Hindawi

Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

Volume 2018, Article ID 8536581, 21 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/8536581

Research Article
Established Numerical Techniques for the Structural
Analysis of a Regional Aircraft Landing Gear

F. Caputo ,1 A. De Luca ,1 A. Greco,1 A. Marro,2 A. Apicella,2 R. Sepe ,3

and E. Armentani3
1
Dept. of Engineering, University of Campania “L. Vanvitelli”, Via Roma 29, 81031 Aversa, Italy
2
Magnaghi Aeronautica, Via Galileo Ferraris 76, 80142 Naples, Italy
3
Dept. of Chemical, Materials and Production Engineering, University of Naples Federico II, P.le V. Tecchio 80,
80125 Naples, Italy

Correspondence should be addressed to R. Sepe; raff[email protected]

Received 22 May 2018; Accepted 4 September 2018; Published 17 October 2018

Academic Editor: Pietro Russo

Copyright © 2018 F. Caputo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Usually during the design of landing gear, simplified Finite Element (FE) models, based on one-dimensional finite elements (stick
model), are used to investigate the in-service reaction forces involving each subcomponent. After that, the design of such sub-
component is carried out through detailed Global/Local FE analyses where, once at time, each component, modelled with three-
dimensional finite elements, is assembled into a one-dimensional finite elements based FE model, representing the whole landing
gear under the investigated loading conditions. Moreover, the landing gears are usually investigated also under a kinematic point of
view, through the multibody (MB) methods, which allow achieving the reaction forces involving each subcomponent in a very short
time. However, simplified stick (FE) and MB models introduce several approximations, providing results far from the real behaviour
of the landing gear. Therefore, the first goal of this paper consists of assessing the effectiveness of such approaches against a 3D full-FE
model. Three numerical models of the main landing gear of a regional airliner have been developed, according to MB, “stick,” and 3D
®
full-FE methods, respectively. The former has been developed by means of ADAMS software, the other two by means of
®
NASTRAN software. Once this assessment phase has been carried out, also the Global/Local technique has verified with regard to
the results achieved by the 3D full-FE model. Finally, the dynamic behaviour of the landing gear has been investigated both
numerically and experimentally. In particular, Magnaghi Aeronautica S.p.A. Company performed the experimental test, consisting of
a drop test according to EASA CS 25 regulations. Concerning the 3D full-FE investigation, the analysis has been simulated by means
®
of Ls-Dyna software. A good level of accuracy has been achieved by all the developed numerical methods.

1. Introduction phase is the most severe and defines the main design
specifications [1].
The landing gear is one of the main and a complex engi- In fact, the landing gear’s principal role is to absorb the
neering system of an aircraft and its weight may reach up to impact energy minimizing the loads which would be
the 3% of the maximum aircraft weight at the take-off. transferred to the airframes and to the other parts of the
Hence, the design phase of the landing gear has a heavy aircraft, passengers included. The landing gear is composed
impact on the whole structure and on the airplane aero- by several components whose main scope is also addressed
dynamic behaviour. to the energy absorption; among these, the shock absorber
Specifically, its main scope is to support the aircraft plays a key-role. The energy absorption is an important
during the landing, the tacking off, and ground operations, design criterion which is also significantly considered in the
so it is mainly subjected during its lifecycle to heavy com- passenger’s passive safety criteria [1]. During the design
pressive loads, but also drag and side loads play a significant current practice, some aircraft operations, which must be
role [1]. Among the several loading conditions, the landing taken into account to assure the aircraft safety, are difficult to
2 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

consider and are often postponed at later design stages by Moreiras et al. [19] proposed a numerical model for the un-
performing experimental tests on prototypes [2–4]. steady aerodynamics characterized by wind tunnel testing, in
However, it may involve expensive design modifications order to predict the aerodynamic effect in previously untested
in the case that the landing gear design fails to meet the conditions and, in this way, to allow a first-stage exploration of
customer and certification requirements. For these reasons, new areas in the design space, without the need of expensive
a prediction model able to simulate, with a good level of wind tunnel or flight testing.
accuracy, the structural response of a landing gear under In this scenario, the regulations [20, 21] precisely define
several landing conditions can be a helpful tool for designers. the minimum requirements to be met during the design.
Several works have been addressed to experimental and Concerning the landing gear current design practice,
numerical investigations of landing gear performances as a preliminary stage is dedicated to the calculation of the
well as other aircraft structural components under the dy- loads acting on each subcomponent during all prescribed
namic loads produced by a landing operation [5–13]. Fur- aircraft operations by means of simplified FE models,
thermore, Daniels [14], proposed an approach for modelling composed by one-dimensional finite elements (stick
and simulating landing gear systems. The model has been models). After that, the design of each subcomponent is
assessed against static and dynamic tests. carried out through detailed Global/Local FE analyses,
Niezgoda et al. [15] carried out numerical simulations consisting in replacing, once at time, each component
for the investigation of the dynamic response of a landing modelled in stick model with one-dimensional finite ele-
gear. In his paper, he discussed the methods used for the ments, with a three-dimensional representation based on
static analysis and presented a mathematical model which three-dimensional finite elements.
allows determining the dynamic characteristics of the Other modelling techniques can be used for the calculation
landing gear. of the reaction forces, such as the multibody (MB) one. The
Infante et al. [16] presented a detailed analysis of a Nose benefits in using such method, rather than others, consists also
Landing Gear (NLG) failure, supported by FE analyses. The of the possibility to analyse in a very short time the kinematic
investigation focused on an accident in which the nose of the behaviour of a structure and, then, the displacements of the
landing gear fork of a light aircraft failed during landing. landing gear subcomponents, before the landing gear pro-
Imran et al. [1] focused on the structural components, made duction. Hence, it is possible to verify the coherence of the
of composite materials, of a landing gear. Structural safety space taken up by each subcomponent, which should not
for static and spectrum loads is analysed by FEM (Finite interfere with the motion of another one, and to estimate the
Element Method). current mass values, the equivalent stiffness, and the damping
Numerical methods are not only used for structural coefficients of the landing gear components.
purposes. Actually, Redonnet et al. [17] proposed a nu- The aim of this paper is to verify the reliability of the stick
merical characterization of the aeroacoustics by a simplified and MB approaches against a 3D full-FE model, which is the
nose landing gear, by using advanced simulation and signal most reliable method but also the highest time-consuming
processing techniques. To this end, the NLG noise physics is one. Simplified stick and MB models can introduce too
primarily simulated through an advanced hybrid approach, much approximations. It is well known that most of the
which relies on Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and approximations introduced by the stick model are related to
Computational AeroAcoustics (CAA) calculations. the geometry, which is one-dimensionally modelled.
Landing gear components are generally designed under Moreover, according to such approach, it is important, from
a “safe life” approach, and its components are often replaced a numerical point of view, to develop an isostatic FE model
many times during the in-service life of the aircraft. equivalent to the real one: if the landing gear is modelled as
In fact, failures may lead to catastrophic consequences, overconstrained, the static equilibrium equations are in-
with serious damages to the aircraft structure and, in the sufficient for determining the internal forces and reactions
worst case scenario, possible loss of human lives. For this on each subcomponent. So, the modelled material properties
reason, the design phase requires a special attention. and geometries assume an increasing importance, which
Damage investigation appears to be of vital importance in gets the stick model a too approximated solution.
preventing accidents, so several authors are working on Concerning the MB approach, since each subcomponent
structural health monitoring systems for multiple and is modelled as rigid and linked to the other subcomponents
different applications. Concerning the damage types, fa- by means of ideal constraints, it is often necessary a proof
tigue cracking is the most common cause of structural tuning phase of the model.
failure in aircraft. Fujimoto and Gallagher [18] attributed to In this paper, three numerical models have been de-
crack onset and propagation processing operations, latent veloped, according to the stick, MB, and 3D full-FE ap-
material defects, mechanical damage, and crack growth proaches, respectively. The models concern the main landing
from corrosion pits. gear of a regional airliner.
Viùdez-Moreiras et al. [19] investigated on the dynamic Once this assessment phase has been carried out, the
loads affecting main landing gear doors of an Airbus passenger structural behaviours of the main fitting and the trailing arm
aircraft. Currently, significant costs are invested by manu- landing gear components have been investigated according to
facturers in order to test the aerodynamic performance and the the aforementioned Global/Local technique, by replacing
high costs associated to wind tunnel and flight testing restrict alternatively their one-dimensional representation with the
the number of test cases that can be performed. So, Viùdez- 3D one. The Global/Local technique has subsequently been
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 3

assessed against the results obtained by a 3D full-FE model. A (i) Global part: some components coarsely modelled
good agreement has been achieved in terms of stress-strain with one-dimensional finite elements, which play
field. only the role of loads transfer;
Finally, the dynamic behaviour of the landing gear has (ii) Local part: a component (either the trailing arm or
been investigated both numerically and experimentally. In the main fitting) finely modelled with 3D finite el-
particular, Magnaghi Aeronautica S.p.A. Company per- ements, on which the stress analysis can be per-
formed the experimental test, consisting of a drop test carried formed. Actually, the internal loads generated also
out according to EASA CS 25 regulations [20]. Concerning by the interaction of all the other components
the numerical investigation, the analysis has been simulated modelled with one-dimensional finite elements will
®
by means of Ls-Dyna code, by developing a 3D full-FE
model; a good level of accuracy has been achieved.
act on each 3D component.

3.2. Multibody Model. Even if, in this paper, the multibody

2. Experimental Test Description approach has been used to predict the reaction forces for the
The main landing gear of a regional airliner has been in- landing gear under static loading conditions, the MB ap-
vestigated (Figure 1). proach allows investigating both the kinematic and the
Table 1 shows the material properties of the landing gear dynamic behaviours of a structure. In general, the main use
components. of such methodology must be found in the possibility to
The drop test has been conducted at Magnaghi Aero- understand trajectory and kinematic of the landing gear
nautica Lab test (Figure 2). subcomponents, before the landing gear production.
The components have been modelled as rigid and linked
reciprocally by means of ideal constraints, neglecting both
3. Numerical Techniques for Quasistatic elasticity and related friction. The inertia properties are
Structural Analyses automatically considered in the developed model by in-
troducing the density in the material properties. The MB
In this section, the three numerical models, based on the stick,
model (Figure 5(a)) has been developed in order to reproduce
MB, and 3D full-FE approaches, are presented. All results are,
the landing gear schematically as shown in Figure 5(b).
respectively, compared to assess their accuracy. In addition,
Different joint types have been introduced in the model:
the Global/Local technique has been used to perform
revolute joints, allowing the motion between the trailing
a structural analysis of the main landing gear subcomponents,
arm, the main fitting, and the shock absorber (Figure 6(a));
and the results have been compared with the results achieved
revolute joints modelled between the folding side brace, the
by a 3D full-FE model. All static FE analyses have been carried
main fitting, and the support fixture (Figure 6(b)); and
®
out by means of NASTRAN code [22], whilst the MB an-
prismatic joints, allowing the sliding between the piston and
®
alyses by means of ADAMS code [23].
the cylinder tube of the shock absorber.

3.1. Stick Model. The stick model is often used to pre- 3.3. Full-FE Model. In order to assess the reliability of the
liminarily explore the loads distribution on each sub- stick and MB modelling techniques, a full-FE model,
component under particular loading condition and characterized by three-dimensional finite elements, has been
geometry configurations. This modelling strategy consists of developed. The full-FE model consists of 1500328 elements
modelling the whole structure by means of one-dimensional and 351676 nodes, whose 1500297 are CTETRA4 elements
finite elements. According to the first modelling stage, the (four nodes with three freedom degrees for each node),
entire landing gear system has been modelled as shown in whilst the remaining part (31) are RBE2 elements. The
Figure 3. The developed FE model consists of 40 nodes and construction of the full-FE model is similar to the one used
42 finite elements (36 CBAR with 6 degrees of freedom for for the dynamic analysis, so, for the sake of brevity, a more
each node, 2 CROD with 1 degree of freedom for each node detailed description of the 3D full-FE model is postponed in
and 4 RBE2), and it is characterized by the boundary Section 5. As a result, this subsection is mainly dedicated
conditions shown in Figure 3. to the description of the modelled boundary conditions
This phase is often followed by a Global/Local analysis in (Figure 7). More in detail, rigid elements RBE2 have been
which the subcomponents of greatest interest, previously used to model the joints. The analysis has been carried out by
modelled with one-dimensional finite elements, are alter-
nately modelled by means of three-dimensional finite ele-
means of NASTRAN code.
®
Since the attention is paid on the calculation of the
ments and replaced to the ones one-dimensionally modelled reaction forces, it must be noticed that, in this model,
(Figure 4). In this way, it is possible to take advantage by the contrary to the one addressed to the dynamic analysis, tyres
3D modelling only where needed and to perform structural have not been modelled (Figure 7).
analysis only on the subcomponent of greatest interest,
considerably reducing the computational time required by 4. Results Analysis
a 3D full-FE model.
As a result of such analysis, the landing gear will be All three modelling techniques have been investigated under
characterized by two parts (Figure 4): the same loading conditions, characterized by two vertical
4 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

Retract actuator

Main fitting
Up lock

Upper folding side Shock absorber

brace cylinder

Shock absorber rod

Lower folding side

brace

Trailing arm

Tyre 30 × 8.8 R15

Figure 1: Main landing gear.

Table 1: Material properties. As a result of the very good agreement, the structural
behaviours of the main fitting and the trailing arm com-
Material properties
ponents have been investigated according to the afore-
Wheel axle 300M AMS6257
mentioned Global/Local technique, by replacing
Main fitting/trailing arm AL7175-T74 AMS 4149
Folding side brace Ti6Al4V AMS4928
alternatively their one-dimensional representation with the
Shock absorber cylinder 4340 AMS 6414 3D one. In addition, in order to assess the reliability of this
technique, the numerical results, in terms of von Mises
stresses map, have been compared with the 3D full-FE model
ones. The von Mises stresses maps achieved by both
forces of 78800 N applied to the wheels, by assuming a shock Global/Local and full-FE techniques have been, respectively,
absorber stroke of 75% of the total mechanical stroke. compared in Figures 9(a) and 9(b), for the trailing arm and
The results, in terms of reaction forces, achieved by the in Figures 10(a) and 10(b) for the main fitting.
three numerical modelling techniques have been presented According to Figures 9 and 10, the contour plots of the
and compared in Table 2. von Mises stresses for the trailing arm and for the main
According to Table 2, a significant disagreement can be fitting are quantitatively and qualitatively in good
noticed between the reaction forces. Such disagreement has agreement.
been addressed to the 3D FE model and, in particular, to the Moreover, the stick model has also been used to
joint modelling between the lower folding side brace and the investgate the reaction forces at the constraints under dy-
main fitting, which consists of rigid elements. In fact, by namic loading conditions, such as during the landing phase.
replacing the whole folding side brace with a beam element In particular, such condition has been investigated
(Figure 8), a very better agreement can be observed (Table 3). according to the FAA Part 23, assuming that the landing
According to Table 3, a very high level of accuracy occurs with only the main wheels contacting the ground in
among the three numerical modelling techniques can be the “tail down” landing configuration. Two vertical forces of
observed. 104256 N, provided by Magnaghi Aeronautica S.p.A.,
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 5

Figure 2: Laboratory for experimental drop test.

z Node 52 (1,2) Node 55 (1,2,3)

CID 6
x
y

CID 5

x
y

Node 66 (1,2,3)

Figure 3: Stick model of the landing gear.

z Node 52 (1,2) Node 55 (1,2,3)

CID 6
x
y

CID 5

x
y

Node 66 (1,2,3)

Figure 4: Global/local technique.

6 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

Retract actuator

Main fitting
Up lock

Upper folding side Shock absorber

brace cylinder

Shock absorber rod

Lower folding side

brace

Trailing arm

Tyre 30 × 8.8 R15

(B)

(A)
Figure 5: Landing gear: (A) multibody model; (B) main structural components.

(a) (b)

Figure 6: Revolute joints between: (a) main fitting, trailing arm, and shock absorber; (b) main fitting and support fixture.
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 7

BCs 52 Joints modelled by

means of RBE2

55

66

BCs
Node 52-CID 6
dof1 dof2 dof3 dof4 dof5 dof6
0 0
Node 55-CID 6
dof1 dof2 dof3 dof4 dof5 dof6
0 0 0
Node 66-CID 5
dof1 dof2 dof3 dof4 dof5 dof6
0 0 0

Figure 7: Boundary conditions (BCs) acting on the 3D full-FE model.

Table 2: Reaction forces achieved for the main landing gear by the representative of the “tail down” configuration, have been
stick, 3D FE, and MB models. applied to the wheel centres of the stick model.
The reaction forces for both static and dynamic loading
Rx (N) Ry (N) Rz (N)
conditions are shown in Table 4.
Node 52
Stick 25290 3463 −160000
3D FEM 25360 2113 −158800 5. Full-FE Dynamic Analysis
MB 25293 3453 −160003
Differences (%) (%) (%) Numerical full-FE model has been developed for simulating
Stick-3D FE −0.28 63.89 0.76 dynamic loading conditions, such as the landing phase.
MB-3D FE −0.26 63.42 0.76 More in detail, according to this technique, all landing gear
Stick-MB −0.01 0.29 0.00 subcomponents have been modelled with three-dimensional
Node 55 finite elements and the simulation has been carried out by
Stick 17390 −262000 54490
3D FEM 21400 −265400 49120 ®
means of Ls-Dyna [24] solver. A nonlinear analysis in
terms of both material and geometry has been carried out.
MB 17395 −261989 54479
The model, shown in Figure 11, counts a total of 448833
Differences (%) (%) (%)
Stick-3D FE −18.74 −1.28 10.93 nodes and 1222238 of three-dimensional finite elements. The
MB-3D FE −18.71 −1.29 10.91 elements used in the model are reported in Table 5.
Stick-MB −0.03 0.00 0.02 Moreover, rigid elements RBE2, discrete elements, and
Node 66 revolution joints elements have been used in order to model
Stick −42690 258500 −52080 the joints between the components.
3D FEM −46750 263300 −47960 Because of the complexity of the analysis, the modelling
MB −42688 258536 −52077 of landing gear has been carried out step-by-step.
Differences (%) (%) (%) A particular attention has been paid on the modelling of
Stick-3D FE −8.68 −1.82 8.59 the shock absorber and the tyre, which need a tuning phase
MB-3D FE −8.69 −1.81 8.58 to replicate as better as possible their real structural re-
Stick-MB 0.00 −0.01 0.01 sponses. The description of the developed modelling tech-
8 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

z
z
CID 6 x x
y CID 6
z y

CID 5 x

Figure 8: 3D full-FE model: second strategy.

Table 3: Reaction forces achieved for the main landing gear by the Moreover, differently from the stick model, also the
stick, modified 3D FE (∗ ), and MB models. secondary actuation system has been modelled (Figure 15)
Rx Ry Rz by introducing elastic and viscous finite elements, charac-
Node 52
terized by a constant elastic stiffness of 50 kN/mm and
(N) (N) (N) a damping factor of 50 kN·ms/mm.
Stick 25290 3463 −160000 The ground has been modelled by means of a rigid wall;
3D FEM∗ 25290 3462 −160000 a “contact-automatic-surface-to-surface” algorithm has
MB 25293 3453 −160003 been defined to avoid the penetration between the rigid wall
Differences (%) (%) (%) and the tyres.
Stick-3D FE 0.00 0.03 0.00 In order to simplify the simulation, the drop velocity is
MB-3D FE 0.01 −0.26 0.00 attributed to the rigid wall along the z-axis (Figure 16(a)),
Stick-MB −0.01 0.29 0.00 keeping fixed the whole landing gear shown in both
Node 55 side (Figure 16(a)) and top (Figure 16(b)) views in
(N) (N) (N) Figure 16.
Stick 17390 −262000 54490 The FE analysis has been set for reproducing the spec-
3D FEM∗ 17400 −262000 54480
ifications described by the EASA CS25 regulations, under
MB 17395 −261989 54479
Differences (%) (%) (%)
which the experimental test has been carried out. Such
Stick-3D FE −0.06 0.00 0.02 regulations define all the test requirements, including the
MB-3D FE −0.03 0.00 0.00 calculation of the equivalent airplane mass resting on the
Stick-MB −0.03 0.00 0.02 landing gear to be implemented during the test. The
Node 66 modelled mass assumes a value of 10800 kg, and it has been
(N) (N) (N) numerically applied to the rigid wall.
Stick −42690 258500 −52080 A drop velocity of 3.05 m/s has been applied to the rigid
3D FEM∗ −42690 258500 −52070 wall. Moreover, a rotational speed of 44.64 m/s has been
MB −42688 258536 −52077 applied to the wheels, and a 0° pitch angle has been con-
Differences (%) (%) (%) sidered. The dynamic simulation has been carried out by
Stick-3D FE 0.00 0.00 0.02 setting an analysis time of 450 ms.
MB-3D FE 0.00 0.01 0.01
Stick-MB 0.00 −0.01 0.01
5.1. Shock Absorber Modelling. In order to model the shock
niques of these two components is demanded in Sections 5.1 absorber, a detailed modelling technique, enabling the
and 5.2, respectively. sliding of the piston inside the cylinder tube, has been
Concerning the interactions among all components, the carried out by defining a contact surface between them. A
joints among the subcomponents have been simulated by means “contact-automatic-surface-to-surface-offset” algorithm
of one-dimensional rigid-finite elements stars and can be mainly has been set by choosing the piston as master surface and
grouped in two categories: spherical and cylindrical joints. the internal surface of the cylinder as slave (Figure 17).
For example, Figure 12(a) shows the spherical joint In particular, an offset between these two surfaces, which
modelled between the main fitting and the shock absorber; is kept constant during the sliding, has been imposed. It
Figure 12(b) shows the cylindrical joint modelled between has been possible to keep the gap constant, by con-
the trailing arm and the shock absorber. straining the piston to slide axially inside the cylinder tube
In order to ensure the motion between the main fitting (Figure 17).
and the trailing arm, a cylindrical pin has been modelled as Moreover, it has been possible to model the damping
shown in Figure 13. and elastic responses by placing two overlapped one-
Another constraint type, shown in Figure 14, has been dimensional finite elements between the shock absorber
defined in order to ensure the motion between the wheels ends: a beam element and discrete spring element (both
and the axle. represented by the yellow line in Figure 17). The two
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 9

Contour plot Contour plot

Stress (von Mises) Stress (von Mises)
Global system Global system
Simple average Simple average
4.464E + 02 4.464E + 02

3.968E + 02 3.968E + 02

3.472E + 02 3.472E + 02

2.976E + 02 2.976E + 02

2.480E + 02 2.480E + 02

1.984E + 02 1.984E + 02

1.488E + 02 1.488E + 02

9.920E + 01 9.920E + 01

4.960E + 01 4.960E + 01

0.000E + 00 0.000E + 00
No result No result
Max = 2.547E + 02 Max = 4.464E + 02
Node 323195 Node 371384
(a) (b)

Figure 9: von Mises stresses (MPa) for the trailing arm achieved by (a) 3D full-FE model and (b) Global/local technique.

(a) (b)

Figure 10: von Mises stresses (MPa) for the trailing arm achieved by (a) 3D full-FE model and (b) Global/local technique.

Table 4: Static and dynamic loading conditions (stick model). one-dimensional finite elements share, thus, the same
nodes. The discrete spring element allowed introducing
Rx (N) Ry (N) Rz (N) the spring property (Figure 18), whilst the beam ele-
Node 52 ment the damping property (Figure 19) of the shock
Stick static load 25293 3453 −160003 absorber.
Stick dynamic load −14420 −97770 −35078 It has been possible to assess the efficiency of this
Node 55 modelling technique by performing a simple simulation. In
Stick static load 17395 −261989 54479 particular, the two coupled one-dimensional finite ele-
Stick dynamic load 102047 −154301 −350578 ments responses (Figure 20(a)) have been investigated
Node 66 under an imposed displacement curve (Figure 20(b)). The
Stick static load −42688 258536 −52077 two finite elements share the same nodes and, in particular,
Stick dynamic load −87626 252071 −177144 the upper one is fully constrained, whilst the bottom is
10 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

y
x
Figure 11: FE model.

Table 5: Element types used in full-FE dynamic model.

Element type Number Freedom degrees
CTETRA4 (solid with four nodes) 670428 3 for each node
HEX8 (solid with eight nodes) 6100 3 for each node
SHELL4 (shell with four nodes) 25838 6 for each node
SHELL3 (shell with three nodes) 481764 6 for each node
PENTA6 (solid with six nodes) 30080 3 for each node

Figure 13: Pin linking the main fitting and the trailing arm.

Cylindrical
(a)
constraint

Extra node:
stem-rim constraint
Figure 14: Modelling of the joints between wheels and axle.
(b)

Figure 12: (a) Spherical and (b) cylindrical joints. 5.2. Tyre Modelling. Concerning the modelling of the wheel
(H38 × 13.0 R18), the tyre inflating has been modelled by
using the same technique used in the aerospace field for
characterized by the displacement curve shown in Fig- modelling the airbag. It starts by the definition of a closed
ure 20(b). surface (tyre tube), containing a control volume (Figure 23),
Figure 21 shows the results provided by FE analysis in inflated by introducing a mass flow rate up to reach the
terms of force vs. shock absorber stroke. desired pressure value (8.25 bar).
Hence, the maximum shock absorber stroke is of In addition, two sets of radial spring finite elements
150 mm (Figure 22). (Figure 24), each one characterized by a variable spring
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 11

Figure 15: Secondary actuation system.

Figure 17: Modelling of the shock absorber.

1.1 E + 6

9.5 E + 5

8.0 E + 5
Force (N) 6.5 E + 5

5.0 E + 5

3.5 E + 5

2.0 E + 5

5E + 4
–50 0 50 100 150 200 250
<<< Extension Compression >>>
(a)
Displacement (mm)
Figure 18: Polytrophic curve.

300

200

100
Force (kN)

–100

–200

–300
–1.5 –1 –0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
<<< Extension Compression >>>
(b) Velocity (m/s)

Figure 16: Landing gear model: (a) side and (b) top views. Oil damper
Figure 19: Oil damper properties.
stiffness carried out by the experimental data, shown in
Figure 25, have been added.
This modelling technique allowed achieving a good level 6. Full-FEM Assessment: Numerical-
of accuracy between numerical and experimental force vs. Experimental Correlation
tyre displacement curves, as shown in Figure 26.
The sensitivity of the model has been tested by varying Figure 28 shows some numerical frames of the drop test
the tyre pressure. Pressures of 4.76 bar and 11.85 bar have simulation.
been considered. The force vs. deflection curves are shown in First of all, the assessment of the prediction capability
Figure 27. of the performed simulations has been carried out, by
12 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

Y
Z X

F
(a)
350

Max compression
325
300
275

Nominal position
250
Displacement (mm)

225
200
175
150
125
100
75
50
25
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Time (s)

50
Nodal Point2-resultant displacement
(b)

Figure 20: (a) shock absorber model; (b) imposed displacement

curve.
Figure 22: Shock absorber stroke.

Shock adsorber correlation

1200
Tyre
1000
lnner
tube
800
Load (N)

600

400 Rim

200

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Stroke (mm) Figure 23: Modelling of the tyre.
Numerical
Experimental
Figure 21: Force vs. shock absorber stroke curve. agreement has been achieved. Figures 29(b) and 29(c) show
the stroke and the rigid wall displacement vs. time curves,
respectively.
comparing the numerical and experimental shock absorber According to Figure 29(a), the numerical curve fits
stroke vs. rigid wall displacement curves (Figure 29(a)). The properly the experimental one related to the 0° pitch angle
numerical results have been compared with the results up to a wheel displacement of 250 mm; after that, the
carried out by two experimental tests, performed with pitch numerical curve slope decreases, and the curve fits better
angles of 0° and 5.94°, respectively. the experimental one related to a 5.95° pitch angle. As
According to Figure 29(a), the numerical curve fits a result, a good agreement has been achieved. Figures 29(b)
properly the experimental one related to the 0° pitch angle up and 29(c) show the stroke and the rigid wall displacement
to a wheel displacement of 250 mm; after that, the numerical vs. time curves, respectively. The numerical contact force
curve slope decreases and the curve fits better the experi- between tyres and the rigid wall has been illustrated in
mental one related to a 5.95° pitch angle. As a result, a good Figure 30.
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 13

Tyre

lnner tube

Rim
Z

Radial beam
X Y

Figure 24: Tyre modelling.

8.0

7.0

6.0
Deflection (in)

5.0

4.0

3.0
Curves shown for the
2.0 following pressures in psi:
69 95 120 146 172 198 224 249 275
1.0

0
0

20E + 3

40E + 3

60E + 3

80E + 3

100E + 3

120E + 3

140E + 3

Load (lbs)
Figure 25: Experimental data of a H38 × 13.0 R18 tyre.

500
450
400
350
300
Force (KN)

250
200
150
100
50
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Displacement (mm)

FE model
Experimental data
Figure 26: Numerical and experimental vertical forces vs. tyre displacement.
14 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

Estimated static load deflection

500
450
400
350

Force (KN)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Deflection (mm)
4.76 Bar
11.85 Bar
8.25 Bar
Figure 27: Numerical vertical forces vs. tyre displacement curves as a function of the tyre pressure.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f )
Figure 28: Continued.
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 15

(g) (h)

Figure 28: Numerical frames of the drop test simulation: (a) t1 � 0 ms; (b) t2 � 50 ms; (c) t3 � 80 ms; (d) t4 � 120 ms; (e) t5 � 170 ms;
(f ) t6 � 210 ms; (g) t7 � 340 ms; (h) t8 � 350 ms.

400

350

300
Rigid Wall Displacement (mm)

250

200

150

100

50

0
0 18 36 54 72 90 108 126 144 162 180
S/A Stroke Ha (mm)

Numerical_3.05 m/s_0DEG
Experimental pitch angle = 5.94°
Experimental pitch angle = 0°
(a)
200
180 400
160 350
Displacement (mm)

Displacement (mm)

140 300
120 250
100 200
80 Stroke absorber 150
60
40 100
50 Rigid wall
20
0 0
–20 –50
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (ms) Time (ms)
Nodal point 2 X displacement Z displacement
Nodal point 447415 Y displacement Resultant displacement
S/A_stoke
(b) (c)

Figure 29: (a) Shock absorber stroke vs. rigid wall displacement curves; (b) shock absorber stroke vs. time curves; (c) rigid wall displacement
vs. time curves.
16 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

400

350

300

250

Force (kN)
200

150

100

50

–50
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (ms)
X Z
Y Magnitude
Figure 30: Contact force between tyre and rigid wall.

Compression diagram
800 250

700

200
600 Fmax = 187 kN

500 Fmax = 177 kN

Reaction wall (kN)

150
S/A load (kN)

400

300
100
200

100 50

–100 0
–20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
S/A stroke Ha (mm) Hr ground (mm)

Numerical_3.05m/s_0DEG Numerical_3.05m/s_0DEG
Experimental polytrop Experimental
Experimental Isotherm
(a) (b)

Figure 31: Shock absorber reaction vs. stroke curves.

Figure 31(a) shows the numerical and experimental The reaction forces have also been monitored during the
shock absorber (S/A) reactions plotted as a function of the dynamic simulation (Figure 32) and compared to the stick
stroke. Finally, Figure 31(b) shows the numerical contact model ones (Table 4), presented in Section 4, representative
force compared with the respective experimental one, be- of the static configuration equivalent to the tail down
tween the wall and one of the two tyres, as a function of the landing configuration.
relative displacement between wheel and rigid wall. According to Figure 32, nodes 52, 55, and 56 correspond
According to Figure 31, a good agreement has been to the constrains locations modelled in the Ls-Dyna model
achieved in terms of peak between numerical and experi- (Figure 33), which coordinates are the same of nodes 52, 55,
mental results. and 56 of the stick model in Figure 3.
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 17

400 200
300 100
0
200 –100

Force (kN)
Force (kN)

100 –200
–300
0 –400
–100 –500
–600
–200 –700
–300 –800
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
Time (s) Time (s)

X X
Y Y
Z Z
(a) (b)
250 400
200 300
150 200

Force (kN)
Force (kN)

100
100
0
50
–100
0 –200
–50 –300
–100 –400
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
Time (s) Time (s)
X RES-X RES-Z
Y RES-Y RES-XYZ
Z
(c) (d)

Figure 32: Reaction forces of full-FE model. (a) Node 52. (b) Node 55. (c) Node 66. (d) Resultant Forces.

Node 55 Node 66 Table 6: Reaction forces achieved by the stick and 3D full-FE
models during the drop test.
Models Rx (N) Ry (N) Rz (N)
Node 52
Node 52 Stick model −14420 −97770 −35078
Ls-Dyna model −201000 −68900 283800
Node 55
Stick model 102047 −154301 −350578
Ls-Dyna model 177700 −123800 −764000
Node 66
Stick model −87626 252071 177144
Ls-Dyna model −70800 200700 141800

This comparison has been performed by considering the

maximum value of the full-FE forces resultant, carried out at
0.25 s of the time analysis (Figure 32). The disagreement is
due to the simplification of the stick model. The stress
analysis has also been carried out at this instant of time.
Figure 34 shows the von Mises stress contour plot of the
Figure 33: 3D full-FE constraints locations. main fitting.
The maximum value of the von Mises stresses can be
The comparison between the reaction forces achieved by noticed in correspondence of the pin linking the main fitting
both numerical models is shown in Table 6. to the shock absorber, by reaching a value of 470 MPa, which
According to Table 6, the single contributes and the is higher than the yield stress.
resultant of the reaction forces carried out by the two Hence, plastic deformation affects the main fitting of the
modelling techniques are significantly far from each other. landing gear just around the hole, as shown in Figure 35.
18 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

Stress-VonMises

Section plane Y-Z

Max stress @ (250 ms)

Figure 34: von Mises stress (GPa) contour plot for the main fitting.
Effective plastic strain

Section plane Y-Z

Figure 35: Effective plastic strain map for the main fitting.

Figure 36 shows the von Mises stress contour plot As well as the main fitting, also the trailing arm, as
concerning the other structural components and, in par- a result of the drop test, is affected by some plastic de-
ticular, the trailing arm. formations as shown in Figure 37.
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 19

Stress-VonMises

Section plane Y-Z

Max stress @ (250 ms)

Figure 36: von Mises stress (GPa) contour plot for the trailing arm.
Effective plastic strain

Section plane X-Z

Figure 37: Effective plastic strain map for the trailing arm.

7. Conclusions under static loading conditions. The former has been de-

Three numerical models, based on MB, stick, and 3D full-FE

®
veloped in ADAMS , the two latter in NASTRAN . Nu-
®
merical results have been compared with each other in order
methods, have been developed in order to investigate the to understand their effectiveness; a very good level of
reaction forces acting on a landing gear of a regional airliner agreement has been achieved.
20 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

Subsequently, a Global/Local technique has been [3] A. G. Barnes and T. J. Yager, Enhancement of Aircraft Ground
presented; specifically, starting from the stick model, each Handling Simulation Capability, AGARD-AG-333, AGARD,
component, modelled with one-dimensional finite ele- Neuilly sur Seine, France, 1998.
ments, is replaced, once at time, with a three-dimensional [4] G. R. Doyle Jr., “A review of computer simulations for
finite element representation. Then structural analyses aircraft-surface dynamics,” Journal of Aircraft, vol. 23, no. 4,
pp. 257–265, 1986.
have been, then, carried out and the stresses fields
[5] D. Williams and R. P. N. Jones, Dynamic Loads in Aeroplanes
on the 3D components have been investigated and under Given Impulsive Loads with Particular Reference to
compared with the stresses field obtained by a 3D full-FE Landing and Gust Loads on a Large Flying Boat, TR No. 2221,
model. Also in these cases, a good agreement has been Aeronautical Research Council, UK, 1948.
achieved. [6] A. E. McPherson, J. Evans Jr., and S. Levy, Influence of Wing
Finally, the dynamic behaviour of the landing gear Flexibility on Force-Time Relation in Shock Strut following
has been investigated both numerically and experimen- Vertical Landing Impact, NACA TN 1995, NACA, Wash-
tally. Magnaghi Aeronautica S.p.A. Company performed ington, DC, USA, 1949.
the experimental test, consisting of a drop test performed [7] F. E. Cook and B. Milwitzky, Effect of Interaction on Landing-
with reference to EASA CS 25 regulations. Concerning Gear Behavior and Dynamic Loads in a Flexible Airplane
the numerical investigation, the analysis has been Structure, United States, NACA TR 1278, NACA, Wash-
ington, DC, USA, 1956.
®
simulated by means of Ls-Dyna code, by developing
a 3D full-FE model; a good level of accuracy has been
[8] W. G. Luber, E. Dill, and K. Kainz, “Dynamic landing loads on
combat aircraft with external stores using finite element
achieved. models,” in Proceedings of Conference and Exposition on
It must be highlighted that an established numerical Structural Dynamics (IMAC-XXV), pp. 19–22, Orlando, FL,
model can be used for Certification by Analysis (CBA) USA, February 2007.
purposes to test new structural solutions in a virtual envi- [9] J. L. Pérez, L. H. Benı́tez, M. Oliver, and H. Climent, “Survey
ronment, by reducing the high experimental costs and by of aircraft structural dynamics nonlinear problems and some
overcoming the issues which characterize the design current recent solutions,” Aeronautical Journal, vol. 115, no. 1173,
practice of landing gear. Nowadays, in fact, the compliance pp. 653–668, 2011.
assessment of new landing gear concepts with the re- [10] P. Suresh, S. Nesar, and G. Radhakrishnan, “Dynamic landing
quirements is postponed until later design stage by per- response analysis of a flexible tailless delta wing aircraft,”
forming experimental tests on prototypes, involving International Journal of Aerospace Innovations, vol. 4, no. 3-4,
pp. 103–117, 2012.
expensive design modifications in the case that the landing
[11] D. H. Chester, “Aircraft landing impact parametric study with
gear design fails to meet the customer and certification
emphasis on nose gear landing conditions,” Journal of Air-
requirements. craft, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 394–403, 2002.
[12] T. L. Lomax, Structural Loads Analysis for Commercial Air-
craft: Theory and Practice, AIAA Education Series, AIAA,
Data Availability Reston, VA, USA, 1996, ISBN-13: 978-1563471148.
[13] F. Caputo, A. De Luca, A. Greco, S. Maietta, A. Marro, and
The data used to support the findings of this study were A. Apicella, “Investigation on the static and dynamic struc-
supplied by Magnaghi S.p.A. under license and so cannot be tural behaviours of a regional aircraft main landing gear by
made freely available. Requests for access to these data a new numerical methodology,” Frattura ed Integrita Strut-
should be made to corresponding authors e-mail: raffsepe@ turale, vol. 12, no. 43, pp. 191–204, 2018.
unina.it. [14] J. N. Daniels, A Method for Landing Gear Modeling and
Simulation With Experimental Validation, NASA Contractor
Report 201601, National Aeronautics and Space Adminis-
Conflicts of Interest tration, Washington, DC, USA, 1996.
[15] T. Niezgoda, J. Malachowski, and W. Kowalski, “Numerical
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest. simulation of landing gear dynamics,” in Mecanica Compu-
tacional, S. R. Idelsohn, V. E. Sonzongni, and A cardona, Eds.,
vol. XXI, pp. 2579–2586, Asociación Argentina de Mecánica
Acknowledgments Computacional, Santa Fe, Parana, Argentina, October 2002.
[16] V. Infante, L. Fernandes, M. Freitas, and R. Baptista, “Failure
The research activity has been developed within CAPRI –
analysis of a nose landing gear fork,” Engineering Failure
“Landing gear with intelligent implementation” Research Analysis, vol. 82, pp. 554–565, 2017.
Project founded by Regione Campania, Italy. [17] S. Redonnet, S. Ben Khelil, J. Bulté, and G. Cunha, “Numerical
characterization of landing gear aeroacoustics using advanced
References simulation and analysis techniques,” Journal of Sound and
Vibration, vol. 403, pp. 214–233, 2017.
[1] M. Imran, R. M. Shabbir Ahmed, and M. Haneefc, “FE [18] W. T. Fujimoto and J. P. Gallagher, Summary of Landing Gear
analysis for landing gear of test air craft,” Materials Today: Initial Flaws, AFFDL-TR-77-125, DTIC, Fort Belvoir, VA,
Proceedings, vol. 2, no. 4-5, pp. 2170–2178, 2015. USA, 1977.
[2] L. Hailiang and W. Lixin, “Assessment of landing gear design [19] D. Viúdez-Moreiras, M. Martı́n, R. Abarca, E. Andrés,
based on the virtual testing and evaluation methodology,” J. Ponsı́n, and F. Monge, “Surrogate modeling for the main
Procedia Engineering, vol. 99, pp. 898–904, 2015. landing gear doors of an airbus passenger aircraft,”
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 21

Aerospace Science and Technology, vol. 68, pp. 135–148,

2017.
[20] European Aviation Safety Agency, Certification Specifications
and Acceptable Means of Compliance for Large Aeroplanes
CS25 EASA, European Aviation Safety Agency, Cologne,
Germany, 2016.
[21] Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Aviation Regula-
tions Part 25-Airworthiness standards: transport category
airplanes (FAR25), Washington, DC, USA, 2018.
[22] MSC, Nastran User Reference Manual, MSC Software Cor-
poration, Santa Ana, CA, USA, 2006.
[23] MSC, ADAMS User Reference Manual 2015, MSC Software
Corporation, Santa Ana, CA, USA, 2015.
[24] J. O. Hallquist, Ls-Dyna Theory Manual, ISBN 0-9778540-0-0,
LSTC, Livermore, CA, USA, 2006.
 Nanomaterial
Nanomaterials
Journal of

The Scientific Journal of International Journal of

World Journal
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Applied Chemistry
Hindawi Hindawi
Scientifica
Hindawi
Polymer Science
Hindawi
http://www.hindawi.com
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
2013 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018

Advances in Advances in
Chemistry
Hindawi
Physical Chemistry
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018

Submit your manuscripts at

www.hindawi.com

International Journal of Advances in

Analytical Chemistry Condensed Matter Physics
Hindawi Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018

Engineering
Journal of
Journal of International Journal of Advances in Journal of
Chemistry
Hindawi
Biomaterials
Hindawi
High Energy Physics
Hindawi Hindawi
Nanotechnology
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018

International Journal of Journal of BioMed Advances in Advances in

Corrosion
Hindawi
Materials
Hindawi
Research International
Hindawi
Tribology
Hindawi
Materials Science and Engineering
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018