Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology

High Strength Materials for Aircraft Landing Gear

K.F. Best, , B.Sc(Eng), C.Eng., M.I.Mech.E., M.R.Ae.S.,
Article information:
To cite this document:
K.F. Best, , B.Sc(Eng), C.Eng., M.I.Mech.E., M.R.Ae.S., (1986) "High Strength Materials for Aircraft Landing Gear", Aircraft
Engineering and Aerospace Technology, Vol. 58 Issue: 7, pp.14-24, https://doi.org/10.1108/eb036313
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/eb036313
Downloaded on: 04 January 2019, At: 05:42 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 449 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)

(1968),"Aircraft Landing Gear: An account of recent developments in undercarriage design and the materials used",
Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, Vol. 40 Iss 1 pp. 6-8 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/eb034330">https://
doi.org/10.1108/eb034330</a>
(1991),"The Future of Landing Gear Steels", Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, Vol. 63 Iss 10 pp. 11-11 <a
href="https://doi.org/10.1108/eb037161">https://doi.org/10.1108/eb037161</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:545847 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 High Strength Materials for Aircraft
Landing Gear
by K. F. Best, B.Sc(Eng), C.Eng., M.I.Mech.E., M.R.Ae.S.
Chief Technician - Airframes
This article is written from the
viewpoint of a structures engineer
who has to make the best use of the
materials available, rather than that
of the metallurgist who aids their
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)
production or development.
The aircraft landing gear is, from
the a i r w o r t h i n e s s a s p e c t ,
considered a part of the airframe
structure. It contributes nothing to
the aircraft's performance in its
flight regime, but provides an
energy absorption system during
landing impact and a suspension
system during taxiing. The landing
gear may be subject to appreciable
standing stress whilst the aircraft is
stationary and high steady and
dynamic stresses during take-off,
taxiing and landing. The complete
landing gear system (less wheels,
14
Dowty Rotol Ltd.
Gloucester
tyres and brakes) generally weighs
in the order of 2½% to 3% of the
aircraft weight, with every effort
being made to keep this to a
minimum by the use of materials
with high static strengths, or rather
high specific strengths. At limit load
conditions and possibly during
some parts of the fatigue spectrum,
stresses approach the yield strength
and the structure may even suffer
limited permanent set which is not
functionally damaging.
The majority of landing gear
components are designed by their
ultimate bending strength when the
maximum advantage is taken of the
shape of the stress strain curve in
permitting maximum stress levels
well into the plastic strain range, so
that a high ratio of yield strength to
AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING - July 1986
ultimate tensile strength is,
therefore, an advantage.
The structures engineer and
designer have several basic
requirements, some of which may
conflict and require a compromise:
The weight, space requirement and,
not least, the cost, must all be as
little as possible. The minimum
weight may not, however, be cost
effective because of
disproportionately higher costs of
the material and manufacturing
processes. Similarly, space
limitations within the airframe may
be critical and so be the decisive
influence upon material choice, in
this case the use of steel at the
highest strength level is almost
inevitable because it offers the
maximum strength and stiffness per
 unit volume. It should, however, be
borne in mind that the use of steel
at the highest strength level does
not offer a worthwhile advantage
over a steel of lesser strength in
every application. For example, a
factor which can influence the
choice of strength level of the steel
used for the sliding member of a
telescopic landing gear is the effect
upon the structural stiffness and
hence upon the dynamic response
arising during and following wheel
spin-up at touchdown. It can
happen that an increase in the
dynamic response arising from the
more flexible sliding member given
by the thinner sections associated
with a higher strength steel,
increases the loads to such an extent
that there is no significant weight
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)
saving in using, say, a 1900 MPa
steel instead of a 1230 MPa steel.
It can be inferred from this that a
high value of the modulus of
elasticity relative to static strength
is an advantage, which is generally
so, except on the few occasions
when a relatively lower value can be
exploited, such as in a liquid spring
cylinder.
Impact strength is not an
important property for the landing
gear designer, the impact properties
of aluminium alloys are poor, with
Izod values of around 3-6J which is
far less than the values for steels,
but this is no handicap to their use.
Loads are applied to landing gears
through the tyres and shock
absorbers in a much less than
instantaneous manner, landing
impact loads typically take 0.1
seconds to wheel spin-up and
around 05. seconds to achieve
maximum vertical reaction; braking
loads also take time to reach their
maximum levels, say, 0.5 seconds.
Good ductility in both the
longitudinal and transverse
directions is, however, very
desirable since deformation rather
than fracture is preferable under
loading conditions outside the
design envelope requirements and
stresses in both longitudinal and
transverse directions are likely to be
high.
Fail-safe or damage tolerant
design is not usually practicable so
that the landing gear is, as a rule,
designed to a specific safe life.
There have been some landing
gears for which the period in
landings of crack growth from
AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING - July 1986
ALLOY 0.2% Proof Stress
MPa
MSR-B 185
(DTD 5035)
ZE 63A
(DTD 5045) 170
Fig. 3 Mechanical properties of magnesium alloys
detectable length with appropriate
N.D.T. equipment to critical crack
length at critical locations, has been
calculated, but this is not damage
tolerant design. High strength level
materials used at high stress levels,
as in landing gears, mean that the
critical crack lengths are in any case
very small so that strength in the
cracked state does not have much to
offer. Resistance to crack initiation
and sub-critical crack growth are,
therefore, more important and
crack growth rate should be
sufficiently slow that critical size
should not be reached in the
timescale of inspections over two
reasonable intervals, say overhaul
periods.
Safe-life requirements laid down
by both civil and military
constructors are becoming ever
longer and are now typically about
60,000 landings for a civil transport
which may, over this period, taxy in
the order of 300,000 km. For a civil
transport the major part of the
fatigue damage to the landing gear
usually occurs during the taxiing
and ground manoeuvring phases,
whilst in a combat aircraft the
landing phase will contribute a
more nearly equal share of the
fatigue damage. For either type of
0.2% Proof
Alloy Stress
MPa
IMI 551
1095
(TA 39)
6AI-6V-2Sn
(MIL-T-9047) 1068
IMI 318
(TA 13) 830
IMI 550
920
(TA 48)
* Figures quoted apply to material of 25-50 mm thickness
Fig. 5 Mechanical Properties of Titanium Alloy
U.T.S. Elongation
MPa %
240 2
275 5
aircraft a high proportion of the
loading cases which cause fatigue
damage are in the low cycle high
stress region, sometimes exceeding
yield stress. No surface can be
regarded as free of stress
concentration which may be
induced either by manufacturing
processes or by geometric effects.
A d e q u a t e notched fatigue
properties and their ready
availability are, therefore, a firm
requirement.
Another aspect which can
influence material choice is
reliability in service. The landing
gear operates in an environment of
rain and salted runways, and stones
thrown up by the wheels,
sometimes on very poor unpaved
surfaces. A reasonable level of
resistance to stress corrosion
cracking is very necessary, together
with suitable surface protection
such as epoxide paint or chromium
plating.
General
If carbon or boron fibre composites
are discounted for current
applications, there are alloys of
relatively high strength, compared
with others of their own type, of
magnesium, aluminium, titanium,
U.T.S. Elongation
R. of A.
MPa %
1250 8 20
1172 8 20
900 8 25
1050 9 20
15
 ELEMENT L.161 7049-T73 7050-T736 7175-T736 AZ 74
(7075-T73) (AMS 4111) (AMS 4107) 7010-T736 (AMS 4149) (7009-T738)

Copper 1.2 - 2.0 1.2 - 1.9 2.0 - 2.6 1.5 - 2.0 1.2 - 2.0 .6 - 1.3

Magnesium 2.1 - 2.9 2.0 - 2.9 1.9 - 2.6 2.1 - 2.6 2.1 - 2.9 2.1 - 2.9

Zinc 5.6 - 6.1 7.2 - 8.2 5.7 - 6.7 5.7 - 6.7 5.1 - 6.1 5.5 - 6.5

Manganese .30 maximum .20 maximum .10 maximum .10 maximum .10 maximum .10 maximum

Chromium .18 - .28 .10 - .22 .04 maximum .05 maximum .18 - .30 .10 - .25

Zirconium - - 0.8 - .15 .11 - .17 - -

Silver - - - - - .25 - .40

Silicon .40 maximum .25 maximum .12 maximum .12 maximum .15 maximum .20 maximum

Iron .50 maximum .35 maximum .15 maximum .15 maximum .20 maximum .20 maximum

Aluminium Rem. Rem. Rem. Rem. Rem. Rem.

Fig. 6
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)

Chemical compositions of a selection of

steel. Composites have been used
for a very few landing gears in
research programmes and at some
time in the future may become
viable alternatives, but at present
the prospective reduction in weight
is offset by prohibitive cost.
The relative strengths of a
number of current high strength
alloys are shown in Fig. 1.
Magnesium alloy castings have
been used with success for major
structural components of a small
proportion of landing gears.
Examples which come to mind are
the main fittings of the nose gears
on the B.Ae. Vulcan Bomber,
B.Ae. Gnat and H.A.L. Ajeet and
more recently for the nose gear
main fitting on the Anglo-French
Jaguar. Although the least strong
and with the lowest specific strength
high strength aluminium alloys
of the materials available, the nearly 10% stronger offers an
weight penalty may be at a advantage for future applications.
minimum when it is used in Fig. 3 shows the properties of these
complex shapes which would in any two magnesium alloys.
case require large blends and Titanium alloys have been
consequent 'dead' metal. There is relatively little used for landing
of course the penalty of the casting gears although they have the
factor which generally needs to be advantages of high specific
applied to cater for the variability strength, that is strength divided by
between castings, but premium density, as good or better than ultra
quality castings with guaranteed high tensile steel and excellent
minimum properties may come to corrosion resistance due to their
be accepted as are premium quality oxide surface coating; the film is
aluminium alloy castings to Mil-A- self healing and reforming is very
21180. Their principal advantages rapid if it is damaged. If
are their relatively low costs and temperature is a problem, the alloys
ability to produce complex re­ retain their strengths at much
entrant or hollow shapes: Fig. 2. higher levels than the magnesium
The main fitting of the Jaguar nose and aluminium alloys. An example
gear is a good example of this. The of the successful use of titanium
material is MSR-B (DTD 5035), alloy at the high strength level of
but ZE63A (DTD 5045) which is 1280 MPa is the pivot bracket for

0.2% Proof Kic Kiscc ST Threshold

Test U.T.S. Elong.
Alloy Stress MPa √m Stress
Direction MPa % MPa √m
MPa MPa

L.161 L 385 455 7 30 36

(7075-T73) T 360 420 3 25 36 296

7049-T73 L 421 490 7 36

(AMS 4111) ST 414 483 3 36 — 310

7050-T736 L 421 490 7 36

(AMS 4107) ST 379 462 4 25 — 234

7010-T736 L 430 500 7 34 -

T 405 475 4 24 -
7175-T736 L 455 524 9 33 -
(AMS 4149) ST 428 490 4 29 241

AZ74 L 450 510 7 32

(7009-T736) ST 430 490 4 23 -

Fig. 7 Mechanical properties and fracture toughness

of a selection of high strength aluminium alloys (All quoted at 75mm thickness)

16 AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING - July 1986

 the nose landing gear of the Harrier
and the Sea Harrier V/STOL
aircraft Fig. 4, manufactured in IMI
551 (BS TA 39), one of the
strongest commercially available
alloys. At a slightly lower strength
level the U.S. material 6A1-6V-2-
Sn (AMS 4978 and MIL-T-9047)
has been used for components such
as mainfittings and is worth
considering. IMI 318 (BS TA 13)
and the stronger IMI 550 (BS TA
48) are both readily forgeable and
are sometimes used for small
components. Fig. 5 shows the
mechanical properties of these
titanium alloys.
However, there are few landing
gear situations in which its
advantages offset the high cost of
the raw material and subsequent
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)

manufacture. This situation may

well change if high strength, low
cost titanium alloys are developed
and there is some research effort in
this direction.
For the large majority of landing
gears the choice of material for the
major structural components
becomes one of either aluminium
alloy or steel. Sliding tubes or
pistons as they are often called are,
with very rare exceptions, made in
steel. Other major structural items
such as main fittings and stays or
braces, may well be in either
material. In landing gears for very
large aircraft these components are
as a rule all steel, all aluminium
alloy for small aircraft and some
combination of materials in the stiffness advantage when designed have now been developed which
middle range. to the same loads. In addition, attain the general strength level of
aluminium alloy forgings have cost the T6 heat treatment while still
advantages both in forging price possessing good resistance to stress
Aluminium alloys and in subsequent manufacturing corrosion.
It could be seen from Fig. 1 that costs compared with steel and Figure 6 shows the chemical
aluminium alloys have lower titanium forgings. A disadvantage is compositions of several high
specific strengths than either steel the greater space required within strength aluminium alloys which
or titanium alloys. Nevertheless, the airframe to accommodate the can be considered and figure 7
aluminium alloys are competitive aluminium alloy components. shows their mechanical properties.
structurally for large forgings where Without doubt the biggest single L.161 is the British equivalent of
the 'dead' metal associated with problem in the past with high the U.S. alloy 7075-T73 which is the
complex shapes and the need for strength aluminium alloys has been duplexed aged version of 7075-T6.
adequate blend radii mitigates in their susceptibility to stress The T73 heat treatment produces a
their favour. In fact, experience corrosion, a problem which drop in strength of about 10%, but
shows that in spite of its specific encouraged the development of the stress corrosion resistance is
strength advantage it is not easy to ultra high strength steels as an extremely good and the alloy is
design, for example, a main fitting alternative. This weakness has now virtually immune. The alloy is
in ultra high tensile steel to much been largely overcome by the quench sensitive due to the
less than the weight of an introduction of duplex ageing which chromium used for stress corrosion
equivalent high strength aluminium does involve some loss of strength if resistance. Alloys subjected to the
alloy component. Aluminium alloys the maximum resistance to stress T73 heat treatment have to pass the
with approximately one third of the corrosion is required, for example stringent stress corrosion tests laid
modulus of elasticity of steel and in the duplex ageing of 7075-T6 to down in the U.S. document QQ-A-
much less than one third of the 7075-T73 or the U.K. DTD 5024 to 367 which requires a test in the
strength of U.H.T.S., also have a DTD 5104. More modern alloys short transverse direction at 75% of

AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING - July 1986 17

 the longitudinal yield stress level to
Chemical Composition Minimum Transverse Properties
a minimum life requirement of 30
days in a 3½% Na Cl environment. 0.2% Proof U.T.S. E.L. R. of A.
Specification Stress
The alloy has a reasonable history C Si Ni Cr Mo V
MPa MPa % %
of satisfactory service experience
with a corresponding confidence
level and is used in a large number S.155 .39 1.50 1.65 .70 .30 .05
1550 1900 5 20
of aircraft. It is widely obtainable. (300M) - .44 - 1.80 - 2.00 -0.95 - .45 - .10
7049-173 has been developed in
35NCD16 .34 .16 3.5 1.6 .30
the U.S. by Kaiser. It has a lesser - 1450 1800 6 30
(THQ) - .40 - .40 - 4.5 -2.0 - .60
proportion of chromium than L161,
relying on high proportions of D6AC .45 .15 .40 .90 0.9 .08
1520 1790 5 18
magnesium and particularly zinc for (MIL-S-8949) - .50 - .30 - .70 -1.2 -1.1 - .15
its properties. The mechanical
properties quoted for 75 mm H.11 .38 .8 0 4.75 1.2 .4
1490 1790 5 15
(AMS 6487) - .43 - 1.0 - .25 -5.25 -1.4 - .6
thickness are good and are so for
the sections generally of interest to 4330V .28 .15 1.65 .75 .35 .05
landing gear designers, say between (AMS 6411) - .33 - .35 - 2.00 -1.00 - .50 - .10
1280 1520 10 30

20 and 125 mm, but the alloy does

not retain its properties at the C Co Ni Ti Mo Al

thickness levels achievable with the

Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)

DTD 6212 7.0 17.0 .30 4.6 .05

7010 and 7050 type alloys. Like
L161 it has a high stress corrosion
threshold stress level, an advantage
when used for landing gears which
can have significant stress levels
even when the aircraft is stationary.
A good material being used for
replacement components on the Jet
Stream, F-111, B52 and for new
components on the F5 and F16, it is
not produced outside the U.S.
The Alcoa development of 7050-
(Maraging) - 8.5
.15
Fig. 10 Chemical compositions and mechanical properties of ultra high strength steels
T736 to replace the lower strength
stress corrosion free duplex aged
versions of 7075 has been supported
by both the U.S. Navy and Air
Force. Its stress corrosion
resistance is partly due to the high
copper content and partly to the
1700 1800 5 25
19.0 - .60 -5.2
- .15
heat treatment process. The zinc
and magnesium ratios are closely
controlled and there is an addition
of zirconium along with the high
copper content to keep up the
strength level. The copper helps in
the solubility of the complex
aluminium, zinc, magnesium
compounds, but its high proportion
causes difficulty from the casting
point of view. The continuous
casting process cools the melt very
quickly to prevent grain coarsening,
but there is a tendency to cracking
of the ingot during cooling which is
dependent upon size. The
manufacture of ingots above about
250 mm in diameter becomes
progressively more difficult. Large
landing gear parts requiring ingots
of say 400 mm diameter would
probably not be supplied unless
there was a substantial demand.
Alcoa have produced and are
producing very large quantities of
alloy, although no European
company will supply it. Technically
it is probably the best, it is certainly
the most researched.
A more recent alloy than 7050 is
7010 for which there is now a draft
U.K. specification 7010-T736
developed under a Ministry of
Defence contract by ALCAN. The
alloy is very closely similar in
composition to 7050, the important
change being a reduction in the
copper content from a range of 2.0
to 2.6% to a reduced range of 1.5 to

18 AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING - July 1986

 2.0%, the lower upper limit being
the maximum permissible without
serious castability problems. It is
therefore easier to meet the
mechanical properties in very thick
sections. Looked at another way,
the. 7010 alloy is close in
composition to 7075 but with the
substitution of zirconium for
chromium. It has been shown to
respond satisfactorily to quenching
in UCON mixtures and there is
scope for research into the effects of
low quenching rates which should
minimise internal stresses and ease
manufacture by virtue of low
distortion. The alloy is entirely
satisfactory, although there is not a
great deal flying yet and is available
in Europe.
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)

AZ74, an alloy developed in

Germany, gets its strength and
corrosion resistance from the silver
content 0.25 to 0.4%. Its strength is
nominally greater than 7010-T736
but comparative tensile tests carried
out on specimens extracted from
large undercarriage forgings have
shown little difference.
The alloy is even more quench
sensitive than 7075 so that
properties are sensitive to section
thickness. There is some experience
of the alloy in France and it is
currently being used on a U.K. civil
landing gear. It is more expensive
than 7010.
7175 T-736 is essentially a high
purity version of 7075 and its
composition is within the limits of
that for 7075. Its strength
approximates to that of the stress
corrosion susceptible 7075-T6 with
a stress corrosion resistance in the
short transverse grain direction not
far short of that for 7075-T73. It has
been used in a number of landing
gears.
With regard to fatigue lives, there
is considerable evidence that all the
A1-Zn-Mg-Cu alloys possess
substantially the same fatigue
properties so that test results tend
generally to lie within a common
scatter band. Fig. 8 shows a
comparison of axial fatigue test
results at R=0 and K=1 for 7010,
7050 and AZ74. Rarely in landing
gears does K=l occur in practice,
there is almost always some stress
concentration, if only due to materials. It has been shown that lower the properties. It is then
anodising, so that larger K's are the fatigue properties may well be likely that the fatigue properties of
more interesting. Fig. 9 shows a governed largely by the size of the a large forging are likely to be
comparison at K=3 of results insoluble inter-metallic constituents inferior to those of a smaller one,
achieved for the same three i.e. the larger the constituents, the the coarser interstitials acting as

AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING - July 1986 19

 internal stress raisers. There is also
evidence that the same components
forged by different manufacturers
can exhibit wide scatter not only
with regard to actual fatigue life to
failure, but also, and more
importantly for safe life design, in
the crack initiation and crack
propagation periods. Good fracture
toughness is always a benefit, since
if any cracking or stress corrosion
does develop, slow propagation is
very desirable. The higher strength
alloys improve their fracture
toughness by keeping the silicon
and iron contents down; this of
course requires high purity base
metals so that their costs increase.
The older 7075-T73 alloy has
relatively good fracture toughness
because its strength is lower and in
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)

practice the silicon and iron

contents are less than .4 and .5%. seems to have been relatively static structural components of the
for some years now. Harrier and Sea Harrier landing
D6AC like H.11 was originally a gears, although none of these are
Steels die and tool steel and was used large. Its fracture toughness and
Turning now to steels, the greatest extensively on the F.111 including stress corrosion resistance are good
potential weight saving comes from the landing gear axles where it was and manufacture in the material
the use of steels in what is generally heat treated to 1790 MPa and has does not require the very rigid
referred to as the ultra high strength been satisfactory. Like H.11 and machine tools and atmosphere-
range of say, 1520 MPa upwards. 4330V it is normally heat treated to controlled furnaces usually needed
There are several steels currently 1520 MPa at the lower end of the for manufacture in low-alloy
available in this range some of strength range. U . H . T . S . Even s o , these
which, such as H.11 (AMS 6487) 4330V has been widely used in advantages do not outweigh the
which is almost the only low alloy America at the (220-240 KSI) high initial cost resulting from the
choice where strength must be strength level, it was used for the high alloy content, especially where
m a i n t a i n e d to e l e v a t e d F.111 landing gear and is still much of a forging is machined away
temperatures, may be used where commonly used when the maximum as swarf. Additionally the costs of
there is the need for a specific strength level is not required. machining errors are relatively high
characteristic. Figure 10 shows the as is the capital tied-up in economic
chemical composition of a number Maraging steel has been used to a
relatively small extent in landing quantities of forgings. It is therefore
of these steels and their mechanical an unlikely choice for future
properties. The low alloy steels in gears. Following an extensive
programme of testing Dowty have landing gears except in particular
this strength range are invariably circumstances.
manufactured by air-melting used maraging steel at the 1780
MPa stress level for many of the 35NCD16, a French developed
followed by consumable electrode
remelting, usually vacuum arc, in
order to minimise inclusion content
and achieve the required high level
of transverse Reduction of Area.
Maraging steel is usually double
vacuum melted.
The ultra high tensile steels most
likely to be used in Europe are the
French 35 NCD 16 (THQ) and the
UK S.155 which in its US
designation of 300 M is very widely
used in America. Nevertheless
some mention must be made of
other steels which are in use. It is
perhaps worth remarking that
although there was a period some
years ago when either new steels or
variants of existing steels were
produced at ever higher strength
levels quite regularly, the position

20 AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING - July 1986

 steel has been used on the landing
gears of the Mirage, Concorde, F-
101's operating in Europe, the
A300 airbus and now as the
principal structural material of the
landing gears for the A310. There is
therefore both military and civil
experience of the alloy which is
similar in composition to the UK
S.28. Since it is air or gas hardening
the distortion following heat
treatment is small and the material
rivals maraging steel without the
high costs, although its 0.2% proof
stress is very much lower. A sub-
zero heat treatment at -75°C is
necessary following hardening, to
reduce retained austenite to an
acceptable level. For quantity
production of large components this
implies appropriate refrigeration
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)
capacity, which we have available at
Dowty Rotol, since in collaboration
with Messier-Hispano-Bugatti we
are manufacturing and designing
large components of the A310 main
landing gear in 35 NCD16.
The most widely used U.H.T.S.
in both the US and the UK for
landing gears is 300 M or S.155 in its
UK standard. Landing gears which
use it include those of the Boeing
727, 737 and 747, the Lockheed
C5A and the McDonnell Douglas
DC.10. Dowty use it extensively in
the Tornado landing gear. It is a
vacuum melted high silicon variant
of 4340 which came into use about
AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING - July 1986
fifteen years ago and the data
available regarding its mechanical
properties and its treatment during
manufacture is by far the most
extensive
Although 35NCD 16 will
undoubtedly continue to be used in
some European designed landing
gears, S.155 (300 M) is seen at
present as the U.H.T.S. material
likely to be selected for the greater
proportion of new landing gears on
a world wide basis. At Dowty Rotol
S.155 has become virtually the
standard U.H.T.S.
Reference has been made to
consumable electrode re-melting,
although this is customarily vacuum
arc, the possibility of Electro-slag
remelting (ESR) should not be
overlooked if it is cheaper or more
readily available than VAR. Some
work has been carried out to
compare the properties of S.155
(300 M) produced by the two
processes which has led to the
general conclusion that the
mechanical properties including
ductility, fracture toughness and
stress corrosion of the ESR material
relative to VAR are similar, with
the exception that the plain
specimen (K=1) fatigue properties
in the transverse direction are
lower. So that unless this is an
important factor the probability is
that under service conditions they
will perform equally well. Figure 11
shows some tensile strength-
reduction of area results and Figure
12 some fracture toughness results,
comparing ESR with VAR 300 M.
Qualification testing would of
course have to be carried out in
components made from ESR
material since although it would be
reasonable to substitute VAR
material at some time should it be
expedient, it is possible that the
reverse would not be acceptable.
Whichever the process of
remelting, a very high standard of
metallographic cleanliness is
required, for example to ASTM
E45-69. Similarly the billets must
pass ultrasonic examination say to
MIL-I-8950 B Class A and the
finished product the magnetic
particle test requirements of
AMS2300.
Because of the problems of
machining S.155 and other
U . H . T . S . in the hardened
condition, a large proportion of the
surface area of components is finish
machined before heat treatment. It
is important to ensure that these
surfaces do not become carburised
or decarburised during heat
treatment. Partial carburising is
particularly harmful as only slight
amount can seriously reduce
transverse ductility and decrease
stress corrosion resistance; no
partially carburised surface can
therefore be permitted. Partial
decarburisation will reduce fatigue
life and the maximum permissible
depth generally accepted is .1 mm
(or .003 to .004 in). Even with
carefully managed atmosphere
controlled heat treatment furnaces
it is very difficult to achieve
complete freedom from partial
decarburisation and the only
guarantee of freedom is to machine
after heat treatment. It is however
normal practice to shot peen all
surfaces, not least to ensure the
restoration of fatigue properties in
partially decarburised areas.
Great care is also required in
machining fully heat treated
material to avoid surface layer
alteration by machining abuse
which can reduce fatigue strength
by up to 30%. Milling, reaming and
grinding operations on fully heat
treated S.155 are liable to introduce
surface layer alterations which
consist of layers of untempered
martensite, overtempered
martensite and over-tempering with
21
 the possibility also of plastic
deformation, residual stress,
cracks, tears, laps and burrs.
Untempered martensite usually
referred to as 'rehardening', occurs
in chip removal and grinding
operations. It essentially results
from excessive overheating and
sudden quenching of the surface
layer by the base material or by the
cutting fluid, it is brittle and often
associated with the later nucleation
and propagation of minute cracks.
Etching in 4% nitric acid shows it is
white layers or bands. Figure 13 is a
diagramatic illustration of a typical
micrograph showing machining
abuse.
Overtempered martensite
invariably exists under layers of
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)

untempered martensite on steels

which have been quenched and
tempered, it is softer than the base
material. It can appear on its own,
generated wherever the interface
cutting temperature exceeds the
original tempering level of the
material. The appearance when
nital etched is a darker surface than
the grey etching of the background
material.
Corrosion protection should be
carried out by high current density
cadmium plating with parts being
thoroughly stress relieved before
plating and de-embrittled after
plating.
External surfaces must be
protected by an adequate paint
scheme, for example an epoxide
primer and polyurethane finishing
coat. In-service damage must be
dealt with as it occurs, damage
being blended out and the area re-
shot peened, followed by brush
plating with low-embrittlement
cadmium solution.
The fatigue strengths of several
high strength steels, 300 M
35NCD16 THQ, Maraging and ground load cases which generate alloys.
D6AC are compared in the next fatigue stresses of significance tend The Acceptable Means of
two figures 14 and 15, at K=l and to occur in the high stress — low Compliance, ACJ 25.571(a), to the
K=3. The curves are shown for cycle region, often at less than 1,000 European Airworthiness
alternating axial stress; they show cycles and usually less than 106 Requirements JAR 25, state that
that S155 (300 M) compares cycles. It is worth mentioning that the appropriate scatter factor must
favourably with other steels and there is evidence that both be negotiated by the applicant,
incidentally has the advantage that U.H.T.S. and titanium have a taking into account the scope of the
there is a great deal of published greater fatigue test scatter in results analysis and the supporting test
fatigue data available, a point of than do aluminium alloys. As a evidence, including the number and
considerable importance to the consequence there is a very recent representativeness of the test
structures engineer who has to carry trend by Airworthiness Authorities specimens, the materials, the type
out fatigue analyses. to require larger scatter factors to of test, the knowledge of the
The fatigue properties are of be demonstrated during fatigue expected loading spectra, the
course helped by the high standards testing of U.H.T.S. components consequences of failure and
of cleanliness. In general the than those required for aluminium environmental conditions. The

22 AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING - July 1986

 fatigue scatter factor can, therefore,
be a subject of negotiation. During
recent discussions with the U.K.
Civil Aviation Authority, values of
scatter factor of one and a half and
twice those for aluminium alloy
have been quoted, although in this
particular instance no decision has
yet been reached.
Scatter bands of plain strain
fracture toughness klc obtained
from various sources are shown in
Figure 16. It will be seen that S.155
(300 M) has a generally higher
fracture toughness at around 55-77
MPa m than the other low alloy
steels at comparable stress levels.
The critical crack lengths of all the
U.H.T.S. are small and at high
stress levels are below the level of
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)
NDT detectability in service. The
critical crack lengths at the specified
proof stresses for various levels of
fracture toughness are shown in
Figure 17. There is generally little
to choose between the various
U.H.T.S. in practice; in general
crack propagation rate is
proportional to stress intensity
range and the differences in time to
develop critical crack length are not
great. Nevertheless, slightly higher
fracture toughness may be an
advantage in some case, for
example in the case of a thin walled
internally pressurised cylinder, the
working stress may be such that the
fracture toughness of one material
may allow a crack to grow through
the wall to develop a leak whilst a
material of lower Klc would grow to
critical length whilst only partway
through the wall thickness, with
more dramatic failure.
Although Airworthiness
Requirements do not as yet insist
on damage tolerance analysis, the
U.S. Specification MIL-A-83444
'Airplane Damage Tolerance
Requirements' does not apply to
landing gears, both the U.S. civil
transport requirement FAR 25 and
the European JAR 25 call for it
except where it is impractical, when
application has to be made for
alternative clearance on a safe life
basis. Landing gears have so far
been accepted as being in this latter
category but doubtless the time will
come when this is no longer so and
minimum guaranteed fracture
toughness may need to become a
condition of supply. There have
been attempts to increase the
fracture toughness of ultra high
AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING - July 1986
strength martensitic steels with the
aim of achieving the toughness of
maraging steel without loss of
strength. A number of modified
heat treatments have been
investigated, apparently with some
success, but whether this will be
repeated on large or complex parts
of varying cross-section is another
matter.
Figure 18 shows stress corrosion
cracking, Klscc, properties of several
U.H.T.S. derived from published
results of tests on production heats.
The Klscc values are in the order of
one third of the corresponding Klc
values and are all far too low to be
used as the basis for a design in
which minimum acceptable crack
length is a significant parameter.
The curve for maraging steel must
be subject to the qualification that
some tests have shown that Klscc for
the material can be in the same
range as the low alloy steels; it has
been suggested this difference is
possibly related to the sizes of bars
from which test specimens were
extracted. The time to failure of the
low alloy steels is short at about 2
hours, but even for the maraging
steel the tie is only about a week.
With very small initial crack size it
is apparent that similar fatigue
cracks in components, if stress
levels are above Klscc are not likely
to be found before sudden failure
occurs. It must be said though, that
there is little evidence that stress
corrosion data obtained from pre-
fatigue cracked specimens is
necessarily relevant to stress-
corrosion crack initiation from
imperfections such as inclusions or
small corrosion pits on the surfaces
of typical landing gear components.
Nevertheless it is obviously of
prime importance to avoid crack
initiation and this is not solely in the
hands of the designer; the
Production Department have a vital
part to play in ensuring that
machining abuse is kept to an
absolute minimum, which must
involve the education of everyone
concerned in the manufacturing
cycle of fully heat treated material.
Finally the Tornado main landing
gear in which the principal
materials are U.H.T.S. to Specifi-
cation S155 (300 M) and high
strength aluminium alloy to Specifi-
cation L161 (7075.T73), a combina-
tion of materials chosen for
minimum weight with in-service re-
liability.
Acknowledgements
We are fortunate at Dowty Rotol in
having a very effective Materials
Laboratory whose assistance in
providing metallurgical services and
data and material for this paper I
am pleased to acknowledge.
References
Aerospace Structural Metals
Handbook, Vol. 1. Code 1217.
Section 3.05. Traverse City,
Michigan: Mechanical Properties
Data Center.
Ault, R. T. et. al. 1971
Development of an improved
ultra-high strength steel for
forged aircraft components.
Technical Report AFML-TR-71-
27, Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base, 1971.
Austin, D. E. & Goehler, D. D.
1963 How inclusions affect
ductility of steel forgings. Metal
Prog. September 1963.
Benjamin, W. D. & Steigerwald,
E. A. 1968 Environmentally
induced delayed failures in
martensitic high strength steels.
Technical Report AFML-TR-68-
80. Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base, 1968.
Boesch, W. J. & Cowan, T. W.
1968 Evolution of a commercial
400 ksi grade maraging steel.
Paper Presented at ASM
Congress Detroit, 1968.
Brown, B. F. 1966 New Stress-
corrosion Cracking Test
Procedure for High Strength
Alloys. Material Res. and
23
 Standards, 6, No. 3, March 1966.
Campbell, J. E. 1971 Shot peening
for improved fatigue properties
and stress-corrosion resistance.
Report MCIC-71-02. Columbus,
Ohio: Metals and Ceramics
Information Center.
Carter, C. S. 1969 The effect of
silicon on the stress corrosion
resistance of low alloy high
strength steels. Corrosion 25,
423.
Carter, C. S. 1970a Evaluation of a
high purity maraging steel
forging. AFML-TR-70-139,
1970.
Carter, C. S. 19706 Observations
on the stress-corrosion crack
propagation characteristics of
high strength steels. Boeing
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)
Document D6-25274, p. 12, May
1970.
Caton, R. G. & Carter, C. S. 1973
E v a l u a t i o n of A F C 77
martensitic stainless steel for
airframe structural applications.
Technical Report AFML-TR-73-
182. Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base.
Cobalt Abstracts 1974-1. London:
Gobalt Information Centre.
Cole, H. G. 1969 The influence of
s u r f a c e and p r o t e c t i v e
treatments on stress corrosion
behaviour. AGARD Conference
Proceedings No. 53, Istanbul
1969.
Dautovich, D. P. & Floreen, S.
1973 The stress corrosion and
hydrogen embrittlement
behaviour of maraging steels.
N a t i o n a l Association of
Corrosion Engineers
Conference. Unieux. France,
June 1973.
Dreyer, G. A. 1962 Investigation of
susceptibility of high strength
martensitic steel alloys to stress
corrosion. Report ASD-TDR-
62-876. Wright-Patterson Air
Force Base, September 1962.
Fager, D. N. & Spurr, W. F. 1971
Solid cadmium embrittlement:
steel alloys. Corrosion 27, No. 2.
Gardiner, R. W. 1972 Fracture
Toughness of 9Ni-4Co-0.45C
Steel in Bainitic and Martensitic
Conditions. Royal Aircraft
Establishment, Farnborough.
Technical Memorandum
MAT.149, 1972.
Harmsworth, C. L. 1969 Low cycle
fatigue evaluation of titanium
6A1-6V-2SN and 300 M steel for
24
landing gear applications.
Technical Report AFML-TR69-
48. Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base 1969.
Henthorne, M. 1972 Stress
corrosion cracking of martensitic
precipitation hardening stainless
steels. AGARD Conference,
Brussels. Proceedings No. 98,
1972.
Honeycombe, R. W. K. 1971 A
new approach to the design of
alloy steels. Iron and Steel
Institute Special Report 145,
1971.
Hudson, J. C. 1948 Corrosion of
iron and steel wires. J. Iron and
Steel Inst. 160.
Imrie, W. M. 1970 Maraging steel
in the British Aerospace
Industry. Metal Forming.
January and February 1970.
Imrie, W. M. 1971 Ultra high
tensile landing gear components
— material selection and
manufacture. JI R. Aeronaut.
Soc. 75, February.
Imrie, W. M. 1976. Undercarriage
Material Requirements.
P r e s e n t e d at R o s e n h a i n
Centenary Conference The
Royal Society London 1976.
Johnson, H. H. & Paris, P. C. 1968
Sub-critical crack growth. Engng
Fracture. Mech. 1.
Lui, K. & Rush, P. 1972
Application of electroplated
aluminium as a protective
coating for fasteners. Presented
at Advanced Technology
Session, Westec Conference, Los
Angeles, March 1972.
McDarmaid, D. S. 1974 Effect of
austenite grain refinement on the
plane strain fracture toughness
and other mechanical properties
of 300 M steel. Royal Aircraft
Establishment, Farnborough,
Technical Report 74025.
February 1974.
McDarmaid, D. S. 1980 Effect of
Electro Slag Refining upon the
mechanical properties of 300 M
steel. Royal Aircraft
Establishment, Farnborough,
Technical Report 80079 June
1980.
McKenna, J. 1973 Dowty Rotol
Limited Materials Laboratory
Report 73/9003.
McKenna, J. & Imrie, W. M. 1969-
72 Dowty Rotol Limited
Materials Laboratory Reports
69/9005, 70/9006, 72/9010,
72/9011 and 72/9014.
AIRCRAFT ENGINEERING - July 1986
Perimutter, I. & Carter, C. S. 1973
Material factors and reliability in
the design of landing gear, TTCP
Symposium, Cambridge. June
1973.
Rubinstein, M. 1972 Metal put-on
tool solves complex aircraft
maintenance problems.
P r e s e n t e d at F . A . A .
Maintenance Symposium,
Oklahoma City. November
1972.
Sanderson, G. et. al. 1974
Cadmium coatings containing
dispersed nickel particles for the
protection of high strength steels
against corrosion. M.O.D.
Report, D.Mat. No. 197, July
1974.
Sink, G. T. 1968 Plating. 55, 449.
Stavros, A. J. & Paxton, H. W.
1970 Stress-corrosion cracking
behaviour of 18% Ni maraging
steel. Metall, Trans. 1,
November 1970.
S t e i g e r w a l d , E . A . 1969
Characteristics of
environmentally-induced
delayed failure in high strength
steels. AGARD Conference
Proceedings No. 53. Istanbul
1969.
Webster, D. 1971 Optimisation of
material properties to achieve
structural efficiency. Metals and
Materials, August 1971, p. 257.
Wells, M. G. H. et. al. 1972 The
relationship of inclusions to
toughness — ductility parameters
in high strength steels. ASM
Meeting. Cleveland 1972.
W h i t t a k e r , I . C. 1 9 7 2 .
Development of Titanium and
Steel Fatigue Variability Model
for Application of Reliability
Analysis Approach to Aircraft
Structures. Technical Report
D6-60164 The Boeing Company.
Zackay, V. F. et. al. 1972 Nature,
Phys. Sci. 236, 108.
Zackay, V. F. & Justusson 1962
The properties of martensitic
steels formed from strain-
hardened austenite. High
Strength Steels Conference,
Harrogate 1962. Iron and Steel
Institute. Special Report 76.
 This article has been cited by:

1. Benjamin T. Daymond, Nicolas Binot, Michael L. Schmidt, Steve Preston, Richard Collins, Alan Shepherd. 2016.
Development of Custom 465® Corrosion-Resisting Steel for Landing Gear Applications. Journal of Materials Engineering
and Performance 25:4, 1539-1553. [Crossref]
2. Ashok Kumar, Y. Balaji, N. Eswara Prasad. 2012. Type Certification of 18 Ni Maraging Steels for Landing Gears. Materials
Science Forum 710, 511-515. [Crossref]
3. R.J.H. Wanhill, R.T. Byrnes, C.L. Smith. Stress corrosion cracking (SCC) in aerospace vehicles 608-650. [Crossref]
4. Carlos Eduardo Silva De Amorim, Herman Jacobus Cornelis Voorwald, Luiz Fábio Dos Santos Vieira, Walter Luis Pigatin.
An Investigation of Electrolytic Surface Damages and Electroplated Crhomium Effects on Fatigue Behavior of High Strength
Steel . [Crossref]
5. M.P. Peres, H.J.C. Voorwald. Effect of Cadmium Deposition on Fatigue Strength of 4340 Steel 1421-1426. [Crossref]
Downloaded by University of British Columbia Library At 05:42 04 January 2019 (PT)