• Welcome aboard HomebuiltAirplanes.com, your destination for connecting with a thriving community of more than 10,000 active members, all passionate about home-built aviation. Dive into our comprehensive repository of knowledge, exchange technical insights, arrange get-togethers, and trade aircrafts/parts with like-minded enthusiasts. Unearth a wide-ranging collection of general and kit plane aviation subjects, enriched with engaging imagery, in-depth technical manuals, and rare archives.

    For a nominal fee of $99.99/year or $12.99/month, you can immerse yourself in this dynamic community and unparalleled treasure-trove of aviation knowledge.

    Embark on your journey now!

    Click Here to Become a Premium Member and Experience Homebuilt Airplanes to the Fullest!

Compression vs Tension?

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

lake_harley

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
1,080
On various plans I've looked at that use truss construction (4130 fuselage rear section for example), it seems the tendency is to design most diagonal bracing to be in compression rather than tension, providing I'm correctly seeing the direction of potential loads. In doing some simple math (all I'm capable of), it seems that a smaller cross section or thinner wall tube could be used for weight savings since the tension capacity seems to be greater than the capacity of a given tube to buckle under compression. Is it somewhat to reduce the potential for a weld not holding on a tension joint, vs the compression joint not being reliant on the strength of the weld?

Just curious.....

Lynn
 
Back
Top