UNCLASSIFIED

AD NUMBER

AD483454

NEW LIMITATION CHANGE

TOApproved for public release, distributionunlimited

FROMDistribution authorized to U.S. Gov't.agencies and their contractors; CriticalTechnology; MAY 1966. Other requests shallbe referred to Naval Air Systems Command,Washington, DC 20360.

AUTHORITY

USNATF ltr, 16 Jul 1974

THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

SU. So NATL All IT, FACILITY SýLAKEHURST, NcEW JERSEY

DYNAI4C PE OR)AWV OF tA MAPS 7 MOD 1 MMM1Th "sIE1lKIN 2,ý-.ETI A10 218-il~Ch PD FAIRLEAD SWEAME

12 May 1966

Prepared under Bureau~ of Na&val Wiapans

Problem A-signment Numnber &S-S-iHY-0

F77-1)ý

OK'

y~

rT rm

CNO ((OP039G) -2 cop>.ýAC-3 copies (2 c'o'-tr fc R-604 O- 1 copy 4-c-A1~3~

WlAC (Attn: Dir., L:' 1'>vDDC -20 copies

C) T 1 CI

'li bt die!ýrc~d tis xýýeIN the;

~~~~~~~T 1vk"8.>~1~A~ T

s-w i ' -tx F -nl,ý C. ývqýq s~

-~~d oi' r , C crt cve' .7 ~ f

U. S. NAVAL AIR TEST FACILITY(SHIP INSTALLATIONS)

U. S. NAVAL AIR STATIONLAKEHURST, NEW JERSEY

Report No. NATF-E-1078

DYNAMIC PERFORMANCE OF A MARK 7 MOD 1 ARRESTING SYSTEMUSING 24-INCH AND 28-INCH PD FAIRILEAD SHEAVES

Final Report12 May 1966

Prepared under Bureau of Naval WeaponsProblem Assignment Number RSSH-03-119

Prepared by:______________________

W. B. BillecRecovery Division

Reviewed by: (fC ( J' -C. T. AbrahamsenHead, Recovery Division

Approved by:B. F. KolfzSuperintendent e ngineering

THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO SPECIALEXPORT CONTROLS AND EACH TRANSMITTALTO FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS OR FOREIGNNATIONALS MAY BE MADE ONLY WITHPRIOR APPROVAL OF COMMANDER, NAVALAIR SYSTEMS CMAND, WASHINGTON, D.C.

20360

NATF-E-1078

ABS TRACT

This report compares Mark 7 Mod 1 arresting-gear dynamic per-formance with standard 24-inch and prototype 28-inch pitch-diameter (PD)fairlead sheaves: performance with the 28-inch PD fairlead sheaves wassatisfactory.

The report also presents data of a Lang-lay purchase cable whichfailed in a destructive test after 653 arrestments: excessive wear andcorrosion contributed to the failure.

iii

NATF-E-1078

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Title Page

I INTRODUCTION .............................................. 1

II SUMMARY OF RESULTS ........................................ I

III CONCLUSIO 3S ............................................... 2

IV RECOMMENDATION ............................................ 2

V TEST EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURE .............................. 2

VI TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS OF PHASE II DATA ................ 3

A. Purchase-Cable History ................................ 3B. Purchase-Cable Physical CondiAion ..................... 4

VII TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS OF PHASES I AND III DATA ........ 7

A. Dynamic Performance ................................... 7B. Summary of Performance ................................ 8

VIII REFERENCES ................................................ 10

LIST OF TABLES

TableNumber Title Page

I Summary of Test Program and Conditions .................... 1

II Particulars c Port Purchase-Cable Failure ................ 4

III Q Values and Purchase-Cable Diameters ..................... 6

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

FigureNumber Title Page

I Purchase-Cable CorrosionA - Starboard Purchase-Cable Interstrand Corrosion .... 11B - Port Purchase-Cable (Deck Section) Broken End,

Unlayed Strands, and Corrosion .................... IIC - Port Purchase-Cable (Engine Section) Broken End

and Corrosion ..................................... 11

iii

NATF-E-1078

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (CONTINUED)

FigureNumber Title Pace

2 Schematic Diagrams: Fairlead System (Upper) andSectional View of Pits (Lower) ................................. 12

3 "Q" Measurement Stations for Purchase Cables ................... 13

4 Percent Elongation versus Number of Arrestments - Port andStarboard Purchase Cables ............................ .......... 14

5 Maximum Deck-Cable Tension versus Engaging Speed ............... 15

6 Maximum Arresting-Hook Axial Load versus Engaging Speed ........ 16

7 Maximum Deadload Deceleration versus Engaging Speed ............ 17

8 Maximum Engine-Cylinder Pressure versus Engaging Speed ......... 18

9 Maximum Engine Ram Stroke versus Engaging Speed ................ 19

10 Maximum Anchor-Cable Tension versus Engaging Speed ............. 20

11 Schematic Diagram of Sheave-Damper Cable Systems ............... 21

12 Cosine a versus Movable-Sheave Stroke .......................... 22

13 Maximum Sheave-Damper Piston Stroke, Cylinder Pressure, andPiston Velocity versus Engaging Speed .......................... 23

14 Sheave-Damper Cylinder Prepressure versus Sheave-Damper PistonStroke ......................................................... 24

15 Sheave-Damper Energy Absorbed versus Engaging Speed ............ 25

16 Typical Time History of Sheave-Damper Piston Stroke (Port andStarboard) versus Time ......................................... 26

17 Typical Time History of Sheave-Damper Cylinder Pressure (Portand Starboard) versus Time ..................................... 27

18 Typical Time History of Sheave-Damper Piston Velocity (Port andStarboard) versus Time......................................... 28

iv

NATF-E- 1078

I INTRODUCTION

This report presents performance results obtained with a Mark 7 Mod 1arresting-engine system using 24- and 28-inch pitch diameter (PD) fair-lead sheaves. These tests had been originated to determine both perfor-mance and purchase-cable-life using 24- and 28-inch PD fairlead sheaves;however, the purchase-cable-life test was performed with 24-inch PD fair-lead sheaves only. The results of the purchase-cable-life test areincluded in this report. The tests were authorized by BUWEPS underProblem Assignment RSSH-03-119, and were conducted by the U. S. NavalAir Test Facility (Ship Installations) (NATF(SI)), U. S. Naval AirStation, Lakehurst. New Jersey, at the Recovery Systems Track Site (RSTS)No. 2.

II SUMMARY OF RESULTS

The test program consisted of 716 ON-CENTER arrestments using adeck span of 95 feet, as outlined below:

TABLE ISummary of Test Program and Conditions

Nominal CRO FairleadNumber of Deadload Engaging-Speed Valve Sheave

Test Arrestments Weight Range Ratio PDPhase Performed (Pounds) (Knots) Setting (Inches)

1 8 10,000 90 - 120 1.1:1 2412 25,000 80 - 120 1.95:1 "

12 50,000 70 - 115 3.15:1 "

II 653 50,000 115 + 2 3.15:1 24

III 8 10,000 90 - 120 1.1:1 2810 25,000 80 - 120 1.95:113 50,000 70 - 115 3.15:1

Total 716

Phase I established arresting-gear dynamic performance with 24-inchPD fairlead sheaves.

Phase II was a destructive test of a Lang-lay purchase cable reevedover 24-inch PD fairlead sheaves. Data pertaining to the history, physicalcondition, dynamic loading, and failure of the purchase cables was obtainedand is included under Test Results and Analysis.

Phase III established arresting-gear dynamic performance with 28-inchPD fairlead sheaves.

1I

NATF-E- 1078

III CONCLUSIONS

1. Arresting-gear dynamic performance with 28-inch PD fairlead sheavesis comparable with that of the same system incorporating 24-inch PD fair-lead sheaves (page 8).

2. Interstrand corrosion and excessive wear contributed to the failureof the port purchase cable used during the Phase II tests (pages 4 and 5).

IV RECOMMENDATION

1. The incorporation of 28-inch PD fairlead sheaves as a service changeof the Mark 7 Mod 1 arresting gear is recommended for the following reasons:

a. Arresting-gear performance with 28-inch PD fairlead sheaves isat least comparable with 24-inch PD fairlead sheaves performance.

b. Tests conducted by reference (a), indicate that an increase inpurchase cable fatigue life is attained with 28-inch PD fairlead sheaves.

c. Current industry practice favors the use of larger sheave di-ameters to improve sheave and cable service life, reference (b).

V TEST EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURE

A. The arresting-engine system employed the following:

I. Mark 7 Mod 1 arresting engine, Serial No. 16

2. Cam: K-5 (PN 502715-1P)

3. Cam Torque: 90 +20 foot-pounds

4. Cam-Chain-Dr-ve Pre-tersion" 4C0 +10 pounds

5. Arresting-Engine Ratio Dial: NAEL(SI) PN 316152-1

6. Purchase Cables:

a. Phase I - NAEL PN A92791-8, 1-3/8-inch-diameter regular-lay 6 x 25, fiber core, anchored externally.

b. Phases II and III - NAEL PN A92791-27, 1-3/8-inch-diameterLang-lay 6 x 24, fiber core, planetary formed, anchored externally.

7. Sheave-damper buffer-accumulator pre-pressure: 750 +25 psi

2

NATF-E- 1078

8. Sheave-damper accelerator-accur-•ilator pre-pressure: 300 ±25psi

9. Orifice-ring in operating-end-,accumualtor piping: 2-1/2-inch-diameter.

10. Return-flow orifice in buffer-accumulator flapper valve:3/8-inch diameter.

11. Return-fLow orifice in accelerator-accumulator flapper valve:1/2-inch diameter.

B. Test Phases I and III were conducted by arresting deadloads ofvarious weights at increasing engaging speeds. Test Phase II was conduct-ed by repeatedly arresting a 50,000-pound deadload aL 115 knots untilthe purchase cable failed. Purchase cables were inspected periodicallyduring Phase II. The following arresting-system parameters were recordedduring all three test phases:

1. Arresting-gear cable tension versus time (four locations)

2. Arresting-engine cylinder pressure versus time and versusram stroke

3. Arresting-engine ram stroke versus time

4. Arresting-engine accumulator pressure versus time

5. Arresting-hook axial load versus time

6. Deadload deceleration versus time

7. Sheave-damper port and starboard cylinder pressure, pistonstroke, and piston velocity versus time.

VI TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS OF PHASE II DATA

A. Purchase-Cable History: The port and starboard purchase cableswere installed on 17 July 1964. The port purchase cable failed on15 April 1965: total time in service was eight months. During thisperiod, 653 arrestments were conducted as outlined in Table I. Particu-lars of the port purchase-cable failure which occurred during the lastarrestment of Phase II are given in Table II.

3

NATF-E- 1078

TABLE IIParticulars of Port Purchase-Cable Failure

At FailureDeadload Engaging Cable Elapsed Ram

Weight Speed Type and Location of Tension Time Stroke(rin) Pailure (1b) _(See) (In.)

50,251 113.4 6 strands parted 68- 100,000 0.55 45.71/2 feet from portdeck terminal

1. Pendant Failures: One pendant failure occurred during thetest program, but no damage was imposed on the purchase cable.

2. Purchase-Cable/Arresting-Engine Damage Caused by Developmentof Cable Slack in the Engine: Purchase-cable damage usually evidencedby peening and broken wires, and engine-ram damage caused by cable im-pacts, were not experienced during this test program.

B. Purchase-Cable Physical Condition

1. Broken Wires: Bi-weekly purchase-cable inspections revealedno broken wires during the entire test period.

2. Birdcaging (Opening of the strands of the cable): Bird-caging did not occur; however, the starboard cablq was damaged by kink-ing when the port cable failed, and this damage has the appearance ofb irdcag ingo

3. Strand Distortion: None was discovered.

4. Extrusion of the Core: Observation revealed no core ex-trusion.

5. Wire Distortion (Unlaying of wires from the normal lay):Wire distortion occurred at the poured sockets only, and resulted frompoured socket/cable preparation, and interaction.

6. Interstrand Notching: Internal inspection could not beperformed because the cable was to remain intact for magnetic-particletests.

7. Core Condition: Not examined for same reason as above.

8. Interstrand Corrosion: Both the port and the starboardpurchase cables exhibited interstrand corrosion as pictorially recordedin Figure IA. This figure is a photograph of the starboard cable, butthe condition is also typical of the port cable. Such corrosion as in

4

NATF-E-1078

Figure 1A extends for a distance away from the deck terminals to pointsapproximately 300 feet along both cables. The 300 feet of cable is thatlength which is or can be in contact with the fairlead system. Figure 2depicts the RSTS No. 2 fairlead system. The elevation view shows thatthe port cable is led beneath the track via a conduit and four verticalfairlead sheaves located in pits alongside the track. The pits and theconduit frequently have water in them from drain-off and seepage, andit is assumed that this condition would accelerate corrosion of thecable. It is believed that the port cable will exhibit a greater extentof interstrand corrosion in a region 100 to 200 feet from the decksocket than the starboard cable. Internal inspection could not beperformed because the cable was to remain intact for magnetic-particletests. Figures lB and IC are photographs of 'the. broken ends of the portcable: Figure 1B is the end of the short section (68 feet) of purchasecable connected to the pendant: and Figure IC is the end of the longsection (905 feet) of purchase cable. Corrosion of the strands can bedetected in both figurcs. Corrosion can be seen particularly in FigureIB because the strands have unlayed.

9. Excessive Wear: "Q" measurements in accordance with NAVWEPS51-5BAA-l were taken twice. The first set of readings was obtainedafter approximately 600 arrestments, and the second set after cablefailure at 653 arrestments. Results of the first measurements indicatedthat wear replacement criteria had not been attained on either cable andthat the most severe wear on either cable was found on the port cableat approximately 150 feet fromn the deck socket where a "Q" value forone strand was 0.950 inch. Results of the second set of measurementsappear in Table iTi and are indicated in Figure 3. At this inspectionit was discovered that: the wear of the port cable at station number 2,48 feet from the deck socket, had exceeded replacement criteria (thatis, the sum of "Q" values for six strands was 8.75 inches). This areaof wear is Located 20 feet from the rupture.

10. Elongation: Figure 4 is a graph of purchase-cable elongationversus number of arrestments. Maximum percent permanent elongationsare calculated as 1.6 percent port and 1.7 percent starboard respectively.These elongations are based upon purchase cable lengths of 1,000 feetport and 850 feet starboard: actual lengths of the cables at removalwere 973 feet port, and 836 feet starboard. These actual lengths areshorter than 1,000 feet and 850 feet respectively because the differencesrepresent cable removed in cropping poured sockets and in adjusting thebattery position of the crosshead. Figure 4 indicates that the cablescontinued to elongate up until the time of failure. The purchase-cablediameters measured at the time of removal indicate, by the results ofTable III, that the port cable diameter was diminished by 0.092 inchand the starboard by 0.1.27 inch.

5

NATF -E -1078

L] 43 X ON4 H H

".4 W 4;--

*--4 - n P 7 V 0 aCo 4 %D C4 ID

44%4 4c n -. - - 0 M (04 .- 1 .4 Pi 4 r -4 nU.0 1 1 1 kn4I1 43co C'S r-4 N N N 140)QO ý

c* Co) L, ON. > 4143 mc co W. 0 r 4

LI4 4I, 0'*0 * ~ 4 4-I

(. 4 .-4 04 C4- 0 CV

cc 10 04 -- -j "', W', .- 0

4.4 $4 Nf 04- a' 4 1441 0 '-4 r4l-

4 0 1414.44

.1 00 ~-.- I Nn 1.4 p Ic 0cCI) -4 r'- N n I' - cl ' 0 00 1-c

r- ,4 .-4 Lf, N1 V-1a -4 0d13 I I I I 4 00 .4- 1 4).- 4-4 4 ,'4 1-4 ý0Cj %Z u0r

.0 V.4 4) 100C0 5.4 X *.- 1w I

HI PV '0 )40O1.4

HO0N ci ' o 2? 10 CPO

:3 4 . 43pw 0 M 44l.

eqU " lJ- 4)I'I 4 0 u-dO)

Coj ) 1 0 4 r- 4-4 W

:3 v-4 v4 0Cl4

-4 1A 0A Ii 0) ( d 4> 0I 0o1 I *4-

01 001 d- . I

4.54 0 p c4 C en 4Cfl 40 4) 0 43

P3 Q ,t I. 0-4 C LI, -,40C4)

.0 N- %') 4) Co C 4' > 4tom O 4 ml ON -

u-I 0 r4 O'u- w,-4 -4 -4 N4 1 COI r.-.41 1 1 4 O.0 44'VCc 10 u " -4

UI4 Cl(4C 41: 016$4CA -1 --. V r-fn0 I 0

4 14 0 - 0 4(Co Ni (I CV) " 44 0'9

I 1 fn (n 4 n * O o 4 0*-4 -4 -4 -4 l

CYN -44 43 C-1C: 3r

O N (i C 4 4I Co ~c0 0'n 4 -i 444~~

w. 244..

6

NATF-E- 1078

VII TEST RES'ITS AND ANALYSIS OF PHASES I AND III DATA

A. Dynamic perfotmance with 24- and 28-inch PD fairlead sheavesinstalled in the arresting-engine system is presented by the data plottedin Figures 5 through 10. !he parameters in each of these figures arediscussed separately

1. Maximum Deck-Cable Tension: Figure 5 indicates lower cabletensions (the dark symbols) w.ere recorded with 28-inch PD sheaves forthe 50,000-pound ucadload arrestments, A separate envelope (the dashedcurves) has been drawn to indicate the range of tensions with 28-inchPD sheaves. The 28-inch PD sheave data overlaps into the 24-inch PDsheave data (the light symbols); the disparity between the two becomesmore evident at highe.r engaging speeds. Maximum cable tensions recordedfor the 25,000-pound dEadload with 28- and 24-inch PD fairlead sheavesare nearly identical and a single envelope is drawn about them. The10,000-pound deadload results are similar with respect to 24- and 28-inch PD fairlead sheaves except that starboard tensions with 28-inch PDsheaves are slightly lower (5,000 pounds).

2. Maximum Arresting-Hook Axial Load and Deadload LongitudinalDeceleration: Differences exist between 24- and 28-inch PD sheave data.Figure 6 indicates maximum arresting-hook axial loads are lower with28-inch PD sheaves for the 50,000- and the 1O,000-pound deadloads; theaxial loads are fcwui tor the ?5,000-pound deadload at engaging speedsbelow 110 knots, and higher at engaging speeds above 110 knots. Figure 7presents the curves of maximum de:dload longitudinal deceleration versusengaging speed; thesce curves a-test to the validity of the hook loadcurves because of their similarit ies. Maximum decelerations are lowerwith 28-inch PD sheav-s for thL 50,000- and 10,000-pound deadloads; thedecelerations are .oweýr for the 25,000-pound deadload at engaging speedsbelow approximately 110 knots and higher at engaging speeds above approxi-mately 110 knots. 1he differeLnces in maximum decelerations are small forthe 25,000- and 50.000-pound deadloads and data scatter from additionalarrestments may be expected to elimin;te differences. The above shouldalso apply to maximum hook : -ds particularly for the 25,000-pound dead-load.

3. Maximum nglin-Cy'lipdcr Pressure: The data points ofFigure 8 indicate slightly higher maximum cylinder pressures were recordedwith 28-inch PD fairiezid sheaves. This was noticed only with the50,000- and 25,000-pound deadicads The 10,000-pound deadload dataexhibits no diffcrcn(c biwcern 24- and 28-inch IM fairlead sheaves.Although the incraýa;e3 found, with 28-inch PD sheaves range from 4 to 10percent, in no cc dsocs ' diff. rencE exceed 400 psi. The differencesare not considered significant and individual curves have not been drawnfor the 28-inch P_ f;:rast'csvu data

4. MaximumT Fngin..-Iam Strikes: Figure 9 indicates greatermaximum engine ram strokes wcte obtained with 28-inch PD fairlead sheavesfor the 10,000- and Q.0,00-:',,und ceadloads. It is significant thathigher ram st ;kes wt r,, roec,,rd.:i with th( se deadload weights becausethese deadloaris g.Žntxrt Lv ,xh ib ted low,,,er maximum deck-cable tensions,

-7

NATF-E-1078

maximnm arresting-hook axial loads and longitudinal decelerations. Itis assumed that the increased runout realized with greater ram strokestended to lower the parameters mentioned.

5. Maximum Anchor-Cable Tensions: No significant differencesin the values of this parameter are found comparing 24- and 28-inch PDfairlead sheave data. Figure 10 is a plot of maximum anchor-cable ten-sion versus engaging speed for the three deadload weights of 10,000-,25,000-, and 50,000-pounds. The data points are distributed into threeenvelopes, one for each deadload weight.

B. Summary of Performance; The use of 28-inch PD fairlead sheavesprovided lower values of maximum deck-cable tension, maximum arresting-hook axial load, and maximum deadload longitudinal deceleration than the24-inch PD fairlead sheaves. All loads are generally within the rangeof accepted test scatter. The following variables exist which affectthe magnitude of arresting loads:

ItemNo. Variable

1 Increased weight and moment of inertia of the 28-inch PD fairleadsheaves

2 Increased angle-of-wrap about the 28-inch PD fairlead verticalpit sheaves

3 Increased length of purchase cable with 28-inch PD fairleadsheaves

4 Increased maximum engine-ram strokes recorded with 28-inch PDfairlead sheaves

5 Increased angle-of-wrap about the movable damper sheave with28-inch PD fairlead sheaves

1. Item I would tend to increase rather than decrease dynamic loads,but other properties of the 28-inch PD sheaves may lower loads. Thelarger sheave diameter (28 inches versus 24 inches) increases the rota-tional torque applied by the purchase cable. (The calculated torqueincrease is 16 percent.) The larger sheave circumference requires lesssevere bending of the purchase cable, and allows the sheave to rotateslower than the 24-inch sheave. These three factors could lower cabletensions and may account for the larger ram strokes recorded with the28-inch sheaves. More of the initial engaging energy would be absorbedin the arresting engine if less engaging energy was dissipated by bendingcable and rotatins fairlead sheaves. Adverse inertial effects are notapparent with the 28-inch PD sheaves.

2. The effects of Items 2 and 3 are considered negligible becausethe increases were small (approximately 6 degrees and 10 feet respectively).

8

NATF-E-1078

3. Item 4 was considered as contributing to lowering of loads.

4. Because Item 5 could produce a force increase upon the movabledamper sheaves, the effects are discussed below:

a. Sheave-Damper Cable Geometry: Figure 11 is a sketch of thesheave-damper cable system indicating the increase in cable wrap with28-inch PD fairlead sheaves. Figure 12 is a graph of cosine a versusmovable-sheave stroke. The force upon the movable sheave is 2T cosine C1where T equals purchase-cable tension. For a given stroke, the forceupon the movable sheave is greater with 28-inch PD sheaves because theangle a is less. Figure 12 indicates force on the movable sheave may beincreased up to 5 percent at a given stroke with 28-inch PD fairlead-heaves.

b. Sheave-Damper Performance: Port and starboard sheave-dampermaxirnium piston stroke, piston velocity, and cylinder pressure are plottedon Figure 13 for 10,000-pound deadload arrestments using 24- and 28-inchPD fairlead sheaves. Slight differences are detected in comparing 24-and 28-inch PD sheave data. At engaging speeds of 90 and 110 knots,maximum piston strokes with 28-incb PD fairlead sheaves are greater thanthose of 24-inch PD fairlead sheaves; however, maximum piston velocitiesand cylinder pressures are lower than those with 24-inch PD fairleadsheaves. These differences are attributed to varying sheave cylinderprepressures. Figure 14 is a graph of sheave-damper cylinder prepressureversus maximum sheave-damper piston stroke for the 10,000-pound-deadloadarrestments of Figure 13. The maximum sheave-damper piston stroke variesinversely with the cylinder prepressure and directly with the engagingspeed. A variance of maximum piston stroke as great as 11 inches is pro-duced by varying the prepressure by 200 psi. The zone between thedashed lines of Figure 14 represents a tolerable prepressure range of750 + 25 psi. Maximum piston-stroke data within this tolerable range ofprepressure may vary by approximately 5 inches or 8 percent. Suchvariance is greater than the 5-percent stroke increases predictable fromchanging the sheave-damper cable geometry.

c. Sheave-Damper Energy Absorption: No significant differencein the quantity of energy absorbed by the sheave dampers could bedetected when comparing 24- and 28-inch PD fairlead-sheave data. Figure15 is a graph of sheave-damper-energy absorbed versus deadload engagingspeed for a 10,000-pound deadload with 24- and 28-inch PD fairlead sheaves.

d. Time Histories- Figures 16 through 18 contain time historiesof sheave-damper parameters for 10,000-pound-deadload arrestments with24- and 28-inch PD fairtead sheaves. The sheave-damper cylinder pre-pressures for these events were approximately 750 psi. The similarityof the 24- and 28-inch PD sheave curves indicates that sheave-damperperformance was unaffected by the 28-inch PD fairlead sheave cablegeometry.

9

NATF-E-1078

VIII REFERENCES

(a) Report NAEL(SI)-ENG-7279 of 13 Apr 1965, Comparative Wire Rope Per-formance and Effect of Sheave Diameter on Fatigue Life as Determinedwith the NAEL(SI) Cycle Tester

(b) Wire Rope Engineering Handbook, American Steel and Wire Company

10

U S. NAVAL AIR TEST FACILITY(SHIP INSTALLATIONS)U S NAVAL AIR STATIONLAKEMURST. NEW JERSEY NATF-E-1078

00

1~14

z .

C.) d

go% $.4

-~0 A4

o- E-4

H-

01,)

46C

N&TF-E-1 078

I~4'0

~~-v4

CJ2

".4

44

I"4'

12*

L4 4

O-1

<H0

E-44

lJ~iw

"r-- co Cu004 LncnA

00 W

E.44

4-i

E-1'

0 C14

H4 1-4P'4 [H

Hr b

H 14

'-4 coI

101 c0

1-4 PAHH4ý 1-4

'-4-4 H

Q- E-4

NATF -E- 1078

t W.' V M ;02A

i. H

Ri; itlIll lT. ..

M OR aRH OR 741glI-

4 c4 0 0 '~~00- ' '.9 S M I 0N 0s .. 0..0 3

(z~~Tt, I~L ..N~O ...~u .zt~awfYs)M1YWhI

I! . .

NATF-E-1078

WEIGHT 24 -IN. PD 28- IN. PDf -

(LB PORT STBD PORT STBD.L.-10,000 02,

60-. 50,000 A

40 t ;-t2 I I I

Mm,,

80

_t4 - I t E

t_ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 :1 .- :':!.: HU

z 130

015

NATF-E- 1078

180.;,: :7-DEADLOAD SHEAVES A

7WEIGHT 24 -IN. 28-IN. ./ -- L......... (LB) PD PD /

10,000 O25,000 U

160 *>* 50,000 /'T -V

* - t -- - ------- --

100. ..... ...

oo4 *--*---*- K--.-J -

==-7- 7-.....I.

--- --- ----.... ....20-__ 1

70 90 1 110 120 130

Figure 6 - Kixir.wim Arrus, ingz-Hook Axial Lo.-id vcrs.us ltngaging Speed

16

NATF-E-107 8

9-

8- -, DEADLOAD SHEAVES ýV Vt: 1 4WEIGHT 24-IN. 28-1F. 4T -- -

50,000 5 4

11

~f i

LT. ~H4 a.4t +4 -- -----4 ~

70 8 W0 i0 100 110- 120-1344AIG PE (~S

F Tgre7-axumDidodDclrio vessEggn Spd

17f

NATE-E-1078

4-

. -4 1 - -I - - 1 - - - -

4 44

04

.~~~~4 . .... T

1I4

_ 0

-44

(IsaoooI) 31flS3H ~i3MI~3 3IO?~HfItXV

+1V

HA&TF-E-1O78

(i20

70l 89 0 100-oi 110 120 13

.E GAI SPEED (-K44- -Figure --9-- +++HnEgneR SroevessEnaig pe

.+ 4+ - --------- 19..

NATF -E- 1078

It0

T r4 :1 24

E=4

'-F4

W 4,ld00 0~I 'c i~VN1[V

NATF-E-1078

NOTES:1. DASHED LINES INDICATE 24-INCH PD SHEAVES

AND CABLE AXIS2. SOLID LINES INDICATE 28-11CH ID SHEAVES

AND CABLE AXIS3. SCALE: 1/2-INCH - 1 FOOT

"36 IN.--

- I/

5450 IN. IN.

MOVABLE SHEAVE II

Figure 11 - Schematic Piagram of She.ve-Damper Cable Systems

21

NATF-E-1078

! 4 4 fi

M.,1

00 T 0

fib $4

>

4 44

4++ If ~ ~II~ +00

S S

~j!! titSO

22

HATF-H-1078

STB31

20

70 8090 10 1101201 130ENAILGSELLK35

223

NATF-E-1078

ra'

00 0

z to w

(IN 04

PLI 4 4 r4OE-4 r.4

o w~

"0 0I 0 E--H I .O r

24A

NATF-E-1078

~~ I ~it -

30 - 14 H. . ....

.... . .......0

0T

--0 - - - - -

jij jj, 17708T010 1 2 3

ENGAGNG SEED (NOTS

Fiue1C haeDmprEeg bobdvessEggn pe

C; r 25

NATF-E-1078

1H@

44

4 004jj r4

1 -1 - I --: tP64 AM

0l Hit--

0 - ----0C 4 -j-'0ý N__ 44

..... V I ---- --XsHI XH. OSd~~HQ3VH

26

NA&TF-E-1O78

'Iw

ia.;;

1-4 H

Io00U

44+ 4

ItOU

P ý6 CI

.~~i%~ AA :; -I

""4: $4

:z Tgo

&;:;S~ ; :o0

U~fV~YM +_flitd

(I qd 000'1) MIS~S-31d )i3aNlI'UD 1idU& L'iYM S

27

NAIT-E-1078

..... ........ ....

2. . ..... .... ... t

.1 7 ~. ...... NOTE: Att 0.005 SECOND

~E~~K7:>:i:T:7.~ -28-IN. PI) SHEAVES

U)&

2 28

UNCLASSIFIEDSecurity Classification

DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA - R&D(Security claseification of title, body of abstract said Indexing annotation must be entered when the overall report in classlied)

"I. ORIGINATING ACTIVITY (Corporate author6 a. REPORT SECURITY C .A.SIFICATIONFU. S. Naval Air Test Facility (Ship Installations)I UNCLASSIFIED

::U. S. Naval Air Station 2b aftouý

Lakehursc, New Jersey 08733

3. RIEPORT TITLE

DYNAMIC PERFORMANCE OF A MARK 7 MOD 1 ARRESTING SYSTEM USING 24-INCH AND28-Ii;CH PD FAIRLEAD SHEAVES

4. DESCRIPTIVE NOTES (Type of report and lncluaive dates)

Final (10 July 1964 - 29 June 1965)S. AUTHOR(S) (Last name, first name, Initial)

Billec, W.

6. REPORT DATE 78. TOTAL NO. OF PAGES 7b. No. Or Reps

12 May 1966 28 26a. CONTRACT OR .iRANT NO. 98. ORIGINATOR-$ REPORT NUMDER(S)

b. PROJECT o. RSSH-03-119 NATF-E-1078

C. 9b,..,. .,., OTHERc~hi gb. oTR rjPORT NOMS (Any othernrnmibera 1hat may be &@signed

10. AVA ILABILITY/LIMITATION NOTICES

THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO SPECIAL EXPORT CONTROLS AND EACH TRANSMITTAL TOFOREIGN GOVERNMENTS OR FOREIGN NATIONALS MAY BE MADE ONLY WITH PRIOR APPROVALOF COMMANDER, NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COWIMAND, WASHINCTON, D. C. 20360

I1. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY

Naval Air Systems Comnmand

13. ABSTRACT

This report compares Mark 7 Mod 1 arresting-gear performance with standard 24-inch and prototype 28-inch PD fairlead sheaves. Performance with the 28-inchPD fairlead sheaves was satisfactory. The report also presents data of aLang-lay purchase cable which failed in a destructive test after 653 arrest-mencs: excessive wear and corrosion contributed to the failure.

DD IJAN4 1. 473 UNCLASSTFIEDSecurity Clessification

UNCLASSIFIED, Security Classification _______________

SeurtyI" ..... .. "sifctiLINK A LINK B LINK C

KEY WORDS ROLE WT ROLE WT ROLE WT-

ýARRESTING GEAR,AIRCRAFT RECOVERY EQUIPMENTEVALUATIONLANG-LAY PURCHASE CABLE

INSTRUCTIONS

1. ORIGINATING ACTIVITY: Enter the name and address imposed by security classification, using standard statementsof the contrbctor, subcontractor, grantee, Department of De- such as.fense activity or other organization (corporate author) issuing (1) "Qualified requesters may obtain copies of thisthe report. report from DDC.."

2a. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION: Enter the over- (2) "Foreign announcement and dissemination of thisall security classification of the report. Indicate whether"Restricted Data" is included. Marking is to be in accord- report by DDC is not authorized."ance with appropriate security regulations. (3) "U. S. Government agencies may obtain copies of

this report directly from DDC. Other qualified DDC2b. GROUP: Automztic downgrading is specified in DoD Di- users shall request throughrective 5200. 10 and Armed Forces Industrial Manual. Enterthe group number. Also, when applicable, show that optionalmarkings have been used for Group 3 and Group 4 as author- (4) "U. S. military agencies may obtain copies of thisized. report directly from DDC. Other qualified users

3. REPORT TITLE: Enter the complete report title in all shall request throughcapital letters. Titles in all cases should be unclassified.Ut a meaningful title carnot be selected without classifica-tion, show title classification in all capitals in parenthesis (5) "All distribution of this report is controlled. Qual-immediately following the title ified DDC users shall request through

4. DESCRIPTIVE NOTES- If appropriate, enter the type of ._"report, e.g., interim, progress, summary, annual, or final. If the report has been furnished to the Office of TechnicalGive the inclusive dates when a specific reporting period is Services, Department of Commerce. for sale to the public, indi-covered. cate this fact and enter the price, if known.

5. AUTHOR(S): Enter the name(s) of author(s) as shown on 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES: Use for additional explana-or in the report. Enter last name, first name, middle initial, tory notes.If military, show rank and branch of service. The name ofthe principal author is an absolute minimum requirement. 12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY: Enter the name of

the departmental project office or laboratory sponsoring (pae6. REPORT DATEL Enter the date of the report as day, i:n for) the research and development. Include address.month, year; or month, year. If more than one date appearson the report, use date of publication. 13. ABSTRACT: Enter an abstract giving a brief and factual

summary of the document indicative of the report, even though7a. TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES: The total page count it may also appear elsewhere in the body of the technical re-should follow normal pagination procedures. i.e., enter the port. If additional space is required. a continuation sheet shallnumber of pages containing information. be attached.

7b. NUMBER OF REFERENCES- Enter the total number of It is highly desirable that the abstract of classified reportsreferences cited in the report. be unclassified. Each paragraph of the abstract shall end with

8a. CONTR'ACT OR GRANT NUMBER: If appropriate, enter an indriati,,n of the military security classification of the in-the applicable number ,f the contract or grant under which fortrution in the paragraph. represented as (T's (5) (C). or (U)the report was written. Therv i% no limsitation on the length of the abstract How-

8b. &l-, & 8d. PROJECT NUMBER. Enter the appropriate er', r. 9h1,- quVester !-ngth i"; from IS0 to 225 words.military department identi•ication. suk h as piro!ect number,subproject number. system numbers, task number, etc. 14 KIý WORDS: Key words are technically meaningful terms

or -0i -' hr:air s ht.t i-harat terize a report and may be used as9a- ORIGINAT'OR'S REPORT NUMBER(S)- Enter the offi- indt, N •rirs f(ýr ( .taloginK the report. Key words must becial report number bN which the documrent will be identified I , 'h? a -,. Si ,rty %-, ,:si fiati,,n :s required. Identi-and controlled b% the originlatling -" t iviy. I'hts number trust tirr% . h, . -.. - q i. irint rt.-fir-•d ignalfatin. trade name. mivharybe unique to this rrport. proi.- I, ri. - . ireograihi 1- atin. as - le used as key

9h ()TIIFR R14 'O-RT N% 'MIIF:R si It the retlrt has been .utd- will I" tollos.|t t, an, indi(aton ,of technical con-assigned any other ri1-,' trirnh.h rither ,'' th- originator ti;s*:n.menit 0 ! ,. role%. and weights i• optional.

orb% the Aln- 5 ir i . f thi- number I.

10. AVAII.AtI[.1 FiY .IMI'tA 110N NOTICES Enter any lim-itations on tufthcr dis,•-nin.a!,rin of the report. ,1ther than lho-,'

'NCLASSIFIED:"c:.rn ' ( !, ,i i'. •

00 0 r-4 Cd 0a) 44I 1-4 1) 4-4 -4

0 ~ 01 rz . 4-1 PP4 4.4 u ~. r4 14'4 uI

0. >, -r4 CO) "- M >, -r4z

Q) C4 n4 u a)) a)) Cl)

w- 9.140 $4 * .*J2 r4 0

?.44

(U c (0 2 4-,, 9:1 C: C0Z.N 4 ,dO JJ Ii - .0 1 U0 u rn

I w 0l w 0 e $4 w a Q) *J 4 Cd wN H OA-A4 0 4J4J -A. r4 Coo0- 44C( 0 4.J2

Q) 'tC"J .C~ C4 p ' Q)~ (U JQC60C CN CO 0J 4

4-4 00 49. C U .0~ CL0 CC 144U :3U) -C4 ) r.j Mf k J4 _ J -4

Aj 02ý4G lc 4j ,. I - x 0nG *09.4~~~- -4l~ ~ ~ 4 ~ $ U -

IDU24 *I I ýD- 0 -

02~4 -- 440U . *4 4 4 44UUU CUJ.4 -r l0JO4 >4-

Z- 114 Z) (0 41 1 02 ca co 0)J 0 )0 P(n41C40 ca (pU CUqQ)-4 4444. 02.) Z02414 )444 UQ

PW~~0 w2~ Uxwww04

(4U - 0 w4 0 a' (U 0 a'm JOG. 2-J ,4 $4U W- 0)( -: 0 4 4 w I )0

a ) W > 4 04)wa U)p- C" CO 0Za .44w0

m ON co 0(14- 1 ) 4q g4 11 1) H4

Q) U( U l) (/) U)U 0 ) U al w l

W4 I ci wU

41~ 0 4U

414 NS ( U CC Cl) -4,- C' 4-i COUQJ(Un 54$4. w2~ a ClU . w P E

'.J u~ ( <\C co ') C/ s4 a) C) Q M U M$4.~ *.04 .5- C) U Un L4W > nd E

U)(4U,( I -<tý - jh4HO

P4) to (nU4 4.J Lcc

(0U mU.4. a -4 <7 W. -~-

0.U) H Cs-4 I M t) I 4.) w. cc QU)

"0N 041WCO 0 c 02 " -w14-C) C)Ua 0 w Wa-Ms*1

CA n C .- d'4.- s. 0> W~ "aC Cd 41 N'a

0 0'. 0U (UD -4to

OZ ý 0)mu t I - W Q) 0 u Q tvW A3 %0(C: W 44 1 ( ly w ~ W W U 4