69023

AVERAGE GUST FREQUENCIES. SUBSONIC TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT

1. NOTATION

a rate of change of wing lift coefficient with incidence, rad–1 rad–1

corrected for Mach number

A aspect ratio

b wing span m ft

c geometric mean chord, S/b m ft

d gust gradient distance for unswept wings m ft

de effective gust gradient distance for swept wings given by m ft

b
d e = d + --- tan Λ
2

D distance flown in a given flight stage km n miles

fc cumulative frequency

f1 natural frequency of wing in first bending mode Hz cycles/s

FM gust alleviation factor in compressible flow for ramp shaped

gust defined in Section 2 (iv)

F0 gust alleviation factor in incompressible flow for ramp

shaped gust defined in Section 2 (iv)

g gravitational acceleration m/s2 ft/s2

Hp pressure altitude m ft

k ratio of up-gusts to down-gusts

l 10 average distance flown to meet an up- or down-gust of km n miles

v e ≥ 10 ft/s (3.05 m/s)

M bending moment Nm lbf in

Mm mean bending moment (1g level flight) Nm lbf in

M max , M min maximum and minimum bending moments, respectively Nm lbf in

∆M change in bending moment, (Mmax – Mm) for an up-gust or Nm lbf in

(Mm – Mmin) for a down-gust

( ∆M ) 10 value of ∆M arising from a 10 ft/s (3.05 m/s) up-gust Nm lbf in

Issued September 1969

With Amendments A to D, March 1989
1
 69023
r relative gust frequency expressed as ratio of gusts ≥ v e to
gusts ≥ 10 ft/s (3.05 m/s)

∆n increment of normal load factor

S wing area (associated with wing lift coefficient) m2 ft2

v true airspeed of gust m/s ft/s

ve equivalent airspeed of gust, v σ m/s ft/s

Ve equivalent airspeed of aircraft m/s ft/s

W weight of aircraft N lbf

Λ angle of sweep of wing 1/4 chord line relative to aircraft degrees degrees
transverse (pitching) axis

ρ air density kg/m3 slugs/ft3

ρ0 standard sea-level air density kg/m3 slugs/ft3

σ relative density, ρ/ρ 0

Suffixes

d relates to a down-gust

u relates to an up-gust

fl indicates per flight

Both SI and British units are quoted.

2. GENERAL NOTES

The results presented have been derived from the accelerometer, VG and VGH records reported in
Derivations 2 to 18 summarised in Table 7.1. These data are drawn mainly from subsonic transport aircraft
in scheduled operations and should therefore be used with discretion for aircraft otherwise engaged. The
balance of the data represents either special gust investigations at high and low altitude, or contour flying.

In converting accelerations to the gust velocities used in Figures 1 to 6, the procedure of Derivation 1 has
been followed and the following assumptions have been made.

(i) The gust produces an increase of lift on the wing alone.

(ii) The aircraft is rigid and can rise vertically but does not pitch.

2
 69023
(iii) The equivalent airspeed of the gust, v e , is given by the formulae

½ρ 0 V e SaF0 ve
∆n = ----------------------------------- for incompressible flow , (2.1)
W
½ρ 0 V e SaFM ve
∆n = ------------------------------------- for compressible flow . (2.2)
W

(iv) The gust alleviation factors F0 and FM are given by Figure 7, which assumes that the gust velocity
rises linearly from zero to ve in distance de , and thereafter remains constant.

(v) The gust gradient distance, d = 100 ft or 30.5 m.

(vi) The effective gust gradient distance for a swept wing aircraft is given by

b
de = d + --- tan Λ . (2.3)
2

No direct allowance has been made for structural flexibility, which can increase both wing strains and the
accelerations at the aircraft centre of gravity from which the gust data are derived. An indirect allowance
is made in that the dynamic characteristics of the aircraft studied were similar, and wing strains determined
on the basis of the above assumptions generally agree with measured values. These data can therefore be
used to calculate gust loads on other similar aircraft provided the same assumptions are made.

In deciding whether or not a given aircraft is effectively similar to those from which the present data were
obtained, consideration must be given to the centre of gravity accelerations caused by turbulence. A flexible
aircraft, subject to the ramp gust defined in (iv) above, may be treated as a simple mass-spring system
having a natural frequency equal to the frequency f1 of the aircraft wing in the fundamental bending mode.
For such a system dynamic effects may be neglected provided that the time taken for the gust to reach its
peak value is greater than about 0.75 × the wing period in bending.

The concept is represented by the expression*

dσ ½f
---------------1- > 0.75 , (2.4)
Ve

which, for d = 100 ft (30.5 m), is given by the area below the lower bound of the shaded areas in Sketch
2.1 below. As the rise time of the gust is reduced, dynamic overswing increases, becoming appreciable
when*

dσ ½f
---------------1- ≤ 0.5 . (2.5)
Ve

This expression, represented by the area above the bold curves in Sketch 2.1, defines those combinations
of Ve and Hp for which the rigid body theory used in the gust analysis becomes unsuitable.

*
These expressions are deduced in Appendix A.

3
 69023
Hp km
0 3 6 9 12 15 18
1000 300
kts
500
800 240 K e y to the F igure

400 f1 G U S T D ATA L E S S
R E L IA B L E H ER E
600 180 R igid body theory
Ve Ve G ust data unsuitable. D ynam ic
300 5
ft / s m/s valid but som e e ffects
a llow ance for a ppreciable
400 120
200 oversw ing
D ynam ic
3 desirable.
e ffects sm all and
200 60 c om parable w ith those
100 of aircraft in Table 1.
1

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Hp + 10-3 ft

Sketch 2.1

It should be emphasised that the curves of Sketch 2.1, relating as they do to the gust defined arbitrarily by
assumption (iv) above, provide a general rather than a specific indication of the influence of dynamic effects
on a given aircraft or operation. Similarly, they concern centre of gravity accelerations only.

In considering the effects of flexibility on wing stresses account should be taken not only of resonant modes
other than the wing fundamental, but also of the possibility of significant dynamic stresses in those regions
where the rigid body assumption is acceptable for the correlation of centre of gravity accelerations. Note
also that a single gust load cycle may give rise to a number of stress cycles when wing resonance is excited
in any mode, thus destroying the direct relationship between the frequencies of occurrence of stress and
gust that exists for the rigid body case.

3. NOTES ON THE CURVES

Figures 1 and 2 show the average distance flown by aircraft without cloud warning radar at various altitudes
in order to experience a positive or negative gust ≥ 10 ft/s E.A.S. (3.05 m/s). The aircraft are listed in
Table 7.1. The curves represent an overall average drawn through the mean of the data for the various
altitude bands as shown in Figure 3. A distinction is made in Figures 1 and 2 between data obtained in
climb and descent as compared with cruise, and between general operations, those carried out exclusively
over the sea, and those obtained on special missions. The special missions data are taken from special
investigations of gust frequencies at high and low altitude by military aircraft, and contour flying by civil
aircraft. The averages given in Figure 3 for scheduled transport aircraft take climb, descent and cruise
together above 5000 ft (1500 m) but separate curves are given below this altitude to identify the more severe
loading experienced during stand-off cruise. A separate curve is also given for aircraft cruising at altitudes
of less than 10 000 ft (3050 m) over the sea, but frequencies above this altitude are essentially given by the
overall average curve. The curve given for special missions should be regarded as tentative owing to
uncertainty regarding the manoeuvre load contributions.

4
 69023
Figure 3, in addition to summarising the data of Figures 1 and 2, also presents data for aircraft fitted with
cloud warning radar. The curve that has been drawn through these data blends with the overall average
curve at 5000 ft (1500 m).

In determining fatigue load spectra it is normally acceptable to assume that each up-gust is followed by a
down-gust of equal magnitude. The distance flown to experience a gust cycle ≥ ± 10 ft/s (3.05 m/s) is, on
this basis, twice the value of l10 given by Figures 1, 2 and 3. However, the values of the ratio of up-gusts
to down-gusts plotted in Figure 4 show that there is a positive bias to loading spectra for altitudes lower
than about 10 000 ft (3050 m). Where this becomes appreciable, as at low altitudes, it should be taken into
account, and for this purpose it may be assumed that the curve given applies for all values of ve . It is likely
that the positive bias results partly from manoeuvring accelerations associated with take-off and landing,
and it is assumed that this is a consistent feature of scheduled transport operations.

The relative frequencies of occurrence of gusts of various magnitudes are given in Figures 5 and 6
respectively for aircraft with and without cloud warning radar. Note that for both cases the maximum relative
frequencies usually occur in the intermediate altitude range (see the dashed curves for 17 500 ft (5250 m)).
These data can be used with those of Figures 1 to 4 to predict the number of gusts of each magnitude likely
to be reached or exceeded on a given flight path.

In Figure 7, the gust alleviating factor for incompressible flow is plotted against the aircraft mass parameter
for a range of wing aspect ratios and values of c/d e . A correction factor, dependent on Mach number, is
given for the determination of the alleviating factor in compressible flow.

4. USE OF THE CURVES

The example, Section 6, illustrates how the curves of Figures 1 to 7 may be employed to compile cumulative
frequency gust spectra for a wing. The example chosen has been deliberately kept short and is only intended
to illustrate the basic procedure. In practice, more flight stages may be introduced and different flight
patterns investigated. The example is presented in terms of a wing bending moment but in some cases it
may be more convenient to consider other parameters. In all cases it is necessary to repeat the calculation
for various sections along a wing to obtain a complete picture of the overall fatigue loading.

In order to facilitate calculations, Appendix B provides equations for the curves of Figures 5 and 6. The
equations only apply over the regions covered by the curves on their respective figures and may become
unreliable if extrapolated beyond those regions.

5. DERIVATION

This section lists selected sources that have assisted in the preparation of this Item.

1. ZBROZEK, J.K. Gust alleviation factor. ARC R & M 2970, May 1953.
2. HEATH-SMITH, J.R. Atmospheric turbulence encountered by a Hunter aircraft at low
altitude. RAE Tech. Note Structures 245, July 1958.
3. HEATH-SMITH, J.R. Atmospheric turbulence encountered by Super Constellation aircraft.
ARC CP 432, January 1959.
4. COPP, M.R. Analysis of acceleration, airspeed, and gust-velocity data from a
FENER, M.W. four-engine turboprop transport operating over the Eastern United
States. NASA Tech. Note D-36, September 1959.

5
 69023
5. COLEMAN, T.L. Atmospheric turbulence measurements obtained from airplane
STEINER, R. operations at altitudes between 20 000 and 75 000 ft for several areas in
the northern hemisphere. NASA Tech. Note D-548, October 1960.
6. SEWELL, R.T. Atmospheric turbulence encountered by a Fairchild C-119 aircraft over
the Canadian Arctic. NRC, NAE Aeronaut. Rep. LR-290, November
1960.
7. SEWELL, R.T. Atmospheric turbulence encountered by a Britannia aircraft on Polar
and North Pacific routes. NRC, NAE Aeronaut. Rep. LR-301, March
1961.
8. WELLS, E.W. Low-altitude gust measurements over three routes in the UK. RAE
Tech. Note Structures 320, October 1962.
9. APLIN, J.E. Atmospheric turbulence encountered by Comet 2 aircraft carrying cloud
collision warning radar. ARC CP 713, June 1963.
10. HUNTER, P.A. An analysis of VG and VGH operational data from a twin-engine
WALKER, W.G. turboprop transport airplane. NASA Tech. Note D-1925, July 1963.
11. BULLEN, N.I. A review of information on the frequency of gusts at low altitude. RAE
Tech. Rep. 65141, July 1965.
12. BULLEN, N.I. A review of counting accelerometer data on aircraft gust loads. RAE
Tech. Rep. 66234, July 1966.
13. SEWELL, R.T. Low altitude flight load spectra for light aircraft. NRC, NAE Aeronaut.
Rep. LR-495, December 1967.
14. HUNTER, P.A. An analysis of VGH data from one type of four-engine turbojet
transport airplane during commercial operations. NASA Tech. Note
D-4330, February 1968.
15. BULLEN, N.I. Loads experienced in turbulence by a Central African Airways Viscount
APLIN, J.E. with and without cloud warning radar. RAE Tech. Rep. 68065, March
1968.
16. BURNHAM, J. Atmospheric turbulence and the SST: A review in the light of recent
research. RAE Tech. Rep. 68096, April 1968.
17. HUNTER, P.A. Summary of VGH data collected on one type of twin-engine jet airplane
BRAZZIEL, M.E. during airline operations. NASA Tech. Note D-4529, May 1968.
18. – Unpublished data from the RAE on the Comet 4. August 1969.

6. EXAMPLE

It is required to generate cumulative frequency versus wing root bending moment curves for an aircraft.
The aircraft has a wing area of 200 m2, a wing span of 41.24 m and a wing sweep angle on the 1/4 chord
line of 30 degrees. The flight plan details are provided in the first 9 columns of Table 6.1. The aircraft is
assumed not to carry cloud warning radar.

6.1 Calculation Procedure

The gust data presented are normalised with respect to the 10 ft/s (3.05 m/s) gust. The first step is therefore

6
 69023
to calculate the incremental normal load factor arising from such a gust ( ∆n )10 , using Equation (2.2), and
to determine the bending moment increment generated by it, ( ∆M )10 . A maximum bending moment, Mmax ,
greater than Mm is then chosen and the bending moment increment ( M max – M m ) = ∆M is calculated. The
ratio ∆M / ( ∆M )10 is then used to factor the 10 ft/s (3.05 m/s) gust to obtain the gust velocity, ve , required
to generate Mmax . Values of the relative gust frequency, r, at ve are then read from Figures 5 or 6 and values
of l10 , the distance flown to meet a 10 ft/s (3.05 m/s) gust, are read from Figures 1, 2 or 3. The product of
r and the number of gusts of velocity ≥ v e that occur in the flight stage, D/l10 , gives the cumulative
frequency, fc . This is further factored using k, read from Figure 4, to account for the proportion of up-gusts
to yield ( f c )u . If a value of Mmin is chosen then ∆M is (Mm – Mmin) giving a new value of ve and hence r
which is factored using k to account for the proportion of down-gusts to obtain ( fc )d .

Table 6.1 lists the calculation steps for determining FM , k, D/l10 and ( ∆M )10 . Note that these values are
independent of the bending moment level chosen, being functions of the aircraft geometry, mass, flight
plan and 1g bending moment level only. Table 6.2 sets out the calculation of ( f c )u for a maximum bending
moment of 5.5 MN m and ( fc )d for a minimum bending moment of 2.5 MN m. Table 6.2 can be repeated
for as many bending moment levels as desired. This has been done for 10 levels and Table 6.3 lists the
values of ( fc )u and ( fc )d for a range of maximum and minimum bending moments. The values listed in
Table 6.3 are plotted in Sketch 6.1 to give bending moment against total cumulative frequency curves. By
selecting the values of ( fc )d obtained for one flight stage only the bending moment against cumulative
frequency curve for that flight stage can also be drawn. Sketch 6.1 shows the stage 5 curve obtained in this
fashion.

7
 TABLE 6.1 Calculation of Gust Parameters for a Particular Flight Plan 
Flight D Hp W Mm a Ve Mach 2W l10 ( ∆M )10
σ ------------------- F0 FM /F0 FM k D/l10 ( ∆n ) 10
stage (km) (m) (kN) (MN m) (rad–1) (m/s) number ρ0 σSac (km) (MN m)

(1) (2) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

1 6.5 460 0.957 1133 3.996 4.70 168 0.310 43.2 0.843 0.975 0.823 2.23 5.2 1.251 0.214 0.855

2 16 1525 0.862 1131 3.990 4.80 190 0.375 46.9 0.852 0.969 0.825 1.63 22.0 0.7275 0.248 0.990

3 48 3350 0.716 1123 3.960 4.87 200 0.435 55.3 0.869 0.962 0.835 1.24 103.4 0.4642 0.271 1.073

4 63 6100 0.533 1113 3.925 5.12 220 0.575 70.0 0.889 0.943 0.839 1.07 410.0 0.1537 0.317 1.244

5 61 9150 0.373 1104 3.891 5.60 220 0.720 90.2 0.908 0.920 0.836 1.05 998.0 0.0611 0.349 1.358

6 2013 10 700 0.310 990.8 3.496 5.91 220 0.800 92.8 0.910 0.906 0.825 1.02 1356.0 1.4815 0.404 1.412

7 60 9150 0.375 880.9 3.108 5.34 195 0.650 75.7 0.896 0.932 0.835 1.05 998.0 0.0601 0.368 1.144

8 60 6100 0.533 876.0 3.089 5.00 192 0.505 56.4 0.870 0.953 0.830 1.07 410.0 0.1463 0.339 1.047

8
9 43 3350 0.716 870.1 3.069 4.81 185 0.410 43.4 0.844 0.965 0.814 1.24 103.4 0.4158 0.311 0.954

10 24 1525 0.862 866.2 3.055 4.70 160 0.310 36.7 0.825 0.975 0.804 1.63 22.0 1.0912 0.261 0.797

11 22 460 0.957 861.3 3.039 4.63 180 0.240 33.4 0.813 0.982 0.798 2.23 5.2 4.2340 0.288 0.875

(1) Use of Figure 7 to obtain FM requires evaluation of (2) Obtained from Figure 7.
2W c (3) Obtained from Figure 4.
----------------, ----- and A.
gρSac de
(4) Obtained from Figure 3, curve number (i). (Note that the introduction of more flight
From the given data c = S/b = 200/41.24 = 4.85 .
stages would allow use of the curves of Figure 1 and other curves of Figure 3.)
Then, given ρ0 = 1.225 kg/m3 , the first expression becomes
(5) The normal load arising from a 3.05 m/s gust is given by Equation (2.2) as
2W –4 W
----------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 1.716 × 10 ------ . 0.5 × 1.225 × Ve × 200 × a × FM × 3.05 373.6Ve aFM
9.81 × 1.225 × σ × 200 × a × 4.85 σa ( ∆n ) 10 = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = -------------------------------- .
From Equation (2.3) W W
b 41.24 (6) ( ∆M )10 = M m × ( ∆n )10 .
d e = d + --- tan Λ = 30.5 + ------------- tan 30 = 42.4 m
2 2
so that c/de = 4.85/42.4 = 0.114 .
Finally, A = 41.24/4.85 = 8.5.
69023
 69023
TABLE 6.2 Calculation of the Cumulative Frequency of Occurrence of the Bending Moments 5.5 and
2.5 MN m
Mmax = 5.5 MN m Mmin = 2.5 MN m
Flight (ve)u r ( f c) u (ve)d r ( f c) d
stage (m/s) (m/s)
(1) (3) (4) (2) (3) (5)
1 5.4 0.0612 0.0528 5.3 0.0629 0.0243
2 4.6 0.1367 0.0616 4.6 0.147 0.0407
3 4.4 0.2147 0.0552 4.2 0.271 0.0560
4 3.9 0.389 0.0309 3.5 0.581 0.0430
5 3.6 0.474 0.0148 3.1 0.878 0.0262
6 4.3 0.214 0.1600 2.2 3.800 2.7900
7 6.4 0.0323 0.0010 1.6 9.980 0.2931
8 7.0 0.0319 0.0024 1.7 9.270 0.6545
9 7.8 0.0130 0.0030 1.8 6.530 1.2090
10 9.4 0.001 36 0.0009 2.1 3.510 1.4560
11 8.6 0.002 66 0.0078 1.9 5.030 6.5871
Σ= 0.3904 Σ= 13.1799

( M max – M m ) × 3.05
(1) ( ve )u = ------------------------------------------------- .
( ∆M m ) 10
( M m – Mmin ) × 3.05
(2) ( ve )d = ------------------------------------------------ .
( ∆M m )10
(3) Obtained from Figure 5 for ve and flight stage Hp (see Table 6.1).
D k
(4) ( f c ) u =  ------ r  ------------- .
 l   1 + k
10
D k
(5) ( f c ) d =  ------ r  1 – ------------- .
l   1 + k
10

TABLE 6.3 Cumulative Frequencies Obtained by Repeating the Calculations of Table 6.2 for a Range of
Bending Moments
M max M min
( f c) u ( f c) d
(MN m) (MN m)
4.50 > 16.40 2.75 > 30.12
4.75 5.259 2.50 13.18
5.00 1.961 2.25 4.189
5.25 0.8294 2.00 1.552
5.50 0.3904 1.50 0.3106
6.00 0.1102 1.00 0.08896
6.50 0.03736 0.50 0.03064
7.00 0.01396 0 0.01115
7.50 0.005320 –0.50 0.00407
8.00 0.001880 –1.00 0.001530

9
 

10
Cumulative frequency
Sketch 6.1
69023
 7. TABLES

TABLE 7.1
Scope of the data

Climb and descent Cruise

Symbol Aircraft Total Routes Notes
Mean altitude × 10–3 Total Mean altitude × 10–3
distance distance
Derivation

ft m × 10–3 ft m × 10–3
n miles n miles
A Ambassador 1.0–14.9 0.3– 4.5 56.3 0.5–15.3 0.2– 4.7 116.9 Europe Records throughout year 12
B Bristol Freighter 0.6– 4.4 0.2– 1.3 11.9 0.8– 6.0 0.2– 1.8 44.6 English Channel Mainly March – August 12
C Comet 1 1.0–34.8 0.3–10.6 220.6 0.9–38.6 0.3–11.8 387.4 Europe, Middle East, Records throughout year 12
Africa
C' Comet 2 1.0–43.5 0.3–13.2 54.2 1.0–43.5 0.3–13.2 212.4 Mainly UK–Singapore Flying mostly around 40 000 ft 9
D Bristol Freighter 0.8– 7.0 0.2– 2.1 15.2 1.0–10.6 0.3– 3.2 65.0 New Zealand Below 5000 ft over sea. Above 12
5000 ft over land
E Hermes 4A 1.0–10.5 0.3– 3.2 44.7 0.9–10.3 0.3– 3.1 384.8 Europe–Middle East– Records throughout year 12

11
India–Singapore
F Hermes 4 0.9–16.0 0.3– 4.9 47.2 0.9–18.5 0.3– 5.6 322.6 W. Europe to Nigeria Mainly April – October 12
or S.E. Africa
G Stratocruiser 1.0–18.8 0.3– 5.7 88.7 1.0–22.9 0.3– 7.0 659.5 UK to US and Canada Operation entirely over sea 12
Weighted slightly Aug. – Oct.
H Super Constellation 1.0–18.1 0.3– 5.5 53.4 1.0–18.7 0.3– 5.7 666.2 Australia to UK, Operations mainly over sea 3
US and S. Africa Records throughout year
I Viking 0.6– 6.8 0.2– 2.1 20.4 0.9–10.1 0.3– 3.1 81.8 Europe Records throughout year 12
J Viking 1.0–10.6 0.3– 3.2 15.3 1.0–14.0 0.3– 4.3 59.5 Southern Africa Terrain generally 3–6000 ft 12
from Rhodesia
K Viscount 1.0–26.9 0.3– 8.2 225.2 0.9–26.5 0.3– 8.1 471.0 Europe Records throughout year 12
L Viscount 1.0–18.7 0.3– 5.7 25.2 0.8–22.8 0.2– 6.9 52.6 Southern Africa Terrain generally 3–6000 ft. 12
from Rhodesia Records throughout year
M Canberra 0.2– 0.6 0.1– 0.2 165.2 North Africa Low terrain and over sea 11
Records throughout year
N Aztec 0.15 0.04 110.0 Central and Eastern Records throughout year 13
Canada
69023
 TABLE 7.1 (Continued)
Scope of the data

Climb and descent Cruise
Symbol Aircraft Total Routes Notes
Mean altitude × 10–3 Total Mean altitude × 10–3
distance distance

Derivation
ft m × 10–3 ft m × 10–3
n miles n miles
φ Sabre 5, T-33 0.50 0.15 20.8 Eastern Canada Mainly May – October 13

P Aero Commander 1.0 0.3 39.6 Western Canada Contour flying, mountainous 13
terrain, April – August
Q Viscount 1.0–18.7 0.3– 5.7 85.5 0.9–26.0 0.3– 7.9 207.0 Southern Africa As for L above 15
from Rhodesia
R DC-8 31.3–32.4 9.5– 9.9 1329.0 Eastern US and Records throughout year 14
Carribean
S BAC 1-11 17.5–22.5 5.3– 6.9 187.0 Central US Mainly April – July 17
T Friendship 2.5–17.5 0.8– 5.3 191.5 Eastern US Records throughout year 10
U U-2 55.0 16.8 23.6 Japan Records throughout year. Also 5

12
one 10 ft/s gust in 82 000
n miles over US and Europe
V Hunter 0.5 0.15 7.4 S. England and July – April only 2
English Channel Windy days favoured
W Canberra 0.2 0.06 7.0 S. and E. England Contour flying 8
and Wales Records throughout year
X Britannia 2.8–16.7 0.6– 5.1 3.8 17.7–30.6 5.4– 9.3 49.5 N. Pacific and N. Pacific route entirely over 7
N. Pole sea. May – December only
Y Viscount 14.1 4.3 279.0 Eastern US Records throughout year 4
Z U-2 52.5 16.0 57.0 US, Australia and 16
New Zealand
α Canberra 36.0 11.0 7.4 Australia July – September only 12

β C-119 0.5–11.0 0.15–3.4 10.4 Mainly Canadian Arctic July, August only 6

γ Comet 4 0.8–37.5 0.2–11.4 151.9 1.0–37.5 0.3–11.4 325.7 Europe, Middle East, Records throughout year 18
Africa
69023
 69023

Hp m

0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800

103
Aircraft Derivation
8
A Ambassador 12
6
B Br. Freighter 12 103
5 C Comet 1 12
4 D Br. Freighter 12
E Hermes 12
3 F Hermes 12 B
G Stratocruiser 12 ~
H Super Const'n 3
2 I Viking 12
J Viking 12
K Viscount 12
L Viscount 12
M Canberra 11
102 N Aztec 13
φ Sabre, T33 13
8 β
P Aero Commander 13
V Hunter 2 β
6 W Canberra 8 Overall average. Aircraft
M 102
5
~ x Britannia 7 operated exclusively over
β C−119 6 the sea
4
K
O A
3
OH F,I
OB β
OC
2
B OH O G
~ KOOH OF
B BO A
OB OJ
V ~ G OA D GO
I
101 ~ OH ~O
OOE,H
O H,2 D GOO C
8 D I CO β L OK
OK
C
G ~
O O H,2O
O
O A
OL
6 D F J
~O G β K O OH 101
l10
5
OB OA OI G xO
K OJ
4
OL
O E l10
G OK J
n miles M
OG OOD
3
OH F D,K O L km
OH OK
I
GO O O K P x EO OL C
2 OI O
OK O G L OL
OD O O
OH,3
A
OF
J OL
V C L
β L
O
100 C
Special missions
8 OL Stand-off cruise Climb and descent
M OL
M M including contour flying
OL Overall average. Scheduled
F
6 transport aircraft
W 100
5 OE E
E OJ
4 N φ

3 Other Operations Scheduled

L or Special Transport
Gust Missions
2
 Climb and descent
+  Cruise
Operations over
~ ~ the sea
10−1
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0

Hp x 10−3 ft

FIGURE 1 AVERAGE GUST FREQUENCIES

13
 69023

Hp+km z
+11 600
0 3 6 9 12 15 18
104
8
Overall average. Aircraft with
6 cloud warning radar 104
5
4

3
Overall average. Scheduled transport
2 aircraft without cloud warning radar
S
U

103 β CO
C
OC
8 OC x
R
6 OC C
x
R α 103
5 L R
OK
4 A H x
xO ~
3 β K
Aircraft Derivation
A F
L x
~ O ~G O H2 Hx
2 H G K
H
A Ambassador 12
x C~ C
~
H2 B Br. Freighter 12
~G F L O F ~
~G O
C
~x C Comet 1 12
F OC C
β
K H ~K D Br. Freighter 12 l10
102 A E Hermes 12

l10
8
E H OK
F Hermes 12 km
I C ~ ~
G G Stratocruiser 12
6 HO E H3
H Super Const'n 3
n miles G K D OG
OK Ox 102
5
B
~ OH O OA
~ H
I Viking 12
4 ~ O
A I
E
K
J Viking 12
O H OL OK K Viscount 12
D O OL
3 E OO L OF L Viscount 12
O
I O F R DC-8 14
G
O OF
H
S BAC 1-11 17
2
OO
OK A T Friendship 10
Ox J G
J ~O U U-2 5
J x Britannia 7
C
O
OH Y Viscount 4
T
10 Ox Z U-2 16
OJ
8 α Canberra 12
β C-119 6
6
OJ 10
5
4 OG
Other Operations Scheduled
3 KO or Special Transport
Gust Missions
 Climb and descent
2
+  Cruise
Operations over
OL
~ ~ the sea

1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
−3
Hp ++10 ft

FIGURE 2 AVERAGE GUST FREQUENCIES

14
 69023

FIGURE 3 GUST FREQUENCIES. OVERALL AVERAGES

15
 69023

Symbol ve

ft/s m/s

+ 10 3.05
x 20 6.10


25
30 9.15


Hp km
0 3 6 9 12
3

x
x
2

k x x

x
1 x
Mean curve through
x
10 and 20 ft/s data

0
0 10 20 30 40

Hp x 10−3 ft

FIGURE 4 RATIO OF UP-GUSTS TO DOWN-GUSTS

16
 69023
ve m/s
0 1.5 3.0 4.5 6.0 7.5 9.0 10.5
10 2

6
5
4

2 Hp +10−3
17.5
30 - 40
101 0-5
8

6
5
4

For values of Hp between

5000 and 17 500 ft
10
10 (1500 and 5250 m) and
8 between 17 500 and 30 000 ft
(5250 and 9000 m) interpolate
6
linearly.
5
4
−3
3
Hp + 10 Curve reference
r numbers, see
ft m Appendix B
2 0-5 0 - 1.5 5.1
17.5 5.25 5.2
30 - 40 9 - 12 5.3
10−1
8

6
5
4

10−2
8

6
5
4

10−3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

ve ft/s

FIGURE 5 RELATIVE GUST FREQUENCIES (Aircraft without cloud warning radar)

17
 69023
Ve m/s
0 1.5 3.0 4.5 6.0 7.5 9.0 10.5
102
8

6
5
4
Hp + 10−3
3
30 - 40

17.5
101
8

6 0-5
5
4

For values of Hp between

5000 and 17 500 ft
1010 (1500 and 5250 m) and
8 between 17 500 and 30 000 ft
(5250 and 9000 m) interpolate
6
linearly.
5
4
−3 Curve reference
3 Hp + 10
numbers, see
r
ft m Appendix B
2 0-5 0 - 1.5 6.1
17.5 5.25 6.2
30 - 40 9 - 12 6.3
10−1
8

6
5
4

10−2
8

6
5
4 Hp + 10−3
3 17.5

30 - 40 0-5
10−3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

ve ft/s
FIGURE 6 RELATIVE GUST FREQUENCIES (Aircraft with cloud warning radar)

18
 69023
1.0

1.00
0.9

0.95 0.8
c / de
FM /F0
0.7 0.30
0.90 F0 0.20
0.10
0.6 0.05
0.85 0.03
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.5
Mach number A=3

0.4

1.0
10 100
2W / gρSac
0.9 1.0

0.8 0.9
c / de

0.30 0.8
0.7 c / de
F0 0.20
0.10
0.05 0.7 0.30
0.6 F0 0.20
0.03
0.10
0.05
0.6
0.5 0.03
A=9

0.5
0.4 A=0

0.4
10 100
2W / gρSac
10 100
1.0
2W / gρSac
1.0
0.9

0.9
0.8
c / de
0.8
0.30 c / de
0.7
F0 0.20
0.10 0.7 0.30
0.05 F0 0.20
0.6
0.03 0.10
0.05
0.6
0.03
0.5
A=6
0.5
0.4 A=

0.4
10 100
2W / gρSac
10 100
2W / gρSac

FIGURE 7 ALLEVIATING FACTOR FOR VERTICAL GUSTS

19
 69023
APPENDIX A

A1. DISCUSSION OF OVERSWING

The curves below show how the maximum inertia force qmax in a simple undamped mass-spring system
depends on the relationship between the rise time, t0 , of the externally applied force P and the natural
period of oscillation T of the system. The maximum inertia force for a given set of conditions usually occurs
when time, t > t 0 , and tends to P0 as t 0 /T → 0 . This is the familiar result that the total elastic force
P0 + q max = 2P 0 when P 0 is applied suddenly.

The broken curves A and B from an example by Williams (see Reference A2), show how aerodynamic
damping affects the response of a typical aircraft wing (otherwise idealised as a mass-spring system) to
gust loading whose variation with time corresponds to P0 . The wing fundamental frequency is taken as 3
cycles/s and the gust gradient distance as 100 ft (30.5 m). Curve A relates to sea level and curve B to 40 000
ft (12 000 m), and it can be seen that the effect of damping, though appreciable at sea level, reduces rapidly
with altitude. The curve for the undamped system can therefore be used to provide a slightly conservative
estimate of the inertia force on an aircraft subject to a gust of the above type.

0.3

20
 69023
Now Reference A1, in examining the response of three typical aircraft ( f1 = 4.36, 3.41 and 2.48 cycles/s)
to gust loads, reports on flight load measurements carried out in turbulence, showing that the dynamic
overswing (corresponding to qmax /P0 above) was on average 0.05, 0.20 and 0.28 respectively. It seems
likely that these figures would be typical of many of the transport aircraft in Table 7.1.

Overswing up to a value of 0.3 has thus been neglected in correlating the equivalent gust data, but inertia
loading greater than this signifies a departure from the type of aircraft or operation on which the gust data
are based. This threshold corresponds on the above Figure to a value t0/T = 0.75, equal to dσ ½f 1 /V e for
an idealised aircraft subject to the ramp gust defined in Section 2. When t0 /T = dσ ½ f1 /V e ≤ 0.5 , the effect
of dynamic loading on centre of gravity accelerations becomes appreciable, and would appear to demand
specific consideration.

The curves in Section 2 of this Item are based on these values of t0 /T.

A2. REFERENCES

A1. HOUBOLT, J.C. Structural response to discrete and continuous gusts of an airplane
KORDES, E.E. having wing-bending flexibility and a correlation of calculated and
flight results. NACA Rep. 1181, 1954.
A2. WILLIAMS, D. An introduction to the theory of aircraft structures. Chapters 10 and 11,
pp. 322-381, Edward Arnold Ltd, London, 1960.

21
 69023
APPENDIX B

B1. EQUATIONS FOR THE CURVES

This Appendix provides equations for the curves presented in Figures 5 and 6. The equations are all
polynominals of the following form

Log10 ( r ) = A 0 + A 1 t + A 2 t2 + A 3 t3 .... An t n , (B1.1)

where t = αve – β (B1.2)

and ve is in m/s. Table B1.1 lists the coefficients of Equations (B1.1) and (B1.2) for the six curves and
identifies them by a number quoted against the description of the curves on the figures. The equations are
only valid within the region covered by the appropriate curves and may become unreliable if extrapolated.

TABLE B1.1
Curve
5.1 5.2 5.3 6.1 6.2 6.3
number
α 0.437 445 0.437 445 0.437 445 0.524 934 0.524 934 0.656 168
β 2.666 667 2.666 667 2.666 667 2.8 2.8 3.0
A0 –1.524 576 –1.153 700 –1.365 450 –1.305 688 –0.952 262 –0.844 664
A1 –1.005 127 –6.982 384E–001 –8.398 582E–001 –9.670 480E–001 –6.926 968E–001 –8.369 762E–001
A2 1.122 618E–001 3.624 622E–002 7.075 122E–002 9.234 943E–002 –2.483 371E–002 –1.048 874E–003
A3 –1.386 327E–002 –4.226 299E–002 –6.446 210E–002 –5.289 779E–002 –5.062 416E–002 1.180 744E–002
A4 –3.081 392E–002 1.294 762E–002 2.186 136E–003 –2.401 166E–003 3.588 339E–002 –2.349 635E–002
A5 –1.520 498E–003 –9.370 764E–005 1.751 922E–002 3.570 518E–002 –2.114 858E–003 –2.115 853E–002
A6 1.012 578E–002 1.660 147E–003 1.781 410E–003 –1.520 816E–003 –3.277 802E–003 2.981 523E–002
A7 4.961 413E–004 –9.756 458E–004 –3.054 754E–003 –4.958 010E–003 2.204 236E–003
A8 –1.021 430E–003 –4.729 060E–003

22
 69023
THE PREPARATION OF THIS DATA ITEM

The work on this particular Item was monitored and guided by the Fatigue Committee which has the
following constitution:

Chairman
Mr J.A.B. Lambert – British Aerospace, Hatfield-Chester Division

Vice-Chairman
Mr W.T. Kirkby – Royal Aircraft Establishment, Farnborough

Members
Mr K.E. Cheverton – Rolls-Royce Ltd, Bristol Engine Division, Filton
Mr H.L. Cox – Independent
Dr M.S.G. Cullimore – University of Bristol
Mr A.D. Hall – Westland Aircraft Ltd
Mr N.H. Mason – Consulting Engineer
Mr L.F. Nicholls – British Aerospace, Weybridge-Bristol Division
Mr H.E. Parish – British Aerospace, Warton Division
Dr Ing. W. Schütz* – Industrieanlagen-Betriebsgesellschaft mbH, München, W. Germany
Mr T. Swift* – Douglas Aircraft Co., Long Beach, USA
Dr R.N. Wilson – Royal Aircraft Establishment, Farnborough
*
Corresponding Member

The work on this Item was carried out in the Strength Analysis Group of ESDU. The members of staff who
undertook the technical work involved in the initial assessment of the available information and the
construction and subsequent development of the Item were

Mr M.B. Benoy – Senior Engineer

Mr M.E. Grayley – Group Head.

23