Let's see some machine work

[Mattndew76]

Yes I want to see function.

 

Are those two components welded together and post machined?

[]2eDeYe]

No, it's all one piece. +/-.030 on the outside profile there so it's a little rough. I'll see if I can post a bit more about the function. 

[q-tip]

I do whole parts that are +-.030 :lol:

[hobospyder]

i build airplanes, anywhere from +-.01 to +-1.25 or greater

[Mattndew76]

i build airplanes, anywhere from +-.01 to +-1.25 or greater

 

Metric?

[hobospyder]

sae, sorry

[q-tip]

You put them together, I guarantee that the machined parts are a much tighter tolerance that that.

[hobospyder]

true. when we get machined parts. 

[mklotz70]

i build airplanes, anywhere from +-.01 to +-1.25 or greater

Is that 1.25 inches?  Over what distance?  

[]2eDeYe]

Most planes are not as tight as you think. When holding tight tolerances on small components of a extremely large assembly it's hard to keep the tolerance buildup from affecting it. Boeing did a study once and found that their planes could be different lengths up to a couple inches (going off memory here). It was a large problem for the 787 guys whe they got barrel sections in from different suppliers that were up to .25" different in diameter.

 

Basically, tolerance stackup is a bitch :lol: 

 

 

 

Being in tooling, we get 1/3 of engineering tolerance, so a hole +/- .010 gets the tooling set up with +/-.003. This is for critical features of course and the rest of the tool can be up to +/-.1 to +/-.03 depending. 

[hobospyder]

Is that 1.25 inches? Over what distance?

in the instance I can remember about 24 inches total. It was 9 even spaces +-1.25 inches for each gap between fasteners. Not a structural part and it was at the very front of an extremely large airplane. When I found it I started freaking out because it had to be an error. But it makes complete sense that you need that tolerance for the fact the there's a frame in the way of one of the fasteners if you did even spacing all the way along the part. Largest I see for tolerance is half an inch on the slightly more important parts, structural tolerances max out at .03 inch. Soon as the fuselage is pressurized most of the tolerances go out the window anyways.

[]2eDeYe]

I always get a kick out of watching the tube change shape when flying, you can watch the gaps between the carry on compartments. No one else seems to notice. :lol: 

[hobospyder]

I've been doing my best to avoid flying

[Mattndew76]

I've been doing my best to avoid flying

I travel by train mostly lol.

 

After reading these posts I don't want to fly anymore lol

[]2eDeYe]

I've been doing my best to avoid flying

 

 

Sometimes ya just gotta fly and you might as well enjoy it. :lol:

 

 

 

I travel by train mostly lol.

 

After reading these posts I don't want to fly anymore lol

 

 

 

Most people think planes are these large solid things. When you get down to it they are mostly empty space, 1/2" thick aluminum tube with a bunch of people inside. :devil:

 

Oh and the new ones are made of plastic :rofl: 

[q-tip]

My gf went on her first flight with me to Arizona 2 years ago and I showed her how much the wings flex as the plane is rolling down the runway. Then she just stared at them, until we hit some turbulence then she didn't want to look anymore. :Lol:

[hobospyder]

Half inch thick? Are you sure about that hippie?

 

Dude, Boeing jets the wings flex even more and better yet, pay attention to the droop before takeoff and after, the fuel is in the wings.

[hobospyder]

Shit, widest frame I've dealt with in passenger compartment is less than a foot wide. Most of the time you're only a foot away from the outside. Frames 20 inches apart (at least on my line and for the most part) empty space is filled with blankets (insulation) wires and tubing. But still it's just empty space. Saw the support structure for the stowbins put in place today.

[]2eDeYe]

Half inch thick? Are you sure about that hippie?

 

Dude, Boeing jets the wings flex even more and better yet, pay attention to the droop before takeoff and after, the fuel is in the wings.

 

On average the thickness I've seen in barrel sections is about that ya. Thicker in some places, thinner in others or maybe it was 3/8"s.   :)

 

 

If they don't flex they break off. The new carbon fiber wings can flex really well. 

 

787 wing test. 

 

 

 

 

777 wing test to failure, super impressive. :cool:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rak2HldVp9M

[hobospyder]

i wish they would've shared a video of the 47 wings breaking

 

i'll leave you to what you know on skin thickness. and just might break out a scale and actually check the measurement tomorrow. i know the skin on my line, never measured it and haven't played with the wing part of the tube so i don't know how thick that is. shouldn't we be having this conversation in the airplane porn thread? enough thread jacking from me, this is my last response

[Mattndew76]

Yeah I am experienced with composite manufacturing.

 

Engineered limits.

 

Bought me a new ingersol 2" insert mill today. Can't wait to try it out.

[mklotz70]

Never thought about the tube expanding.....I knew about the wings flexing, but you can watch that easily.  Interesting!

[mklotz70]

I'm sure some have already seen some of these pics or Bory's Datstang thread......