Criteria

Text:
Display:

Results

Viewing 4621 to 4650 of 4693
1941-01-01
Technical Paper
410040
H. Ledyard Towle
1940-01-01
Technical Paper
400155
D. W. SHERMAN
THE eventual solution to the question: “Shall it be of unit design or shall it have a separate frame?” will be known only when a complete understanding is reached of the ride problem, including car feel and quietness, and a better understanding is obtained of the structure's influence on these performance phases, Mr. Sherman believes. Such knowledge, he predicts, will result eventually in the lightest, least-expensive and best performing automobile, be it unitary in structure, conventional, or something as yet unconsidered. His paper brings out some of these considerations which have proved to be of paramount importance in research work conducted by his company. Pointing out that it is impossible to predict ahead of time just how a new car design will perform, he contends that it will be much easier to adjust the job to the best rigidity range with the separate-frame construction than with the unitary construction.
1940-01-01
Technical Paper
400168
THOMAS A. BISSELL
1940-01-01
Technical Paper
400119
H. B. Bartlett
1939-01-01
Technical Paper
390034
HOWARD KETCHAM
1939-01-01
Technical Paper
390019
V. E. Clark
1939-01-01
Technical Paper
390167
Edwin L. Allen
THE development in constructional design which appears to be nearest at hand is the so-called unit construction, Mr. Allen believes. Rear-engine mounting is inevitable, he reasons, if cars are to become more blunt of nose and more tapered at the tail, but the change-over will evolve slowly. Speculating on future body materials and processes, he first takes up the possibility of molding the complete body in large sections of some plastic material, giving his views on the improvements that must be made in the plastic materials and necessary changes in production equipment and processes. The three major periods - past, present, and future - are considered separately in the light of their influence upon: 1. The body engineer himself, his development, his ever-changing responsibilities and opportunities. 2. Constructional design and probable reasons for adopting each successive type of construction used. 3. Styling and contour changes, illustrating trends affecting outward appearance.
1939-01-01
Technical Paper
390162
Don R. Berlin, Peter F. Rossmann
AS a refinement that permits a smoother external or wetted surface of the airplane, and thus adds to aerodynamic cleanness, flush riveting of the plane's skin is of utmost importance, Mr. Berlin points out. The ultimate object of the research reported, he explains, was to outline the problem of determining and providing requisite tools. No attempt is made in his paper to treat the aerodynamics and strength characteristics of flush riveting. Among the phases of riveting that required careful analysis in the solution of the problem noted especially by Mr. Berlin are appearance, strength, processing methods, economics of production and sources for equipment and tools. Time studies were employed extensively, and close contact with the production departments was maintained in the work.
1939-01-01
Technical Paper
390184
W. D. Appel
MR. APPEL defines a frameless car as one in which the body is used as a structural member and in which the axles, engine, and steering gear are attached to the body, instead of having that unit used merely as a shell for passengers. The chief differences between frameless and conventional cars are summarized by stating that frameless cars: 1. weigh about 2% less; 2. cost less by somewhat more than 2% - where sufficient quantities are involved; 3. are definitely more rigid; 4. are necessary to obtain the lowest floor height; 5. cost no more to service; 6. are just as quiet on the road; and 7. do not involve higher insurance rates than conventional cars.
1938-01-01
Technical Paper
380014
P. E. Hawkins
1938-01-01
Technical Paper
380017
V. W. Whitmer
1938-01-01
Technical Paper
380070
Joseph Ledwinka
1937-01-01
Technical Paper
370131
Edward G. Budd
STREAMLINING, introduced into the aircraft industry because of practical necessity, became a no less compelling force in automobile body design. Even though the power saving is not as great as with aircraft, it improved the appearance of the car, and people wanted it. And so a force as great as necessity mothered invention. The body engineer must share the credit for the flowing lines of modern bodies with the steel industry for developing wide sheets of proper composition, with the press builders for producing the huge, powerful presses necessary, and with the ingenuity of the die makers. The all-steel body is discussed, explaining its greater strength and stiffness and stressing its ease of assembly into complete units that can be transported easily to assembly plants. Restraining factors in body design are given as what the public is prepared to accept and what it is commercially practicable for the manufacturer to produce.
1937-01-01
Technical Paper
370132
R. J. Minshall, John K. Ball, F. P. Laudan
THIS paper contains a general discussion of the problems involved in arriving at the final design of large airplanes having gross weights of 35,000 lb. up to approximately 100,000 lb. It deals with certain aerodynamic features that evidence themselves when airplanes are increased to the sizes just noted. Comments are made on wing-taper airfoil sections and the possibility of increasing the L/D in large airplanes, and on certain factors that enter into the control of large airplanes. A rather detailed account of structural considerations is undertaken; it shows the methods used by the aircraft designer in scaling up his ideas from airplanes of a year ago to the larger types to follow. Several types of aircraft construction are discussed, showing the advantages and disadvantages of each type. The question of strength-weight ratios also is discussed. The methods of analyzing semi-monocoque and pure monocoque structures are reviewed, and examples are given of the analysis procedure.
1937-01-01
Technical Paper
370137
Stanley E. Knauss
THE experience gained over a period of many years in the development of light-weight, high-strength structures is now finding its way into the bus industry. Investigation of present-day bus operations showed the need for a road vehicle that would carry the greatest possible payload of passengers with a smaller horsepower engine without dragging along a load of dead weight and useless structure that would eat up gasoline instead of miles. A motor coach is now available in which are incorporated aircraft materials, design, and construction features resulting in a vehicle that is approximately 1000 lb. lighter than the lightest conventional design with the same engine horsepower and seating accommodations. Motor-bus operators today can reduce costs by the use of light-weight equipment provided there is no sacrifice of strength and reliability.
1937-01-01
Technical Paper
370046
E. W. Winans
1937-01-01
Technical Paper
370194
John Oswald
1936-01-01
Technical Paper
360143
Don R. Berlin
THIS paper includes comments on advantages over other types of structure; adaptability to machine manufacture for production and design considerations to best accomplish normal life of structure which may be expected under continued service; and frequency of overhaul necessary to basic structure during life of airplane.
1936-01-01
Technical Paper
360148
Frank R. Fageol
THE successful development of the chassisless motorcoach and its relation to safety, weight reduction and automotive design are discussed by the author. Pioneer design of this type, made back in 1927 after encountering various difficulties with conventional frames, was followed by successive improvements in design, resulting in the highly developed unit of today. A study is included of the engineering fundamentals primarily involved in the integral or chassisless design versus conventional-frame design from a strength and weight standpoint. This study involves a comparison with other more concrete objects to establish a definite insight to the why and wherefore of these structural changes. The relation to body safety design and its interconnection to weight distribution, vehicle balance, and resistance to crushing are also covered by the author.
1936-01-01
Technical Paper
360145
D. W. Sherman
ALONG with larger tires, independent wheel suspensions, higher speeds, and the dynamic and vibrational problems associated with these innovations, came the need for chassis frames having a high resistance to torsional movements. The X-member-type frame has been the most generally adopted means for obtaining increases in this direction. However, the past few years have seen the need for torsional rigidity in the chassis frame to be intensified. Although considerable gains have been made, in general, these gains have been accomplished not by major improvements in the design of the structure but by the addition of material. Consequently, the weight of the chassis frame has become a serious problem, so much so that in many cases special heavy frames are being used for the open-body types where the need for a stiff frame is acute.
1936-01-01
Technical Paper
360006
E. L. Johnston
1936-01-01
Technical Paper
360036
E. L. ALLEN
1936-01-01
Technical Paper
360063
W. R. Shimer
1936-01-01
Technical Paper
360134
George J. Mercer
EVOLUTION of body engineering is recalled with the traditional practices of the profession and the difficulty of obtaining information and instruction. Relations and locations of side-sweep, turnunder sweep, and belt line are discussed; definite suggestions are made and design procedure outlined. How the first visual impression or “eye appeal” of a new design affects public acceptance is emphasized, and the special influence of this factor upon women is pointed out. Responses from three authorities in body design to a twelve-point questionnaire on debatable policies and principles give an indication of modern body-design trends and practice.
1936-01-01
Technical Paper
360138
Fred W. Herman
THE introduction to this paper includes definitions of the major items under discussion, and is followed by a discussion of the materials most widely used in metal-aircraft construction and their important physical properties. In the remainder of the paper are described some of the problems encountered in metal construction and the processes that have been developed to facilitate manufacture. The following specific items are discussed: (1) Design, (2) Tooling, including lofting, (3) Fabrication, (4) Assembly, (5) Inspection, and (6) Protective coating. Special equipment and tools are illustrated.
1934-01-01
Technical Paper
340107
C. V. Johnson
THIS paper points out that the shock-absorbing system of the main landing-gear of an airplane must function under the impact of landing and while taxiing on landing fields. The present requirements for impact landing are outlined, and a typical analysis is made to check up a proposed system for a given airplane. The effects of geometrical arrangement of gear, of tire size and of tire rebound are considered. Laboratory methods of testing systems to determine whether the requirements have been met are discussed. The characteristics desired of the shock-absorber system for good taxiing are enumerated, and the effects of various types and arrangements of absorber units on performance are investigated. In conclusion, the paper presents a discussion of the tail-wheel shock-absorber system in which it is brought out that the same criteria that are applied to the main gear apply here, but that the relative importance of various factors is not the same as in the main gear.
1934-01-01
Technical Paper
340095
R. N. Falge
THE prospects for substantially improved headlighting conditions in the future look very promising, Mr. Falge concludes. Assurance of safe headlighting conditions on our roads at night involves the full cooperation of those who build the lamps, those who specify how they shall be used, those who are responsible for their maintenance, and those who use them. The automotive industry, interested technical societies and state enforcement officials have done an excellent job in establishing the fundamental requirements underlying safe headlighting and in developing test specifications to cover them. More than three-quarters of the cars on the road are equipped with headlamps capable of complying with these requirements when properly maintained, adjusted, and used. The stage is all set for the final drive to permit and induce motorists to adjust and use their head-lamps in accordance with this practice. Legislation is needed to specify the multiple-beam practice in all states.
1933-01-01
Technical Paper
330006
Herbert Chase
“IN making these comments,” Mr. Chase says, “I am well aware that engineers are rarely given an opportunity to design a car incorporating even a large proportion of the improvements they would like to see included. “Unless some more or less ‘ideal’ types of construction are visualized, however, there may be no well-considered objective.” Visualizing these “more or less ideal types of construction,” Mr. Chase, in the following paper, throws a blanket indictment at the car designers, says what he thinks about current automobiles in no uncertain terms, and states specifically what he thinks ought to be done about it. Bodies, frames, springs, headlights, seats, engines-no unit of the modern car escapes Mr. Chase's stimulating criticism.
1932-01-01
Technical Paper
320041
Joseph W. Meadowcroft, James J. Paugh
ALL-STEEL welded bodies for passenger-cars have many advantages over composite bodies, among them being fewer parts, doors of only two pieces, no visible outside seams, lower tops for the same headroom, less roof weight, lower center of gravity, greater safety, increased visibility, permanent quiet, economical upkeep and perfect outside lines. Wood and steel react so differently to stress that neither adds much to the strength of the other in a composite structure. Steel alone, welded into a unit structure, is lighter and less bulky. The entire side of the body is stamped from a single sheet, with the openings die formed to reenforce it. Chassis frame and body follow the same lines, so that they reenforce each other and body sills can be omitted. This plan saves 2 in. in height, as compared with some other bodies.
Viewing 4621 to 4650 of 4693