Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-tnzcf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T10:30:20.233Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Drainage Criteria for Runway Surface Roughness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

Desmond F. Moore
Desmond F. Moore*
Affiliation:
Transportation Research Department, Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, Inc., Buffalo, New York
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The main factor contributing to hydroplaning on slick runways is the existence of a squeeze film in the contact area between tyre and surface. The situation may be improved by optimising surface texture so that the asperities break through the water film in a minimum time. Two techniques are described for characterising surface texture: a superposition solution based on viscous channel flow and a dimensionless number approach involving size, spacing and shape factors. The “feel” of a surface is quantitatively obtained, and an outflow meter is described which, by directly measuring the mean hydraulic radius of runways, provides a comparison of their drainage abilities.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 69 , Issue 653 , May 1965, pp. 337 - 342
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1.Horne, W. B. and Leland, T. J. W.Runway Slipperiness and Slush. Journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society, Vol. 67, pp. 559–571, September 1963.Google Scholar
2.Mixes, E. C.The Pilot's Point of View. Journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society, Vol. 67, pp. 539–543, Sept. 1963.Google Scholar
3.Sawyer, R. M., Batterson, S. A. and Harrin, E. N.Tire-to-Surface Friction Especially under Wet Conditions. NASA Memo 2-23-59L, p. 10, March 1959.Google Scholar
4.Hughes, A. J.Tyre Design Considerations. Journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society, Vol. 67, p. 579, September 1963.Google Scholar
5.Moore, D. F.On the Inclined Noninertial Sinkage of a Flat Plate. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 20, pp. 321–330, October 1964.Google Scholar
6.Hays, D. F. Squeeze Films for Rectangular Plates. Paper No. 62-LubS-9, Lubrication Symposium ASME, June 1962.Google Scholar
7.Den Hartoo, J. P.Advanced Strength of Materials, pp. 19–20. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1962.Google Scholar
8.Moore, D. F. The Sinkage of Flat Plates on Smooth and Rough Surfaces. Ph.D. Dissertation, Mechanical Engineering Dept., Pennsylvania State University, Dec. 1963.Google Scholar
9.Fuks, G. I. The Flow of Liquids in Narrow Clearances between Adherent Plane Surfaces of Solids. Translation from Russian by D.S.I.R., London N.W.I, November 1958.Google Scholar
10.Giles, C. G. and Lander, F. T. W.The Skid-Resisting Properties of Wet Surfaces at High Speeds: Exploratory Measurements with a Small Braking Force Trailer. Journal Royal Aeronautical Society, Vol. 60, pp. 83–94, Feb. 1956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Tabor, D.Collision Through Liquid Layers. Engineering, pp. 145–147, 18th February 1949.Google Scholar
12.Schulze, K. M. and Beckmann, L. Friction Properties of Pavements at Different Speeds. Paper at ASTM Annual Meeting, 24th-26th June 1962.Google Scholar
13.Horne, W. B. and Dreher, R. C. Phenomena of Pneumatic Tire Hydroplaning. NASA TN D-2056, November 1963.Google Scholar
14.Kummer, H. W. and Meyer, W. E.Rubber and Tire Friction. Engineering Research Bulletin B-80, The Pennsylvania State University, December 1960.Google Scholar
15.Archibald, F. R.Load Capacity and Time Relations for Squeeze Films. Trans. ASME, Vol. 78, pp. A231–245, 1956.Google Scholar