Author |
Message |
Frank Jenkin #1 / 8
|
 A380 and Glare
Something I've wondered about since I saw an article in AW&ST many months ago: A drawing showed where the "stronger, lighter" Glare material was being used on the A380. However, the one place it was *not* used was in the center fuselage area above the wing, which would seem to be a place where it would be advantageous. Does anyone out there know why this is so? Is there some negative property of Glare (other than, presumably, cost)? Frank
|
Tue, 07 Aug 2007 02:00:43 GMT |
|
 |
George William Herbe #2 / 8
|
 A380 and Glare
Quote:
>Something I've wondered about since I saw an article in AW&ST many months >ago: A drawing showed where the "stronger, lighter" Glare material was >being used on the A380. However, the one place it was *not* used was in the >center fuselage area above the wing, which would seem to be a place where it >would be advantageous. >Does anyone out there know why this is so? Is there some negative property >of Glare (other than, presumably, cost)?
I should qualify this comment with, I am not qualified/educated in engineering with glare. I hear that it only takes to curves in a single dimention well, which explains why the fuselage tail and nose are in aluminum (well... the ribs, stiffeners, stringers, etc are aluminum anyways) but only the relatively circular cross section body areas are glare. I don't know for sure why it's not used above the wing on A380. I was wondering about its elastic modulus and ability to be joined with an aluminum sheet in a lap riveted structure. But I don't know. -george william herbert
|
Sat, 11 Aug 2007 18:22:53 GMT |
|
 |
Frank Jenkin #3 / 8
|
 A380 and Glare
Actually, several of the Glare fuselage panels have compound curves. The panel in question looks to be constant cross section (i.e., simple curvature). And since the elastic modulus and thermal-expansion coefficients are likely to be different between Glare and "regular" Aluminum alloy, it seems doubly curious that Glare is not used on the entire fuselage. The only explanation I can think of is that, since Glare has to be made in an autoclave, that fuselage panel is too large to fit in any commercially-available autoclave. But with the money spent on the A380 development, a specially-large autoclave wouldn't seem to be that big a deal. Or, did I possibly misinterpret the drawing in AW&ST? -- Frank
Quote:
>[snip] > I hear that it only takes to curves in a single dimension > well, which explains why the fuselage tail and nose are in > aluminum (well... the ribs, stiffeners, stringers, etc are aluminum > anyways) but only the relatively circular cross section body areas > are glare. > I don't know for sure why it's not used above the wing on A380. > I was wondering about its elastic modulus and ability to be > joined with an aluminum sheet in a lap riveted structure. > But I don't know. > -george william herbert
|
Sun, 12 Aug 2007 01:22:54 GMT |
|
 |
matt webe #4 / 8
|
 A380 and Glare
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:22:54 GMT, " Frank Jenkins" Quote:
>Actually, several of the Glare fuselage panels have compound curves. The >panel in question looks to be constant cross section (i.e., simple >curvature). >And since the elastic modulus and thermal-expansion coefficients are likely >to be different between Glare and "regular" Aluminum alloy, it seems doubly >curious that Glare is not used on the entire fuselage. >The only explanation I can think of is that, since Glare has to be made in >an autoclave, that fuselage panel is too large to fit in any >commercially-available autoclave. But with the money spent on the A380 >development, a specially-large autoclave wouldn't seem to be that big a >deal. >Or, did I possibly misinterpret the drawing in AW&ST?
I'll give you another possibility, and i admit to being none to comfortable about using Glare in the Fuselage. I'd be very cautious about using it in load bearing structures. Glare is a multilayer sandwich of alumining and glass/resin, which is all well and good, but one of the things you have to plan for is can your material handle the current density of a lightening strike? You'd be amazed at the amount of copper mesh buried inside the composite fuselage of a V22 Osprey! What concerns me about glare is the possibliity of explosive de-lamination in the event of a lightning strike. it isn't all that unusual for a lightning strike to burn a hole at the entry or exit point in the aluminum skin. On most aircraft, you just patch the alumiun skin, and you are done. On glare, the vaporized aluminum is likely to delaminate, and resin are huge producers of gas when overheated, to the point that they are used in blow up protectors to protect high voltage lines. The strike flashes over the blowout protector, which is lined with resin. The resin just about explodes from the heat, and literally blows out the arc. It is very impressive to watch. Explosive de-lamination in the area of the wing box is likely to have very unpleasant consequences because of the loads being carried. Same problem on the wings. The further you get away from the wing box, the smaller the loads being carried, and the less of a concern the delamination is likely to be. That is an opion, no more, no less. I am electrical engineering by education, with some specialized education in high voltage and lightning protection.
|
Sun, 12 Aug 2007 12:14:50 GMT |
|
 |
Rock Ayer #5 / 8
|
 A380 and Glare
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 18:00:43 GMT, " Frank Jenkins" Quote:
>Something I've wondered about since I saw an article in AW&ST many months >ago: A drawing showed where the "stronger, lighter" Glare material was >being used on the A380. However, the one place it was *not* used was in the >center fuselage area above the wing, which would seem to be a place where it >would be advantageous. >Does anyone out there know why this is so? Is there some negative property >of Glare (other than, presumably, cost)? >Frank
The benefits of Glare unfold in areas where tension loads are pre{*filter*}. Hence its use on the upper side of the forward and rear fuselage. Due to the presence of the wing, the center fuselage section has to cope with shear loads, hence a different material is used here. Some ventral sections of the A380 fuselage use yet something different - welded aluminum shells, which favourably lend themselves to compression loads. Generally spoken, if you take any aircraft and have a look at the materials and construction principles used throughout the fuselage, you'll find just the same patchwork the A380 is. Nothing peculiar about it. Regards, Rock
|
Fri, 17 Aug 2007 06:02:42 GMT |
|
 |
Frank Jenkin #6 / 8
|
 A380 and Glare
You make an interesting point: Glare is built like a multi-layer capacitor! In addition to the possible vaporization of the resin, the negatively-charged aluminum "plates" would be electrostatically repelled from each other. OTOH, it's inconceivable to me that lightning strikes weren't considered by the A380's design engineers. And airliner certification requires extensive lightning-strike testing. However, it's possible that the mix-and-match of aluminum and Glare on the A380 is related to lightning tolerance. Be interesting to see if Boeing has some clever (i.e. lightweight) way of handling the lightning issue on their 787, other than by embedding a metal mesh. -- Frank
[snip] Quote: > I'll give you another possibility, and i admit to being none to > comfortable about using Glare in the Fuselage. I'd be very cautious > about using it in load bearing structures. > Glare is a multilayer sandwich of alumining and glass/resin, which is > all well and good, but one of the things you have to plan for is can > your material handle the current density of a lightening strike? > You'd be amazed at the amount of copper mesh buried inside the > composite fuselage of a V22 Osprey! > What concerns me about glare is the possibliity of explosive > de-lamination in the event of a lightning strike. it isn't all that > unusual for a lightning strike to burn a hole at the entry or exit > point in the aluminum skin. On most aircraft, you just patch the > alumiun skin, and you are done. On glare, the vaporized aluminum is > likely to delaminate, and resin are huge producers of gas when > overheated, to the point that they are used in blow up protectors to > protect high voltage lines. The strike flashes over the blowout > protector, which is lined with resin. The resin just about explodes > from the heat, and literally blows out the arc. It is very impressive > to watch. > Explosive de-lamination in the area of the wing box is likely to have > very unpleasant consequences because of the loads being carried. > Same problem on the wings. The further you get away from the wing box, > the smaller the loads being carried, and the less of a concern the > delamination is likely to be. > That is an opion, no more, no less. I am electrical engineering by > education, with some specialized education in high voltage and > lightning protection.
|
Mon, 13 Aug 2007 23:35:14 GMT |
|
 |
Rock Ayer #7 / 8
|
 A380 and Glare
On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 03:19:55 GMT, "Frank Jenkins" Quote:
>Interesting comment on the welded shells, since it implies that a >lower-strength weldable alloy is actually a better choice in some locations. >Or does the A380 use friction-stir welding?
The lower lobe section environment rather implies a material that has superior characteristics in terms of corrosion and fatigue. Lower lobe skin panels with laser-beam welded stringers were introduced with the A318. Friction stir welding is primarily an option for joining panels. Regards, Rock
|
Tue, 28 Aug 2007 04:09:54 GMT |
|
 |
Rock Ayer #8 / 8
|
 A380 and Glare
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 15:35:14 GMT, "Frank Jenkins" Quote:
>You make an interesting point: Glare is built like a multi-layer capacitor! >In addition to the possible vaporization of the resin, the >negatively-charged aluminum "plates" would be electrostatically repelled >from each other. >OTOH, it's inconceivable to me that lightning strikes weren't considered by >the A380's design engineers. And airliner certification requires extensive >lightning-strike testing. However, it's possible that the mix-and-match of >aluminum and Glare on the A380 is related to lightning tolerance. >Be interesting to see if Boeing has some clever (i.e. lightweight) way of >handling the lightning issue on their 787, other than by embedding a metal >mesh.
The 787 is going to use lightning strike protection appliqu (adhesive thin foils) in places, e.g. the wing box upper and lower surfaces. An interesting point is how far Boeing will stretch that technology. The JSF was to make extensive use of paint replacement appliqu, and the foils may as well bestowed with tiny streamwise grooves (riblets) for a benefit in skin friction drag. So far, Boeing only makes mention of the lightning strike protection function. Regards Rock
|
Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:16:31 GMT |
|
|
|