Toller Test! Ist halt immer wieder interessant, wie hoch belastbar Material aus Faserverbundwerkstoff in anderen Sparten auch ist. 👍Composites rocks!

Bei "1.8" gibt die innere strukturelle integrität nach. Innerer Bruch der Struktur. Der Flügel bleibt aber noch in Form. Bei "2.3x" erfolgt die Überschreitung der Biegegrenze und endgültiger destruktiver Bruch.

@AntaresFilm

5 жыл бұрын

Bei j=1.8 löst sich ein Verklebung in die Lasteinleitung (Versuchsaufbau). Die Lasteinleitung verschiebt sich aber nicht, da diese durch eine Sicherheitseinrichtung mechanisch in Position gehalten wird. Das Versuch geht weiter, und bei j=2.32 versagt dann der Flügel. English: Bernd P: "At "1.8", the internal structural integrity gives way. Inner failure of the structure. The wing is still in shape. At "2.3x", the bending limit is exceeded and the final destructive break occurs." At j = 1.8, a glue-joint in the test jig fails. However, the jig does not shift as it is mechanically held in position. The load-test continues, and at j = 2.32 the wing fails.

Amazing what sience is capable of !

@AntaresFilm

6 жыл бұрын

Amazing what engineering is capable of :)

@e30kitty

5 жыл бұрын

Amazing for what they waste energy, we have big problems on this planet but just invent more shit

@helmutpohl2762

Жыл бұрын

@@e30kitty----> Hi Kitty, world is waiting for You to be saved ! I am proud of You !!

Mich würde mal interessieren ob bei so einer starken Durchbiegung die Querruder überhaupt noch Steuerbar sind, bzw bleibt das Querruder Gestänge und die Klappenansteuerung dauerhaft geschädigt ? ( natürlich bei einer nicht so starken Durchbiegung wie gezeigt , sondern beim max zulässigen Last vielfachen ) ???

@AntaresFilm

5 жыл бұрын

Die Gängigkeit der Steuerung wurde im Vorversuch bis zur Belastungsgrenze (j=1) getestet. Die Steueranlage war gängig und wurde hierbei nicht dauerhaft verformt. In English: Alexander Theissl wrote: “I would be interested to know whether the ailerons are still controllable with such a strong deflection, or does the aileron linkage and the flap control permanently suffer damage? (Of course with a not as strong deflection as shown, but multiples at the maximum allowable load) ???” Answer: The mobility of the controls was tested in a preliminary test which reached limit load (j = 1). The control system retained full mobility and was not permanently deformed by this test.

Warum wird der test nicht mit Kerosin oder Ersatzweise Wasser das sich im Flügel befindet gemacht ? oder sind in den Flügel keine Tanks ?

@motivase

5 жыл бұрын

Das ist ein Elektromotorsegler. In den Flügeln sind Akkus

@helmutpohl2762

Жыл бұрын

Hallo Uwe, wir sind stolz auf Dich und Deine Ideen : wäre doch toll, wenn das Wasser in den " Flügeln" auch noch gefroren wäre !!!

Wie hoch sind die Kräfte in Newton, die oben dran ziehen? Als das was der Kran oben zieht.

@helmutpohl2762

Жыл бұрын

... für mich bitte in Kilogramm, - weder der arme Newton noch der arme Watt wären mit ihrem Namens - MISSBRAUCH einverstanden ....mir reicht schon der Mist von km/h und mph und kt ......genauso wie Links / Rechtsverkhr, verschiedene Steckdosen und Stromsysteme ... und das in unserer Zeit !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

@SoaringExperience

Жыл бұрын

@@helmutpohl2762 Mag sein. Newton ist aber die SI-Einheit für die Kraft und das hilft mir mehr. Und Kilogramm "ziehen" nur mit Hilfe der Erdbeschleunigung daran. Also Newton passt schon gut.

What is the number he's counting off?

@AntaresFilm

6 жыл бұрын

This is an ultimate load test, which means that the wing is loaded until it fails. The wing has been designed for a limit load; the maximum load that the wing is expected to see in service. The ultimate load must be a minimum of 1.5 x limit load. Safety factor = ultimate load / limit load. This wing was designed for a safety factor of 2 (other aspects were driving the design), and it actually reached 2.32. The voice in the video is calling out the safety factor at the given time.

Shouldn't the bending force be applied more uniformly closer to the wing root at the same time simulated aerodynamic force is applied toward the wing tip?? I see the attachment points further toward the wing tip but aerodynamic lift force closer too the root also contributes to bending moment force at the wing root. Is this testing mid span failure mode only or are you evaluating the wing root/spar strength as well?

Wird immer noch j=1,5 verlangt?

@AntaresFilm

Ай бұрын

Ja, in der Luftfahrt wird grundsätzlich j = 1,5 verlangt. Es gibt natürlich auch Einzelparagrafen die höhere Sicherheiten verlangen, aber 1,5 ist der Grundregel.

@dr.wilfriedhitzler1885

Ай бұрын

@@AntaresFilm Danke, habe selbst Verkehrszulassung betrieben, da war j auch 1,5. Ich wollt’s bloß wissen weil ich schon lang was ganz anderes mache.

stronk

Forces close to the fuselage would put the forces in shear. That's not the real world. Short distances contribute little to moment.

@rogser

7 жыл бұрын

Hey Sandy. It seems like a distributed wingtip load test, the exactly opposite. Structural engineering at its finest.

@slowtraveler

3 жыл бұрын

In fact you never have such forces close to fuselage, because whole wing is lifting device, so physically 'lifting point center' is at about middle of the wing. But as the force is distributed also further out of fuselage, where wing is not so strong as it is close to fuselage - they test it that way...

@helmutpohl2762

Жыл бұрын

Hi Sandy, - have a look to reality : Videos of gliders at high speed for example .----> looks same as in this test ....................

@rodfeher

Жыл бұрын

there is not much force on the fuselage, one wing is attached directly to the other wing. the fuselage just hands below the strongest wing part (the union between wings).

😂😂 die haben wirklich ein Flügel zerstört für nichts 😡🤷‍♂️

that test is stupid. do it back and forth really fast like in a real flight+ add the kerosine into them and u will see what happens.

@AntaresFilm

4 жыл бұрын

This test is required by aviation authorities in order to obtain certification. What is being tested is the maximum bending load that the wing will withstand before breaking. This loadcase can occur (for example) when the pilot flies into windshear while pulling maximum g in order to recover from a dive. Moving the wings back and forth really fast is a different problem, and it is called "flutter". Flutter can reduce a carbon fiber wing to a cloud of powder in a matter of miliseconds (aluminum wings are merely reduced to a cloud of tinfoil). Therefore, aircraft are designed not to flutter in the first place. The certification testing for flutter is done in actual flight, because it can not be accurately tested on the ground (although eigenfrequency-tests are usually performed ahead of time). Finally, seeing that the Antares 20E is a battery powered aircraft, we do not see why we should be adding kerosine to the wings. Please enlighten us.

@helmutpohl2762

Жыл бұрын

Hi dvr 1337, - why don´t You go in the testing compartment and tell them personally what to do ? ----> I think, they are waiting for You .........................