Test Pilot time: Short field landings.

Discussion in 'Flight Following' started by flyingcheesehead, Jan 1, 2019.

  1. tspear

    tspear Pattern Altitude PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,753
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Timothy
    You have it. Race cars are known to get as much as 5g of downforce. Airplanes actually have less than one G as the wings provide lift reducing the available down force.
    Technically with adhesion and other factors you may be able to exceed one G by a minimal amount.

    Tim ( not an engineer)

    Sent from my SM-J737T using Tapatalk
     
  2. SoCal RV Flyer

    SoCal RV Flyer Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2016
    Messages:
    2,319
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    SoCal RV Flyer
    Even without aero downforce, it's possible to generate roughly 1.3g of lateral and braking acceleration. Go-karts are a good example. It's a function of the mechanical interaction between a soft tread and the minor imperfections in the track surface...think of meshing gears on a microscopic level.
     
    flyingcheesehead likes this.
  3. tspear

    tspear Pattern Altitude PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,753
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Timothy
    Interesting on the 1.3G. I do not recall it being that high.

    Tim
     
  4. SoCal RV Flyer

    SoCal RV Flyer Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2016
    Messages:
    2,319
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    SoCal RV Flyer
    It's somewhat surface-dependent. I was involved in some skidpad testing with the karts, and it was on a textured concrete surface. High tire wear but great grip!
     
  5. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    22,259
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    1 G deceleration would put the pendulum at 45º, not horizontal.*


    * Yes, for those who nitpick like I sometimes do, we have to assume an idealized "pendulum" that didn't swing, otherwise we'd have to have a low-jerk brake application. And yes, I mean Jerk the technical term - The derivative of acceleration.
     
    Mtns2Skies and dtuuri like this.
  6. dtuuri

    dtuuri En-Route

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    3,372
    Location:
    Madison, OH
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    dtuuri
    That makes sense, but from where does the 1 G stopping limit, whether just practical or mathematical, come from then? I would guess that tire tread is designed to minimize friction during the takeoff roll, does that have something to do with it?
     
  7. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    22,259
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    There isn't a 1G stopping limit. Intuitively, you'd think there would be, but it depends on a lot of things - namely, anything that change friction.

    Tire tread isn't designed to "minimize friction during the takeoff roll" - You don't want your tires to skid during takeoff either.

    I would imagine that the reason we probably don't see more than 1G very much is that you wouldn't want aircraft tires to have too soft a tread, as normal landings would flat-spot them if that were the case. But, a harder tread won't "bite" the pavement as well.
     
    Mtns2Skies likes this.
  8. kath

    kath Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Messages:
    781
    Location:
    Anchorage, AK
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Katherine
    The maximum the force of static friction (that is, "grip" without slipping) can be is "mu * N". (Well, reality is more complicated than this, but this is a freshman-physics-approximation kind of treatment.)
    "N" is the normal force from the pavement. If the surface is flat and there's no racecar-like downforces or lift forces or anything like that, this is the weight of the aircraft.
    "mu" is a coefficient which is typically between 0 and 1.
    So if "mu = 1.0", then the sideways force of friction/"grip" can be (at most) equal to the downward weight of the aircraft.

    Now, there's no law of physics that says "mu" has to be 1.0 or less. I can be more than 1.0, thanks to the wonders of materials science. But mu's less than 1.0 are typical for most everyday household surfaces-gripping-against-other-surfaces.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2019
    flyingcheesehead and dtuuri like this.
  9. PaulS

    PaulS Final Approach

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    8,222
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    PaulS
    Pop those flaps out if you need to stop quickly in the planes I fly. Brake hard with them down and you will hear a lot of squealing, especially from an instructor if one is on board.
     
    Eric Stoltz likes this.
  10. dtuuri

    dtuuri En-Route

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2011
    Messages:
    3,372
    Location:
    Madison, OH
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    dtuuri
    Thank you for this. Nice explanation.
     
  11. FastEddieB

    FastEddieB Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    8,923
    Location:
    Mineral Bluff, GA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Fast Eddie B
    It always seemed to me that once you’re generating more than 1g, you should theoretically be able to get the car to stick to a wall.

    Kinda like a rotating space station could generate 1g so astronauts could jog around the inside.

    No?
     
  12. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    22,259
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    No... Depending on what you mean here.

    As @kath mentioned, one of the primary parts of the friction equation is the normal force. If you just plopped a car against a vertical wall, the normal force would be zero (since gravity would now be a tangent force and not a normal force), so the car comes crashing back down to the ground.

    But, using your "rotating space station" example, if you had a larger version of the amusement park ride with the big cylinder that spins around with people around the inside and the floor drops away (sorry, can't remember what it's called), it would work. Basically, if you had a "wall" that was the inside of a cylinder, put the car up against the inner part of the wall and rotated it around at a speed that resulted in a 1G force in a downward direction relative to the car (away from the center of the cylinder), then yes, you absolutely could stick a car that's able to accelerate at >=1G up against the wall and it'll "stick".
     
  13. MauleSkinner

    MauleSkinner Final Approach

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,382
    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    MauleSkinner
    My freshman physics approximation was a statistical failure. So was my final grade. ;)