Aircraft Subsystems Modelling Using Different MBS Formalisms

  • Krzysztof Arczewski
  • Janusz Frączek
Conference paper
Part of the Computational Methods in Applied Sciences book series (COMPUTMETHODS, volume 4)


The paper presents three case studies of dynamic analysis of aircraft during landing manoeuvre using two basic formalisms encountered in rigid and flexible multibody system (MBS) modelling. In the first case a formulation in natural coordinates has been used to analyze the dynamics of a medium size aircraft. Equations of motion have been formulated and solved using velocity transformation method. The aircraft has been modelled as consisting of rigid bodies connected by universal joints with springs. Aerodynamic forces have been taken into account by applying the Vortex Lattice Method (VLM) to the calculations performed. The effect of ground proximity on the results (ground effect) has been analyzed. In the second case, a dynamic analysis of a glider during the landing manoeuvre has been carried out from the point of view of stress recovery by means of various methods. Body positions and orientations have been written in absolute coordinates with floating frame approach for flexible bodies. Finite element method (FEM) and component mode synthesis has been used to model the flexibility of the bodies. A comparison of stress results obtained for different computation methods has been carried out. In the third analysis a MBS model of the Su-22 military airplane main landing gear has been presented. The absolute coordinates and the differential algebraic equations (DAE) formulations were used in all calculations. The whole landing gear model includes individual models of hydraulic actuators, shock absorber, flexible tire and contacts between some landing gear parts. Several types of simulations like landing gear extension and selected ground manoeuvres were performed. On that basis values of the forces which will allow to assess fatigue and durability of landing gear in future experiments were obtained. The received results were compared to the experimental measurements which were carried out on a real military airplane. The key issues of that comparison and general remarks were formulated. In the final part of the paper general conclusions regarding application of various computation MBS methods to dynamical analyses of aircrafts have been presented.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Prashant DK (2003) Simulation of asymmetric landing and typical ground maneouvres for large transport aircraft. Aerospace Science and Technology. 7: 611–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Doyle GA (1986) A review of computer simulations of aircraft-surface dynamics. J. Aircraft. 23(4)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Catt T, Cowling D (1993) Active Landing Gear Control for Improved Ride Quality During Ground Roll, Smart Structure for Aircraft. AGARD CP 531, Stirling Dynamics Ltd. BristolGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hitch HPY (1981) Aircraft ground dynamics. Vehicle System Dynamics. 10: 319–332Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kruger WR et al. (1997) Aircraft landing gear dynamics: simulation and control. Vehicle System Dynamics. 28:157–289Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pritchard JI (1999) An Overview of Landing Gear Dynamics. Hampton, Virginia, Langley Research CenterGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Garcia de Jalon, Eduardo B (1994) Kinematic and Dynamic Simulation of Multibody Systems. Springer-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nikravesh P (1988) Computer-Aided Analysis of Mechanical Systems. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schwertassek R, Wallrap O (1999) Dynamics of Flexible Multi Body Systems. Vieweg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shabana AA (2005) Dynamics of Multibody Systems. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bathe KJ (1996) Finite Element Procedures. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bertin JJ (2002) Aerodynamics for Engineers. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brenan KE, Cambpell SL, Petzold LR (1996) Numerical Solution of Initial Value Problems in DAE. SIAM, Philadelphia 1996Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fraczek J, Lazicki P, Leski A (2005) Dynamical Analysis and Experimental Verification of Military Aircraft Landing Gear Using MBS Methods. In Proc. of the ECCOMAS Thematic Conference, 21–24 June, Madrid, SpainGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Issa SM, Arczewski K (1998) Wings in Steady and Unsteady Ground Effects. Canadian Aeronautics and Space Journal. 44(3): 188–193Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    PW-6. Technical Documentation. DWLKK. WarsawGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Arczewski K, Fraczek J (2005) Friction Models and Stress Recovery Methods in Vehicle Dynamics Modelling. Multibody System Dynamics, 14: 205–224MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yim HJ, Haug EJ and Dopker B (1989) Computational methods for stress analysis of mechanical components in dynamic systems. In Concurrent Engineering of Mechanical Systems, Vol.1, E.J. Haug (ed.) University of Iowa, Iowa City, 1989, 217–237Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    UNIGRAPHICS, Users Manual, 2003Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    MSC. NASTRAN/ADAMS/AIRCRAFT/TIRE (2005) Users Guide, MSC Software, 2004Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    H.B. Pacejka (Ed.) (1991) Tire Models for Vehicle Dynamics Analysis. In Proc. of 1st International Colloquium on Tyre Models for Vehicle Dynamics Analysis, Swets & ZeitlingerGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Krzysztof Arczewski
    • 1
  • Janusz Frączek
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Aeronautics and Applied MechanicsWarsaw University of TechnologyWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations