Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11681/20942
Title: Evaluation of XM20 aluminum landing mat
Authors: Naval Air Engineering Center (U.S.)
Burns, Cecil D.
Grau, Robert W. (Robert Walter)
Keywords: Aluminum landing mats
Landing mats
XM20 landing mat
Airfields
Trafficability
Issue Date: Aug-1969
Publisher: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
Engineer Research and Development Center (U.S.)
Description: Miscellaneous Paper
Abstract: This investigation was conducted to evaluate XM20 aluminum landing mat fabricated by Dow Chemical Company, Madison, Illinois. The mat, fabricated from 2- by 12-ft extrusions, was similar to AM2 mat except for minor differences in the cross section of the mat and the method used to attach the end connectors to the mat extrusion. A test section consisting of one clay subgrade item at a strength of 4 CBR was constructed and surfaced with the XM20 mat. The test section was subjected to uniform-coverage traffic representing operations of an aircraft having a 60,000-lb gross weight with a single-wheel main gear assembly load of 27,000 lb with a 30x7.7 tire inflated to 400 psi. Based on the results obtained in this study, it is concluded that: (A.) The XM20 mat will sustain 1600 cycles (188 coverages) of aircraft operations with a 27,000-lb single-wheel load and 400-psi tire inflation pressure when placed on a subgrade having a CBR of 2.5 or greater throughout the period of traffic, or about 1230 coverages of the same loading when placed on a subgrade having a CBR of 4 or greater throughout the period of traffic. (B.) The service life of the XM20 mat on a 4-CBR subgrade is about six times greater than that of standard AM2 mats tested previously at WES on subgrades with a CBR of 4. (C.) General behavior of the mat in this test was greatly improved by the double thickness of the ribs at the end joints of the planks.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11681/20942
Appears in Collections:Documents

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
MP-S-69-39.pdf19.11 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open