What skin metal thickness is the TSi using? for the wings, fuselage, tail, etc.
Heard that it feels "very thin and fragile", compared with the RV-10
Thanks!
Metal skin thickness?
Re: Metal skin thickness?
Cannot comment on comparison between RV-10 vs TSi as far as feel goes... But the feel of the skin on it's own is almost irrelevant. They use different types of aluminum- The RV is made of 2024, and the TSi is 6061. They both have their advantages and disadvantages, and one of the advantages of 2024 is that it is slightly stronger and slightly stiffer. It is also slightly heavier, and has poor corrosion resistance compared to 6061 (this is why the vans people endlessly debate the prime/no prime issue, if it was 6061 there would be a much stronger case for the no prime crew). Because the 2023 is slightly heavier and slightly stiffer, it might feel more robust compared to the same thickness of 6061. However, the TSi is 33% lighter than the RV-10 when it is completely built, and therefore might not need the same strength of aluminum skin.
Perhaps more important than the skins themselves is the strength and placement of the spars and ribs, since these are supporting the majority of the stresses of flight. Think surface area, where the stress to the skins is displaced over a very large surface area, so that's why they are able to be so much thinner than a spar, which must bare the weight of the entirety of the plane as well as the primary stresses of lift, drag, etc. This is why for a very long time people were able to use canvas for the skins of the aircraft, or why you are able to fly with just a parachute.
Without having the exact model of the plane in CAD to do FEA on, we won't know the true answer of which aircraft is more robust in design. But one thing I can guarantee, is the "feel" of the skins is not much if not completely irrelevant to the overall integrity of the aircraft.
Perhaps more important than the skins themselves is the strength and placement of the spars and ribs, since these are supporting the majority of the stresses of flight. Think surface area, where the stress to the skins is displaced over a very large surface area, so that's why they are able to be so much thinner than a spar, which must bare the weight of the entirety of the plane as well as the primary stresses of lift, drag, etc. This is why for a very long time people were able to use canvas for the skins of the aircraft, or why you are able to fly with just a parachute.
Without having the exact model of the plane in CAD to do FEA on, we won't know the true answer of which aircraft is more robust in design. But one thing I can guarantee, is the "feel" of the skins is not much if not completely irrelevant to the overall integrity of the aircraft.
-
escalantea
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2019 9:51 pm
Re: Metal skin thickness?
Great explanation!
The "canvas covered wings" does it all, you are 100% correct, thanks again.
A
The "canvas covered wings" does it all, you are 100% correct, thanks again.
A