JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HELICOPTER SOCIETY 54, 042004 (2009)

Composite Skid Landing Gear Design Feasibility

Kshitij Shrotri∗ Daniel Schrage

Aerospace Engineer Professor
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA

Composite skid landing gear design feasibility results are presented. Limit drop test as per Federal Aviation Regulation
(FAR) Part 27 has been simulated by finite element analysis using ABAQUSTM for multiple landing scenarios from a drop
height of 508 mm (20 inches). Load factor, ply stresses, and ply strains are evaluation metrics. Study of seven fibers and
two matrix systems has been used for laminate selection. 48 ply all-composite designs exhibit load factors within 4–6g with
more than 40% weight saving in comparison to a 1/4-inch wall thickness aluminum design. High strains are observed in
crossmember radii. Lower load factors with weight saving increased to 49% are observed in hybridized metal–composite
configurations. Benefits of metal–composite hybridization are region dependent only. A 48-ply design with Ke49/PEEK
skids, 1/4-inch-thick Al 7075 crossmember radii, and the rest of IM7/PEEK (or IM7/977-3) shows desired performance.
Physics-based strength failure criteria are recommended over maximum strain theory.

Nomenclature of initial taxi and takeoff run capability but at the cost of design com-
plexity. Skid landing gear, on the other hand, offers design simplicity
d fuselage displacement upon impact and reduction in empty weight (WE ). Traditionally, skid landing gears
h drop height have been manufactured from elasto-plastic metal alloys, which dissipate
L ratio of assumed rotor lift to the rotorcraft weight energy during plastic bending. Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 27
n limit inertia load factor (Ref. 1) regulations permit yielding of the landing gear under limit loads.
nj load factor developed, during impact, on the mass used in the Under crash loads, the metal skids and crossmembers plastically deform,
drop test (i.e., the acceleration dv/dt in g recorded in the drop test dissipating energy while allowing for a controlled fuselage underbelly
plus 1.0) crash.
WE empty weight Reduction in gross weight (WG ) and empty weight (WE ) of the aircraft
WG gross weight are primary design concerns. Corrosion resistance concerns in metals
γ12 shear strain and fatigue performance can be adequately addressed with composite
ε11 normal strain along the longitudinal fiber direction materials. Composites offer other advantages such as high specific energy
ε22 normal strain along the transverse direction absorption (SEA) under crushing loads (Ref. 2). Literature search reveals
ε33 normal strain out of the plane that a composite skid landing gear design would be a novel idea. The
με microstrains first design step requires evaluation of a composite skid landing gear
ν12 in-plane Poisson’s ratio performance under limit loads as per FAR Part 27.725. Limit drop test
ρ density (kg/m3 ) simulation by dynamic explicit FEA was conducted by Tho et al. (Ref. 3)
σ11 normal stress along the longitudinal fiber direction using LS-DYNA and Sareen et al. (Ref. 4) using MSC/DYTRAN® .
σ12 shear stress Airoldi and Janszen (Ref. 5) have performed similar analyses using
σ22 normal stress along the transverse direction MaDyAc, a multibody tool, and optimized the metal skid landing gear
σ33 normal stress out of the plane design. This paper reports load factors and local ply stresses and strains
obtained using ABAQUSTM (Ref. 6) for all-composite, hybrid composite,
Introduction and hybrid metal–composite designs.

Rotary winged aircraft traditionally use one of two types of landing
gear systems. The oleo-strut landing gear with wheels offers advantages
∗ Corresponding author: email: badger@gatech.edu.
Presented at the 64th American Helicopter Society Annual Forum, Montreal,
Canada, April 29–May 1, 2008. Manuscript received December 2007; accepted
July 2009.
Skid Landing Gear Configuration
The skid landing gear was based on a Bell AH-1G Cobra helicopter.
The rear and front crossmember placements and heights were based
on work done by Airoldi and Janszen (Ref. 5) and Monterrubio and
Sharf (Ref. 7) as complete data were unavailable. A linear taper law
was incorporated in both crossmember horizontal beam regions. Figure
1 shows a wireframe model. The rear crossmember is 490 mm in height,

DOI: 10.4050/JAHS.54.042004 042004-1 

C 2009 The American Helicopter Society
K. SHROTRI JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HELICOPTER SOCIETY

Table 2. Composite fibers

Fiber E (GPa) ρ (kg/m3 )

E-Glass 77 2540
S-Glass 85 2480
AS4 231 1790
IM7 292 1790
T700S 230 1800
Boron 385 2650
Kevlar49 130 1450

Table 3. Fiber/matrix and AI 7075 properties

Fig. 1. Skid landing gear configuration. E 1 (GPa) E 2 (GPa) G12 (GPa) ν12 ρ (kg/m3 )
Fiber
IM7 292 19.5 70 0.2 1790
80 mm lower than the front crossmember, and the skid track/tread is 2140 AS4 231 14 14 0.2 1790
mm. The center of gravity (CG) location is 770 mm along the station T700S 230 23.2a 95.8b 0.2 1800
line (STA), from the rear crossmember, 0 mm from the butt line (BL), Ke49 130 13c 13d 0.2 1450
and 1854.2 mm from the skids along the water line (WL). Helicopter Matrix
specifications are shown in Table 1 as taken from Ref. 8. Composite skid 977-3 3.45 3.45 1.23 0.32 1300
PEEK 4 4 1.42 0.4 1309
inner diameters and crossmembers have been sized for a typical 1/4-inch
Metal
wall thickness. Outer diameters of the skid tubes and crossmembers are Al 7075 72 72 27.03 0.33 2700
101.6 mm (4 inches) and 76.2 mm (3 inches) with maximum taper at the
a−d
crossmember midspan, resulting in a diameter of 101.6 mm (4 inches). Approximated.

Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 27.725
FAR Part 27.725 requires the drop height to be no less than 203.2 mm
(8 inches) and as generally 330.2 mm (13 inches). A typical 508 mm
(20 inches) drop height for military helicopters was chosen. Load factors
were calculated using Eqs. (1) and (2). The ratio of rotor lift to the
rotorcraft weight was prescribed a value of 0.67.
h + (1 − L) d
We = W ×
h+d
 
We
n = nj × +L
W
Material Selection
Al 7075 has been used for the reference landing gear as comparison.
Seven unidirectional tape fibers and two matrix systems were consid-
ered for comparison of load factors and strain limits. Fiber properties
(Refs. 9–12) are shown in Table 2. S-Glass, E-Glass, and boron were
eliminated due to high densities, which hinder weight saving. All fibers
are transversely isotropic, and matrices are isotropic. Table 3 lists the
fiber/matrix properties (Refs. 9–13). Transverse shear stiffness (G23 ) for
IM7 was used as 5.74 GPa. Elastic properties for unidirectional lam-
ina have been calculated in Matlab© V 7.0 (Ref. 14) using the rule of
mixtures. Table 4 lists comparison of IM7/977-3 lamina properties with
experimental results for a 65% fiber volume fraction laminate published
by Kulkarni (Ref. 15). Results match within 13% for all moduli values.
(1) Table 5 lists composite lamina properties. An N = 4 (π /4) 48-ply quasi-
isotropic [(45/–45/0/90)6 ]s laminate with ply thickness of 0.127 mm
(2) (5 mils) has been used. Equivalent laminate properties have been com-
puted in Matlab© V 7.0 as listed in Table 6. To eliminate testing, a linear
spring-mass model has been used for load factor comparison. The mate-
rial with the lowest stiffness has the lowest load factor. Static analysis has
been done for a lower bound on stiffness based on strains. Ke49 was elim-
inated due to low stiffness. Finite element analysis (FEA) has been done
for remaining fibers with thermoplastic poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK)
and 350◦ F cure 977-3 epoxy resin as the matrices.
Finite Element Analysis

Table 1. Helicopter design data Dynamic explicit FEA was conducted using ABAQUS/EXPLICIT V
Design Parameter Metric Value 6.7-1. Skid tubes and crossmembers were modeled with conventional

Rotorcraft mass 3636.36 kg

Fuselage rolling inertia (I xx ) 3660.7 kg-m2
Table 4. Rule of mixtures property comparison
Fuselage pitching inertia (I zz) 17354 kg-m2
Fuselage yawing inertia (I yy ) 14643 kg-m2 Property IM7/977-3 Kulkarni’s Thesis
Landing gear dampers 60 N-m-sa
CG STA location from rear crossmember 770 mmb E 1 (GPa) 191 180 (−6%)
CG BL location 0 mm E 2 (GPa) 9.5 9.7 (+1%)
CG WL location from skids 1854.2 mm ν12 0.24 0.33 (+27%)
G12 (GPa) 5.3 6.1 (+13%)
a
Landing gear damper coefficient taken from Ref. 7. ρ (kg/m3 ) 1621.7 –
b
Dimension based on Ref. 5 due to lack of available data.

042004-2
COMPOSITE SKID LANDING GEAR DESIGN FEASIBILITY 2009

Table 5. Lamina properties (65% Vf ) Table 7. Typical laminate strain allowable (103 με)

Laminate E 1 (GPa) E 2 (GPa) G12 (GPa) ν12 ρ (kg/m3 ) Fiber Angle ε11 ε22 ε33
IM7/977-3 191 9.5 5.3 0.24 1622 0◦ 14 8 15
IM7/PEEK 191.2 10.7 5.76 0.25 1619 90◦ 10 8 15
AS4/977-3 151.4 8.2 4.17 0.23 1622 ±45◦ 6 8 15
AS4/PEEK 151.6 9.1 4.45 0.26 1619
T700S/977-3 150.7 10.2 5.40 0.23 1628
T700S/PEEK 150.9 11.1 6.21 0.23 1625
Ke49/977-3 85.7 7.9 4.09 0.23 1401 Table 8. Typical laminate stress (MPa) allowable
Ke49/PEEK 85.9 8.7 4.36 0.26 1398 (tensile/compressive)

Fiber Stresses (all orientations) MPa

σ11 2200/1500
Table 6. Equivalent laminate properties σ22 80/135
σ33 80/135
Laminate E (GPa) G (GPa) ν12
σ12 100/150
IM7/977-3 71.177 27.213 0.3078
IM7/PEEK 72.022 27.53 0.3079
AS4/977-3 56.587 21.611 0.3092
AS4/PEEK 57.183 21.809 0.311 calculation. A single ply laminate with equivalent properties as listed in
T700S/977-3 58.037 22.295 0.3016 Table 6 was used to reduce run time. CG displacement depends on the
T700S/PEEK 59.086 22.796 0.2960 drop mass and the landing gear stiffness. Hence an equivalent stiffness
Ke49/977-3 35.086 13.529 0.2937 approach is satisfactory. Drop test analysis was then conducted by pre-
Ke49/PEEK 34.519 13.342 0.2937 scribing only 1g gravity load. CG maximum vertical acceleration after
impact was used for load factor calculation. Maximum bending strains
are in the crossmember tapered regions. Hence, these regions were mod-
four node shell elements with reduced integration (S4R). Gauss quadra- eled with 48 individual plies. The rest was modeled with an equiva-
ture with three integration points for each composite ply was used. A rigid lent laminate or aluminum as per the design. Figure 2 shows the mesh
reference node, with prescribed mass and inertia properties as listed in (3538 shell elements). All shells are midplane surfaces. Composite layup
Table 1, represents the fuselage. Rigid beam connectors connect the fuse- was modeled as conventional shells with local cylindrical co-ordinates.
lage at two locations on both crossmembers. Two dampers were modeled Tables 7 and 8 show allowable strains and stresses for failure criteria.
on the rear crossmember. A single rigid three-dimensional discrete four- Typical tensile and compressive allowable were chosen for σ11 . A range
node element (R3D4), with a central reference node with translational of absolute values was chosen for other stresses.
and rotational degrees of freedom constrained using the Encastre (fixed)
boundary condition, represents the ground. master–slave contact was Results
specified. The ground is the master surface, and the landing gear is the
slave surface. Penalty contact friction algorithm was used with coefficient Level landing: Aluminum skid landing gear
of friction as 0.35. A piecewise elasto-plastic stress–strain law (Ref. 16)
for Al 7075 with yield at 326 MPa, 1.2% plastic strain at 542 MPa, and Figure 3 shows CG displacement and acceleration plots obtained dur-
571 MPa as ultimate strength was modeled. 1g gravity load was applied. ing landing and drop analyses. The point of minima on the displacement
Total step time varied from 0.6 to 1 s. Critical step time ranged from 10−6 plots indicates the commencement of the landing gear rebound. Load
to 10−7 s. Landing analysis was first conducted by introducing rotor lift factor computed is 3.59g, which agrees with published load factors.
equaling 2/3rd of the helicopter gross weight (WG ). Vertical CG dis- Figure 4 shows maximum Von Mises stress as 548 MPa, less than the
placements after impact were used for the equivalent drop weight (We ) ultimate strength of 571 MPa. Weight saving was computed based on
the mass property outputs from ABAQUS. At the feasibility stage, joints
and other parameters affecting weight were not considered.

Sample load factor computation. Maximum CG displacement from

landing analysis is 611.38 − 508 = 103.38 mm, where 611.38 mm is
the displacement of the rigid reference node, representing the fuselage
while 508 mm (20 inches) is the drop height. The difference gives the
centroid displacement AFTER impact.
Equivalent drop mass (We ):
508 + (1 − 0.67) × 103.38
We = 3636.36 × = 3224.39 kg
508 + 103.38
Maximum CG acceleration from drop analysis is 22.49 m/s2
22.49
nj = + 1 = 3.29
9.81
 
3224.39
Load factor : n = nj × + 0.67 = 3.59g
3636.36
Fig. 2. ABAQUS mesh.

042004-3
K. SHROTRI
Fig. 3. Al 7075: CG vertical displacements and accelerations.
Level landing: Composite skid landing gears
Figure 5 shows CG displacements and accelerations of the 48-ply all-
composite IM7/977-3, T700S/977-3, AS4/977-3, and IM7/PEEK skid
landing gears. As expected, accelerations are higher than for the metal
landing gear. The highest load factors computed are 5.75g and 5.73g
for IM7/PEEK and IM7/977-3 designs, respectively. Figures 6 and 7
show that normal and shear stresses are greater than 3000 and 124 MPa,
in the 0◦ and 45◦ fibers, respectively, and exceed allowable values.
Figures 8–15 show normal strains along the 0◦ fiber in ply 46 and shear
strains along the 45◦ fiber in ply 48 along the crossmember outer diam-
eters. Most of the IM7 fiber crossmember beam produce strains within
±3000–6000 με. Ply strains are high in localized regions close to ra-
dius bends on the rear crossmember, indicating that local stiffening or
plasticity induced strain relief may be required. Shear strains are as high
as ±10,000–30,000 με in the rear crossmember. Both strains increase
with decreasing fiber stiffness. Thus, it can be said that high stiffness
Fig. 4. Von Mises stress.
042004-4
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HELICOPTER SOCIETY
IM7 fiber shows better performance in the crossmember regions for a
single all-composite configuration. It is to be noted though that the skids
produce acceptable strains. Hence, even low stiffness yet high impact
resistant Ke49 fiber may be used in this region. A key point to be noted is
the absence of plasticity and nonlinearity in the stress–strain constitutive
law prescribed for the composites. Any nonlinearity and possible plas-
ticity effects displayed by the composite will result in energy dissipation,
hence lower load factors and also more acceptable strains and stresses.
Hybridization of composites and metal–composites was also analyzed to
study the effect on load factor and strain/stress relief.
Level landing: Hybrid skid landing gears
From previous results, it can be noted that strains are large in re-
gions close to the bend radii of the crossmembers. Strains produced by
the Ke49 skids are within acceptable values. Ke49 fiber can be used
for the skids leaving the remainder with high stiffness fibers. To allevi-
ate strains in the crossmembers, the radii bends were assigned Al 7075
elasto-plastic properties. Thus, a combination of metal plasticity with
the nonlinear constitutive stress–strain law and linear composite stress–
strain law was prescribed. Several configurations, with both PEEK and
977-3, were analyzed to understand the amount of strain relief as well as
the volume fraction dependence of metal in the design. Figure 16 shows
the CG displacements and accelerations of the hybrid designs. It can be
seen that metal plasticity in the bend regions alleviates the load factors
significantly without adding much weight. The lowest load factor with
acceptable strains is obtained for a design with Ke49/PEEK skids, Al
7075 crossmember bends, and the rest IM7/977-3. As the elastic prop-
erties of PEEK are very nearly similar to those of 977-3, it is projected
that replacing IM7/977-3 with IM7/PEEK in any configuration should
result in near identical performance. Figures 17–36 show normal strains,
normal stresses, shear strains, and shear stresses in the 0◦ and 45◦ fibers
in plies 46 and 48 along the outer diameters of the rear crossmember.
Figure 37 shows out-of-plane strains. IM7 produces 7000 με in the
COMPOSITE SKID LANDING GEAR DESIGN FEASIBILITY 2009

Fig. 5. Composites: CG vertical displacements and accelerations.

Fig. 7. Ply 48 (45◦ ) σ12 : IM7/977-3.

Fig. 6. Ply 46 (0◦ ) σ11 : IM7/977-3.

0◦ fiber and 9000–12,000 με along ±45◦ in shear. AS4 and T700S pro-
duce marginally higher strains. Both, normal and shear strains are high.
Strength-based theory shows that any of the three fibers is acceptable
provided the regions close to the crossmember bend radii are metallic.
While IM7 fiber shows the most desired performance, stress-based al-
lowable show that any of the fibers can be used in conjunction with
metal plasticity in the bend regions. Hence, AS4 and IM7 fiber, with
high SEA values (Ref. 17), are recommended. It can be concluded that
metal plasticity aids significantly in lowering the load factor. Thus, it
may be possible to use either of the fibers in conjunction with 977-3,
PEEK, or a similar matrix, for the hybrid metal composite design. The
configuration with Al crossmember bends and skids and the rest made
of IM7/977-3 has a load factor of 4.40g while that with only Al bends Fig. 8. Ply 46 (0◦ ) ε11 : IM7/977-3.

042004-5
K. SHROTRI JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HELICOPTER SOCIETY

Fig. 9. Ply 48 (45◦ ) γ12 : IM7/977-3.

Fig. 12. Ply 46 (0◦ ) ε11 : T700S/977-3.

Fig. 10. Ply 46 (0◦ ) ε11 : IM7/PEEK.

Fig. 13. Ply 48 (45◦ ) γ12 : T700S/977-3.

Fig. 11. Ply 48 (45◦ ) γ12 : IM7/PEEK.

Fig. 14. Ply 46 (0◦ ) ε11 : AS4/977-3.

and the rest of IM7/977-3 is 4.14g. Weight saving as compared to an Al

skid landing gear of 1/4-inch wall thickness is 41.77% for the latter and
13.73% for the former. Thus, use of metal in regions other than the bends
adversely affects weight saving. Metal–composite hybridization is not a
function of volume fraction. It is dependent on the crossmember radii
only. Ke49/PEEK skids increase weight saving to 49%. A design with
Ke49/PEEK skids, Al 7075 crossmember bends, and the rest of the land-
ing gear of AS4 or IM7/PEEK is the recommended design. PEEK was
chosen due to its higher fracture toughness (9–10 times that of 977-3).
Elastic properties being similar, results are similar under limit loads.
Level landing with drag (run-on): IM7/977-3 skid landing gear
Figure 38 shows the CG displacements and acceleration plots. The
impact surface and landing gear are to be tilted at 26.6◦ with respect

042004-6
COMPOSITE SKID LANDING GEAR DESIGN FEASIBILITY 2009

Fig. 17. Ply 46 (0◦ ) ε11 : Al bends/IM7/977-3.

Fig. 15. Ply 48 (45◦ ) γ12 : AS4/977-3.

to the horizontal. This was simulated by imposing resolved components

of the gravity load and lift, while maintaining the horizontal attitude of
the landing gear and impact surface. An initial forward velocity equaling
half the level landing drop velocity at impact was simulated for drag. The
drop height to achieve these velocities at impact is 0.633 m (∼25 inches).
Figure 39 shows the ply strains in the 46th ply (0◦ ) fiber direction, again
high in localized regions along the rear crossmember tapered beam. Load
factor for this case is 4.74g.

Rolled attitude Landing: IM7/977-3 skid landing gear

Rolled attitude landing impact has been simulated as the critical

rolling condition reported by Sareen et al. (Ref. 4). Sink speed of 3.04 m/s
(10 ft/s) with a rolled attitude angle of 6.4◦ has been simulated by inclin-
ing the landing gear assembly at 6.4◦ to the horizontal with drop height Fig. 18. Ply 48 (45◦ ) γ12 : Al bends/IM7/977-3.

Fig. 16. Hybrid: CG vertical displacements and accelerations.

042004-7
K. SHROTRI JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HELICOPTER SOCIETY

Fig. 19. Ply 46 (0◦ ) σ11 : Al bends/IM7/977-3.

Fig. 22. Ply 48 (45◦ ) γ12 : Al bends and skids/rest IM7/977-3.

Fig. 20. Ply 48 (45◦ ) σ12 : Al bends/IM7/977-3.

Fig. 23. Ply 46 (0◦ ) σ11 : Al bends and skids/rest IM7/977-3.

Fig. 21. Ply 46 (0◦ ) ε11 : Al bends and skids/rest IM7/977-3.

equaling 0.471 m (18.6 inches). Figure 40 shows the CG displacement

and maximum acceleration. Load factor obtained is 4.54g. This is lower
than that for level landing and level landing with drag (run-on) con-
ditions and is in agreement with published trend. Load factor is lower
due to larger CG displacement (141 mm). Ply strains are acceptable in
regions away from the bend radii as shown in Figure 41. This is another
indication that metal plasticity is essential to relieve strains. Fig. 24. Ply 48 (45◦ ) σ12 : Al bends and skids/rest IM7/977-3.

042004-8
COMPOSITE SKID LANDING GEAR DESIGN FEASIBILITY 2009

Fig. 25. Ply 46 (0◦ ) ε11 : Ke49 skids/IM7/PEEK/Al bends. Fig. 28. Ply 48 (45◦ ) σ12 : Ke49 skids/IM7/PEEK/Al bends.

Fig. 26. Ply 48 (45◦ ) γ12 : Ke49 skids/IM7/PEEK/Al bends.

Fig. 29. Ply 46 (0◦ ) ε11 : Ke49 skids/AS4/PEEK/Al bends.

Fig. 27. Ply 46 (0◦ ) σ11 : Ke49 skids/IM7/PEEK/Al bends. Fig. 30. Ply 48 (45◦ ) γ12 : Ke49 skids/AS4/PEEK/Al bends.

042004-9
K. SHROTRI JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HELICOPTER SOCIETY

Fig. 31. Ply 46 (0◦ ) σ11 : Ke49 skids/AS4/PEEK/Al bends. Fig. 34. Ply 48 (45◦ ) γ12 : Ke49 skids/T700S/PEEK/Al bends.

Fig. 32. Ply 48 (45◦ ) σ12 : Ke49 skids/AS4/PEEK/Al bends.

Fig. 35. Ply 46 (0◦ ) σ11 : Ke49 skids/T700S/PEEK/Al bends.

Fig. 33. Ply 46 (0◦ ) ε11 : Ke49 skids/T700S/PEEK/Al bends. Fig. 36. Ply 48 (45◦ ) σ12 : Ke49 skids/T700S/PEEK/Al bends.

042004-10
COMPOSITE SKID LANDING GEAR DESIGN FEASIBILITY 2009

Table 9. Load factors and weight saving

Design Material Weight Saving (%) n (g)

Level Landing
Al 7075 reference landing gear – 3.59
IM7/977-3 42.21 5.73
IM7/PEEK 42.21 5.75
T700S/977-3 42.21 5.34
AS4/977-3 42.21 5.19
Al bends and skids rest IM7/977-3 13.73 4.40
Al bends rest IM7/977-3 41.77 4.14
Ke49/PEEK skids rest IM7/PEEK 49 5.73
Ke49/PEEK skids Al bends rest IM7/PEEK 49 4.08
Ke49/PEEK skids Al bends rest T700S/PEEK 49 3.99
Ke49/PEEK skids Al bends rest AS4/PEEK 49 4.13
Level Landing with Drag (Run-On)
◦
IM7/977-3 42.21 4.74
Fig. 37. Out-of-plane strains Ply 46 (0 ) ε33 : Ke49 skids/IM7/
Rolled Attitude Landing
PEEK/Al bends.
IM7/977-3 42.21 4.54

Load Factor and Weight Saving

Table 9 shows load factors and weight saving for the designs. Designs
with Ke49 skids, Al crossmember bends, and the rest of composite/PEEK
(or 977-3) show best load factors. Designs with load factors of 4.08g and
5.75g show best and worst performances.
Summary
Composite configurations show higher load factors as expected but
result in weight saving more than 40%. Highest strains are observed in
compression along the 0◦ fiber orientations (ply 46) in the crossmember
regions. Out-of-plane strains are within 15,000 με in compression and
20,000 με in tension for all-composite configurations and 7000–9000 με
in compression and 12,000–15,000 με in tension for metal–composite
hybridized designs. Shear strains are high in all designs. Designs with
IM7 fiber have most manageable strains due to high fiber stiffness.
Focht et al. (Ref. 18) report allowable strains for IM7/977-3 as high
as 18,000 με for unidirectional laminates in the fiber direction and up
to 30,000 με for cross plies, under high strain rate compressive impact
loading. Out-of-plane strains they reported are as high as 35,000 με.
Local ply strains in regions close to the rear crossmember radii bends of
most configurations are very high. Stiffeners integrated within the com-
posite tube at critical locations may result in increased localized stiffness
without significant weight addition and load factor increase. Increasing
the number of plies could result in relieving strains but at the cost of load
factor increase beyond 6g. Strength theory shows that the stresses are

Fig. 38. Level landing with drag: CG vertical displacements and accelerations.

042004-11
K. SHROTRI JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HELICOPTER SOCIETY

Fig. 41. Ply 46 (0◦ ) ε11 : IM7/977-3 for rolled attitude landing.

Fig. 39. Ply 46 (0◦ ) ε11 : IM7/977-3 for level landing with drag.
above or close to typical allowable for such fibers in the all-composite
designs. Metal–composite hybridization offers better designs for any of
the three fibers. Allowable values used are typical values based on manu-
facturer data sheets and published data, which in fact report higher stress
allowable for individual fibers. Thus, the designs may be feasible based
on strength theory than on maximum strain theory.
It is to be noted that hourglass effects could be of concern in the
analyses. Coarse mesh and reduced integration elements are believed to
be the cause of this. Hourglass control with enhancement can be used in
addition with mesh refinement. However, mesh refinement will mean an
expensive run time when analyzing composites. While full integration
elements such as the S4 element or higher order elements such as the eight
node reduced integration shell element (S8R) may be better, these too
should result in higher computational expense. Thus, efficient modeling
techniques for dynamic analysis of composites are needed. For validation
of results, the reference aluminum skid landing gear had been analyzed
to ensure that the resulting displacements, reactions and hence the load
factors computed are within the correct range.
Metal–composite hybridization takes advantage of plasticity, thus re-
sulting in energy dissipation and lower load factors. From the crashwor-
thy perspective, it may be useful to have plastic energy dissipation in these
regions, as the behavior of composite tubes under impact when at an in-
clination may not produce crushing (Ref. 19) and hence, increased SEA.
Fabricating the radii bends from elasto-plastic metal and crossmember
from acceptably low stiffness fiber, such as AS4, to increase the bending
moment versus rotation area under the curve, may be useful. Only the
horizontal tapered crossmember beams under bending loads and the skid
tubes under compressive and shear loads would be the composite region

Fig. 40. Rolled attitude landing: CG vertical displacements and accelerations.

042004-12
COMPOSITE SKID LANDING GEAR DESIGN FEASIBILITY
whose crush characteristics would be of concern. If these regions can
be triggered to crush during crash, increased SEA and a lighter weight
design could be possible. Hybridization of aluminum with composites
results in lower strains along all fiber directions in composite regions.
Maximum Mises stress in aluminum is 549 MPa. Fabricating only the
radii bends from metal is better than fabricating both, the radii bends and
skids, from metal. A larger aluminum region may enhance relief in the
connecting composite regions by increased plastic dissipation. AS4 and
IM7 fibers are recommended for further study.
Conclusions
1) A composite skid landing gear is conditionally feasible. Local
stiffening of crossmember beams, plasticity effect or increase in the
number of plies is necessary.
2) An increase in solely the number of plies will increase the load
factor significantly and also reduce weight saving.
3) Hybridization of elasto-plastic metal and composite as well as
multiple composites achieves better weight and load factor performance
than a single all-composite design.
4) Plastic bending is highly desirable in the crossmember bend
regions.
5) Weight savings of 20%–50% can be obtained despite hybridization.
6) Physics-based strength failure criteria are suggested instead of
maximum strain theory.
7) AS4 and IM7 fiber may both be suitable depending upon the strain
relief in the crossmember bends by the metal plasticity effect.
8) Crashworthiness of both the configurations needs to be studied,
and testing is essential for result validation.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Prof. Sathyanarayan Hanagud and Prof.
Olivier Bauchau of Georgia Institute of Technology, Mr. Bob Meiss-
bach of MD Helicopters, and Mr. Alessandro Airoldi of Politecnico di
Milano for their valuable inputs.
References
1
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 14 Part 27. Available at
www.faa.gov. Accessed June 30, 2009.
2 19
Mamalis, A., Manolakos, D., Demosthenous, G., and Ioannidis,
M., Crashworthiness of Composite Thin-Walled Structural Components,
CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1998.
042004-13
2009
3
Tho, C., Sparks, C., Sareen, A., Smith, M., and Johnson, C., “Ef-
ficient Helicopter Skid Landing Gear Dynamic Drop Simulation Using
LS-DYNA,” American Helicopter Society 59th Annual Forum Proceed-
ings, Phoenix, AZ, May 6–8, 2003.
4
Sareen, A., Smith, M., and Howard, J., “Helicopter Skid Landing
Gear Dynamic Drop Analysis and Test Correlation,” American
Helicopter Society International 54th Annual Forum Proceedings,
Washington, DC, May 20–22, 1998.
5
Airoldi, A., and Janszen, G., “Landing Performance of a Helicopter
Skid Landing Gear with the Use of a Multi-Body Program,” Dipartimento
di Ingegneria, Politecnico di Milano, Italy. Available from the author.
6
ABAQUS (now Simulia), ABAQUS/CAE 6.7 Users Manual,
ABAQUS, Providence, RI, 2007.
7
Monterrubio, L., and Sharf, I., “Influence of Landing-Gear Design
on Helicopter Ground Resonance,” AIAA-1999-4327, AIAA Modeling
and Simulation Technologies Conference and Exhibit, Portland, OR,
August 9–11, 1999.
8
Talbot, P., Tinling, B., Decker, W., and Chen, R., “A Mathematical
Model of a Single Main Rotor Helicopter for Piloted Simulation,” NASA
Technical Memorandum 84281, September 1982.
9
HexTowTM IM7 and AS4 (6000) Carbon Fiber Product Data Sheets.
Available at www.hexcel.com. Accessed June 30, 2009.
10
TORAYCA® T700S Data Sheet. Accessed June 30, 2009.
11
KEVLAR® Aramid Fiber Technical Guide. Accessed June 30, 2009.
12
Sun, C. T., Mechanics of Composites Materials and Laminates,
Purdue University, AAE 555 Class Notes, Chapter 1.
13
Goldberg, R., and Stouffer, D., “High Strain Rate Deformation Mod-
eling of a Polymer Matrix Composite,” NASA TM-1998-208664, August
1998.
14
MATLAB Release 14 V 7.0, The Mathworks Inc. Natick, MA, 1984–
2009.
15
Kulkarni, R., “Characterization of Carbon Fibers: Coefficient of
Thermal Expansion and Microstructure,” MS Thesis, Department of Me-
chanical Engineering, Texas A&M University, December 2004.
16
Dowling, N., Mechanical Behavior of Materials, Prentice-Hall,
Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2006, pp. 162–163.
17
Jacob, G., Fellers, J., Simunovic, S., and Starbuck, M., “Energy
Absorption in Polymer Composites for Automotive Crashworthiness,”
Journal of Composite Materials, Vol. 36, (7), 2002, pp. 813–850.
18
Focht, J., Woldsenbet, E., and Vinson, J., “High Strain Rate Proper-
ties of IM7/977-3 Graphite/Epoxy Composites,” AIAA-1998-1854, 39th
AIAA/ASME/ASCE/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materi-
als Conference, Long Beach, CA, April 20–23 1998.
Fleming, D., and Vizzini, A., “The Effect of Side Loads on the
Energy Absorption of Composite Structures,” Journal of Composite Ma-
terials, Vol. 26, (4), pp. 486–499.