Dangers of composite airframes

  • Thread starter hammertime
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Composite
In summary, the article discusses the potential safety concerns surrounding the use of carbon fibre in aircraft construction, specifically in the Boeing 787. The conversation suggests that the 787 may have to go through a similar phase as the de Havilland Comet to ensure its safety, but the advancements in technology and society's demand for safety make this comparison unlikely. Additionally, the conversation touches on the use of simulations, quality control, and extensive testing in the development of composite planes. Overall, while there may be some growing pains with composite materials, they offer a higher strength-to-weight ratio and can be carefully engineered and tested for safety.
  • #1
hammertime
135
0
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Something like the Comet will never happen again.

Firstly becuase of increased technonlogy, we can run rigourous simulations looking at the behaviour of materials to make sure that its strong enough and won't fatigue.

Secondly becuase the modern society will simply not allow the 'suck it and see' attitude of the previous decades.

When CF airframes fly, they will be safe. As companies in this day and age just cannot afford to put forward something that is inherantly unsafe. This is not saying it will be invincible, there are always accidents and unforseen problems, but you arent going to get multiple failures.EDIT: Thirdly, there will never be a Comet style disaster again because of the Comet itsself... That plane single handedly killed british aviation for years.
 
  • #3
I think the comparison is a stretch anyway - the comet failed due to fatigue, a problem that is difficult to predict in advance or test for. Composites don't exhibit fatigue, these failures are essentially design flaws that are found during early testing. They aren't good, but they will be gone by the time the plane goes into production.

Yes, it means there are some growing pains associated with composite planes (though they do already exist...), but that doesn't imply these will lead to in-flight failures.
 
  • #4
hammertime said:
I just read http://www.newscientist.com/article...e-carbonfibre-planes-are-still-grounded.html" article and I had to ask something. Will the 787 have to go through a de Havilland Comet phase in order to be perfected? I mean, how do we know the composite airframes won't break apart after, say, six months, or a year, or five years?
Composite materials are just like any metallic material in that poor workmanship or unseen flaws will be possible locations for failures. Make no mistake that any material will fall into this scenario. There are a lot of things that are different that make it a completely different ball game then with the Comet. So much that, IMO, it is a stupid comparison. While the article is correct that simulations are not the end all be all because there is no way to theoretically model flaws or something that will degrade the material properties. That is what modern day quality control is for. We also have much more extensive test programs than during the Comet's time. The test bed fuselages will, most likely, get somewhere on the order of 10,000 simulated take offs and landings plus all of the flight testing done prior to certification. The Comet did not have testing like that until after they started crashing (they instituted water tank tests of cabin pressurizations).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
I work with composites. I have nothing bad to say about them. There are so many different types of composite and composite process. The technology has come a long way. You have fiberglass kevlar composite and various blends of pure resin with many materials making up it's composition. With any process there are area's for mistake. Resins and epoxies are usually two parts. That should explain it. They also have to be agitated to remove air pockets. Last but not least while in the mold depending on the type there needs to be a nice even vaccum. Composites are an engineering design as well as any structure. They are harder to repair and make look good than standard sheetmetal or wood and steel tube designs. But there strength to weight ratio is uncomparable.
 

What are composite airframes?

Composite airframes are aircraft structures made up of a combination of materials such as carbon fiber, fiberglass, and resin. These materials are layered and bonded together to create a strong and lightweight structure.

What are the dangers associated with composite airframes?

The main danger associated with composite airframes is the risk of delamination, which is the separation of layers within the structure. This can weaken the overall strength of the airframe and potentially lead to structural failure.

How are composite airframes inspected for potential dangers?

Composite airframes are inspected through a variety of methods, including visual inspections, non-destructive testing, and ultrasound. These inspections can detect any cracks, delamination, or other potential dangers within the structure.

How do environmental factors affect the safety of composite airframes?

Environmental factors such as exposure to extreme temperatures, humidity, and UV radiation can weaken the materials in composite airframes over time. This can lead to potential dangers and therefore, regular maintenance and inspections are necessary to ensure the safety of the airframe.

Are composite airframes more dangerous than traditional metal airframes?

There is no clear answer to this question as both types of airframes have their own unique risks. However, composite airframes are more susceptible to hidden damage and require specialized maintenance and inspection techniques, making them potentially more challenging to maintain compared to metal airframes.

Similar threads

  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
21
Views
804
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
996
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
25
Views
7K
Replies
25
Views
1K
  • Cosmology
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Back
Top