The Engineering Common Model Framework (ECMF) Project: Towards Scalable and Secure Cyberinfrastructure for Computational Model Sustainment
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Engineering topics
Publications and source records attributed to Hoffman, Edward L..
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Model tests have been made to determine the landing-impact characteristics of a parachute-supported reentry capsule that had a compliable metal structure as a load-alleviating device. A 1/6-scale dynamic model having compliable aluminum-alloy legs designed to give a low onset rate of acceleration on impact was tested at flight-path angles of 90 degrees ( vertical ) and 35 deg, at a vertical velocity of 30 ft/sec ( full scale), and at contact attitudes of 0 deg and +/-30 deg. Landings were made on concrete, sand, and water. The maximum acceleration encountered was approximately 35g and the maximum onset rate was 2,000 g/sec. on concrete a t the 55 deg flight-path, f30 contact-attitude conditions; therefore, load-alleviating devices on the canister end of the model would be required. To evaluate the scaling characteristics of compliable metal structures, models were tested with 1/4.1-scale and full-scale aluminum-alloy legs. The maximum vertical accelerations and strokes obtained from tests of the 1/4.1-scale and full-scale legs were the same within the recording accuracy of the equipment. Acceleration time histories for the 90 degree flight-path, 0 deg contact-attitude condition were computed and are in good agreement with the experimental results.
A limited investigation of a 1/24-scale dynamically similar model of the Navy Bureau of Aeronautics DR-77 design was conducted in Langley tank no. 2 to determine the calm-water take-off and the rough-water landing characteristics of the design with particular regard to the take-off resistance and the landing accelerations. During the take-off tests, resistance, trim, and rise were measured and photographs were taken to study spray. During the landing tests, motion-picture records and normal-acceleration records were obtained. A ratio of gross load to maximum resistance of 3.2 was obtained with a 30 deg. dead-rise hydro-ski installation. The maximum normal accelerations obtained with a 30 deg. dead-rise hydro-ski installation were of the order of 8g to log in waves 8 feet high (full scale). A yawing instability that occurred just prior to hydro-ski emergence was improved by adding an afterbody extension, but adding the extension reduced the ratio of gross load to maximum resistance to 2.9.
A model of the Convair Y2-2 airplane was tested in Langley tank no. 2 to determine whether satisfactory stability in yawed landings was possible with a certain ventral fin. Free-body landings were made in smooth and rough water at two speeds and two rates of descent with the model yawed 15deg. The behavior of the model was determined by visual observations and from motion-picture re.cords. It was concluded that satisfactory stability was possible with the ventral fin as tested but that the characteristics of the model shock absorbers and the settings of the elevon control surfaces had an appreciable influence on behavior.
Tests with a dynamically similar model of the Navy XP4M-1 airplane were made to determine the best way to land the airplane in calm and rough water, to determine its probable ditching performance, and to determine practicable modifications which could be incorporated in the design of the airplane that would improve its ditching characteristics. The results were obtained by making visual observations, by recording longitudinal decelerations,a nd by taking motion pictures of the landings. A list of conclusions from the test results is included.
Tests were conducted in calm water in Langley tank no. 2 and in calm and rough water at an outdoor catapult in order to determine the best way to make a forced landing of an Army A-26 airplane and to determine its probable ditching behavior. These tests were requested by the Air Materiel Command, Army Air Forces, in their letter of March 26, 1943, WEL:AW:50.