Design structural limits for the b series taylorcraft

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Design structural limits for the b series taylorcraft

That's true. The other thing they did was real world test of components to destruction instead of by analysis. We built our analysis techniques by developing formulas to reproduce the results of those tests. There was method to the analysis process. The problem was the Loads guys would tell us what to apply to the part so we could design to that and we would often not be able to understand where they got the number. Bigger problem was, they often couldn't tell us either.

It is still true a lot of the time now!

Hank

There is a reason there is a cauldron and funky cloths in the Loads section. Those guys are STRANGE, and that isn't soup for lunch!

[jstall]

Re: Design structural limits for the b series taylorcraft

I had always heard that many of the older a/c of the 30's were sometimes overbuilt, as the engineering and the aeronautical engineering of the time was no way where it is today or even in the mid to late 40's

If it looked strong enough but maybe would be well???????? ok double or tripple it and that should be good. Example is the wing
structure of the Fairchild 24, wow, anyway, strong but sometimes very heavy for the power plant to be installed in it

[jstall]

Re: Design structural limits for the b series taylorcraft

what is really needed is the structural analysis of the primary components. I'm sure it was done (not on the originals, they were laid out on a lofting floor with chalk by the tlar method). By the time the f-19 was out there should have been an analysis. It isn't the analysis that is a problems so much as the loads analysis. The loads group was always playing with black magic.

Hank

most common heard statement from structural analysis group to the loads group, "where the h**l did you get that number!"

amen to that!
Js

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Design structural limits for the b series taylorcraft

What is really needed is the structural analysis of the primary components. I'm sure it was done (not on the originals, they were laid out on a lofting floor with chalk by the TLAR method). By the time the F-19 was out there should have been an analysis. It isn't the analysis that is a problems so much as the LOADS analysis. The Loads Group was always playing with black magic.

Hank

Most common heard statement from structural analysis group to the loads group, "WHERE THE H**L did you get THAT number!"

[M Towsley]

Re: Design structural limits for the b series taylorcraft

Hank,

I know I have seen them somewhere, I am almost positive. Did Chet's book list them by chance? Maybe I am thinking of a different plane. Forrest, where are you??? I am sure this would be an easy one for you.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: Design structural limits for the b series taylorcraft

There are some old design books with "guidelines" but if anyone has actual numbers for the Taylorcraft I would REALLY be interested. It would make engineering any modifications MUCH easier!

Hank

[jstall]

Would anyone have or have info concerning what the Taylorcraft airplanes
were structurally designed to, such as G-numbers on the structure?

Most aircraft today or the more modern aircraft have these numbers published.

I'm just wondering? I know I have never seen figures for this on the Champ, Cub, Ercoupe or others of the era