• 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!

Test to Failure

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

Toobuilder

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
6,662
Location
Mojave, Ca
So if you are building an original design structure of some kind, wings, for instance, is it common practice to build a test sample first, then take it all the way to failure? I recall seeing pictures of many of the Rutan designs upside down and loaded up with sandbags as their owners verified the structure before flight. Obviously, these were tested to some percentage of calculated failure, but not damaged. Eventually, these designs became common and their structural properties were proven through years of use, so I'm pretty sure most Long Ezes were not sandbagged before flight. With that said, I'd sure like to know how well a new design holds up. With something simple like a horizontal stabilizer, failure of a test piece represents a fairly small investment, but a wing, now that's a different story.

What is the accepted method of verification for a "one off"?
 
Back
Top