![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi Group:
Cla Looking at the calculations for the spar, spar.pdf I do not see your interpretation. The 67000 psi value is Bearing Ultimate, not tensile. A MATWEB lookup is in order: 6061-T6 Tensile ultimate: 45000 Tensile yield : 39000 Bearing ultimate: 88000 Bearing Yield : 56000 The values presented in the spar calculation are correct, and the bearing ultimate of 67000 is below spec. So where is the spar calc using bad values except, as you say, in the initial assumptions of 244 pounds versus 288? Curtis Scholl Just a little more input from another more knowledgeable than myself. The material that the plans and the airplane use is 6061t6 correct? The calculations show the material or the identifier as being 6061. The problem in the shown calcs is that the numbers he is using at 68000psi tensile is higher than the ultimate strength of 2024-t4 which is given at 64000. 6061t6 is only 45,000psi ultimate and 39,900 yield. It's no wonder the wing was failing at 2g. *** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com *** *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com *** |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Richard Lamb and the Texas Parasol Plans ...and Sirius Aviation | Richard Lamb | Home Built | 12 | August 9th 05 08:00 PM |
want to trade 601 plans for 701 plans | [email protected] | Home Built | 0 | January 27th 05 07:50 PM |
bush rules! | Be Kind | Military Aviation | 53 | February 14th 04 04:26 PM |
Texas Soars into Aviation History | A | Piloting | 7 | December 17th 03 02:09 AM |
good book about prisoners of war | Jim Atkins | Military Aviation | 16 | August 1st 03 10:18 AM |