
The reaction factor is 3·0 at a vertical velocity of
touchdown of11½ft./sec.
There are one or two points of interest in this
shock-absorber which might first be noted. There
had been so much trouble in legs in recent years
owing to vicious recoil habits that it was decided
to produce one which would largely overcome
this drawback. At the same time consideration
had to be given to ease of manufacture and the
desirability of making the basic design adaptable
to the requirements of either an articulated or a
December 1949
r =Lever arm ratio (1·33)
then,
The closure orifice area is derived from equa­
tion (12), the recoil orifice area being set at one-
quarter the value of the former. The following
data are collected:
V=11½ft./sec. A = l·13 in.2(·00785 ft.2)
k=0·5 p =58 lb./ft.3 (fluid density)
The maximum force sustained by the fluid will be
derived from equation (13) and from the know­
ledge that the total end load per leg is 3Wr/2 lb.,
at 1/3 closure, this becomes,
By equation (12) we may now evaluate the closure
orifice area, and from the given data this works
out at,
a=·0185 in.2
while the recoil orifice area which we may
designate 'a r ' is,
These orifice areas will be apportioned between
a convenient number of holes drilled around the
lower and upper lips respectively of the orifice
ring, the loose steel piston ring acting as an auto­
matic valve and directing the flow through either
set according to the direction of stroke.
In subsequent drop-tests this shock absorber
was shown to sustain a reaction factor of 3·0 in­
stead of 3·20 as indicated by the nomogram. It
will be remembered that this nomogram was
cantilever leg as might be dictated by the factors based upon an assumed shock-absorber efficiency
involved in the specific case. The dynamic prob­ of 80 per cent; the tests indicate the efficiency to
lem was overcome by arranging a complete isola­ be in excess of this. It is of use to determine the
tion of the air chamber from the oil chamber; in realized efficiency. The energy equation is,
this way the oil and air could not mix and cause E =E3+Et
cavitation and high velocity recoil. The fact that i.e.,
the orifice ring would be working in unaerated oil
was a guarantee also of consistent energy-absorp­ hence
tion performance on the closure stroke. Among
the practical advantages was included the feature
that a leg of this type could be used in any posi­
tion—upside down or on its side if need be.
Manufacturing requirements were met by the fact which is interesting and indicative of what may be
that no internal bore grinding was necessary and achieved with simple fixed orifices.
that the very smallest number of component parts
were used; also, the large overlap between the
bearings provided an ideal type of leg for use as a
cantilever when occasion arose.
We first consider the energy absorption and
evaluate the requisite constants, knowing that the
travel of the wheel hub is 7·5 ins., that the maxi­
mum load fully to compress the tyre is 4,250 lb.,
and that the product 'rl' is equal to 4/3 of the
hub travel; the constants become,
From figure 2 we find the reaction factor to be
3·20 at a shock-absorber efficiency of 80 per cent.
Dealing now with the geometry of the shock-
absorber wefindit convenient to manufacture the
plunger tube from 1⅝ in. o.d. steel tube, to be
ground to 4·600 in. finished size. By making a
layout on the drawing board we find the geo­
metrical constants to be,
D1 = 2·0 in. Y 1 =5·25 in.
L =5·55 in. c =0·25 in.
Substitution in equation (5) gives, 'D' = l·83 in.
We now turn to a consideration of the inflation
pressure and of the orifice sizes for the closure
and the recoil strokes. Let the inflation height
'b/l' be 1/2, i.e., the shock-absorber will be one-
third extended under static load conditions.
Hence the inflation pressure will be one-half of
the static pressure. Adopting the notation,
R =Static reaction per wheel (1,200 lb.)
A =Cross sectional area of plunger tube
(2·01 in.2)
P0 = Inflation pressure of leg
385