flipdewaf
Topic Author
Posts: 1595
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Ultimate Load Vs Max Weights

Tue Mar 13, 2012 12:23 pm

I started a thread about wing load questions several months ago and I have a few more questions but thought I'd start a new thread rather than dig up the old one.

I remember from my uni days (only 4/5 years ago) that the wing structure was largely based on MZFW and the 2.5G turn with the 1.5 load factor.

I realise that these tests are largely to test the validity of the modelling methods but is there any chance these can be used to modify the useable weights. I'll use the A350 as an example as this is the next big jet to undergo this test.

MZFW is 192000kg, if the ultimate load testing on the wings went to 156% before breaking would airbus be able to say that the wing is good for 199680kg? Obviously other components do rely on weights and loads so all others would have to pass too or is it just good for the weight to which it has been designed i.e 192t?

Thanks,

Fred
Image
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Ultimate Load Vs Max Weights

Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:13 am

Quoting flipdewaf (Thread starter):
I remember from my uni days (only 4/5 years ago) that the wing structure was largely based on MZFW and the 2.5G turn with the 1.5 load factor.

Depending on the design, it may be MTOW or MZFW, and 2.5g x 1.5. Whichever is more limiting will be the test point (it depends on the MZFW/MTOW spread).

Quoting flipdewaf (Thread starter):
I realise that these tests are largely to test the validity of the modelling methods but is there any chance these can be used to modify the useable weights.

Yes, absolutely, this is a normal occurrence.

Quoting flipdewaf (Thread starter):
MZFW is 192000kg, if the ultimate load testing on the wings went to 156% before breaking would airbus be able to say that the wing is good for 199680kg?

Yes.

Quoting flipdewaf (Thread starter):
Obviously other components do rely on weights and loads so all others would have to pass too or is it just good for the weight to which it has been designed i.e 192t?

No, you can go beyond. This is partly how you can get increased weights without re-doing the static tests.

Tom.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: OldAeroGuy, wilcharl and 13 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos