At 04:19 AM 6/12/2006, you wrote:
>Phil, what would the compression member look like exactly?
>
>A better design is to use one long bolt with a
>compression member between the WAF pairs instead of paired short
>bolts, placing the joint in a balance double shear. This is my
>considered opinion as
I have built my Spars exactly as called out in the KR-2 plans using RR
furnished parts. The wings are ready for finishing and painting.
I am betting my life that the WAFs as installed will function long and well.
I am trying to determine exactly how the WAFs function in relationship to the
The recent series of posts concerning Powder Coating for Wing Attach Fittings
(WAF) have assumed that the 3/16 bolts have to fit snug in the steel WAF and
the Spruce spars since the bolts are stressed in sheer. I read an explanation
some years ago in the KR newsletters that the WAF are clamped
Cheese & crackers - all that math to prove the the thing works per plans if ya
don't crash it.
--
Paul
KR2 Stretched
Derry, NH
.
> My conclusion: There would be minimal sheer load on the AN bolts for KR WAFs.
> Sid Wood
At 02:10 PM 6/9/2006, you wrote:
>I read an explanation some years ago in the KR newsletters that the
>WAF are clamped to the spars and generate their holding action by
>friction. The 3/16 attach bolts are stressed primarily in tension
>not in sheer.
>Another newsletter article reported on
A better design is to use one long bolt with a
compression member between the WAF pairs instead of paired short
bolts, placing the joint in a balance double shear. This is my
considered opinion as a professional engineer.
This is the requirement in Australia.
Phil
This could be a good idea, if there was evidence of a problem, which
there is NOT. Why is there an expectation that the WAF joint is a weak
point?
Ron Freiberger
A better design is to use one long bolt with a
compression member between the WAF pairs instead of paired short
bolts, placing the
That seems to be what all the engineers say. And, I am sure they are
correct. I just can't make myself do it that way. I used 1 per attach
point on my first KR, and it worked, so I feel comfortable with it. I think
it is the thought that if any one of those bolts fail, it is all over.
See
Of
airgu...@comcast.net
Sent: Saturday, 10 June 2006 4:41 AM
To: KRnet
Subject: Re: KR> WAF Bolt Sheer Load
Cheese & crackers - all that math to prove the the thing works per plans if
ya don't crash it.
--
Paul
KR2 Stretched
Derry, NH
.
> My conclusion: There would be minimal
At 06:02 PM 6/9/2006, you wrote:
>This could be a good idea, if there was evidence of a problem, which
>there is NOT. Why is there an expectation that the WAF joint is a weak
>point?
Why accept something that is less than it can be? If people were
willing to belive that something can't be
M
Subject: Re: KR> WAF Bolt Sheer Load
> That seems to be what all the engineers say. And, I am sure they are
> correct. I just can't make myself do it that way. I used 1 per attach
> point on my first KR, and it worked, so I feel comfortable with it. I
> think
> it is the tho
Pour : "KRnet" <kr...@mylist.net>
cc :(ccc : Serge VIDAL/DNSA/SAGEM)
Objet : Re: KR> WAF Bolt Sheer Load
A better design is to use one long bolt with a
compression member between the WAF pairs instead of paired short
bolts, placing the joint in a b
12 matches
Mail list logo
