Composite Fuselage Construction

[[email protected]]

Can anyone comment on which manufacturers use "sandwich" construction
in the fuselage and which ones don't? I'm particularly interested in
the LS ships, but I'm also curious about what others are doing or have
done.


Thanks,
Dave

[Bob Kuykendall]

> Can anyone comment on which manufacturers use "sandwich" construction
> in the fuselage and which ones don't? I'm particularly interested in
> the LS ships, but I'm also curious about what others are doing or have
> done.

Tough question. My take on it is:

It's not going to break down well by manufacturer, or even by model.
In then production lives of all ships there will be minor changes,
including the starting or discontinuing of sandwich construction in
various models.

Most composite ships I've seen inside out have sandwich construction
in the vertical fin. That stands to reason, it's usually a ruled
surface that's easy to core and which gains a lot of panel stiffness
with a little bit of foam. Some ships have virtually no sandwich
construction anywhere in the fuselage, including the vertical fin. I
think that most ASW 20 fall into this category.

In my own fuselages I only have sandwich construction in the vertical
fin, with the builder adding sandwich stiffeners under the cockpit
rail and also at the skidmark patch of the fuselage belly under the
pilot's butt.

The only glider fuselages I've seen with all-over sandwich
construction are the Russia AC4 and AC5, and the ASC American Spirit
and American Falcon kit gliders. The Russias have tiny wings, and as a
consequence require very low gross weight to climb well. The sandwich
fuselage helps keep the fuselage weight down, but makes the
construction so light that crashworthiness seems to suffer somewhat.
For the ASC ships, I don't know the rationale for full-sandwich
construction, except perhaps it made those huge shells stiffer and
easier to handle until bonded together.

I've hear that some manufacturers have include sandwich stiffeners in
key areas such as near the aft lift tube carrythroughs, but I've seen
relatively little of this in the crashed gliders I've picked through.
But that's mostly due to the selection process itself; I've had
precious little opportunity to inspect crashed high-end gliders such
as Duo Discus, DG1000, and ASH25. WIth luck, few such opportunities
will present themselves.

Thanks, Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com

[Craig[_2_]]

On Jun 10, 1:26 pm, Bob Kuykendall > wrote:
> > Can anyone comment on which manufacturers use "sandwich" construction
> > in the fuselage and which ones don't? I'm particularly interested in
> > the LS ships, but I'm also curious about what others are doing or have
> > done.
>
> Tough question. My take on it is:
>
> It's not going to break down well by manufacturer, or even by model.
> In then production lives of all ships there will be minor changes,
> including the starting or discontinuing of sandwich construction in
> various models.
>
> Most composite ships I've seen inside out have sandwich construction
> in the vertical fin. That stands to reason, it's usually a ruled
> surface that's easy to core and which gains a lot of panel stiffness
> with a little bit of foam. Some ships have virtually no sandwich
> construction anywhere in the fuselage, including the vertical fin. I
> think that most ASW 20 fall into this category.
>
> In my own fuselages I only have sandwich construction in the vertical
> fin, with the builder adding sandwich stiffeners under the cockpit
> rail and also at the skidmark patch of the fuselage belly under the
> pilot's butt.
>
> The only glider fuselages I've seen with all-over sandwich
> construction are the Russia AC4 and AC5, and the ASC American Spirit
> and American Falcon kit gliders. The Russias have tiny wings, and as a
> consequence require very low gross weight to climb well. The sandwich
> fuselage helps keep the fuselage weight down, but makes the
> construction so light that crashworthiness seems to suffer somewhat.
> For the ASC ships, I don't know the rationale for full-sandwich
> construction, except perhaps it made those huge shells stiffer and
> easier to handle until bonded together.
>
> I've hear that some manufacturers have include sandwich stiffeners in
> key areas such as near the aft lift tube carrythroughs, but I've seen
> relatively little of this in the crashed gliders I've picked through.
> But that's mostly due to the selection process itself; I've had
> precious little opportunity to inspect crashed high-end gliders such
> as Duo Discus, DG1000, and ASH25. WIth luck, few such opportunities
> will present themselves.
>
> Thanks, Bob K.http://www.hpaircraft.com

The ASW-15 used honeycomb core material over the entire fuselage and
the Phoebus used balsa. These were early attempts to maintain
structural stiffness without adding too much weight. In general it
was found that the weight reduction was minor compared to the cost and
added complexity of coring the fuselage. Additionally it's much
easier to repair a single skin fuselage than it is to deal with
sandwich construction over compound curves.

Craig

[[email protected]]

On Jun 10, 3:42*pm, wrote:
> Can anyone comment on which manufacturers use "sandwich" construction
> in the fuselage and which ones don't? I'm particularly interested in
> the LS ships, but I'm also curious about what others are doing or have
> done.
>
> Thanks,
> Dave

ASW-15
ASW-17
ASK-21
Major pain in the butt to repair compared to singel wall construction.
UH

[noel.wade]

On the "changes over time" subject:

Bob K mentioned Russia AC-4 models being sandwich construction... Not
so with all of them!

My early model (S/N #4) has solid/single-wall construction throughout
most of the fuse (I'd guesstimate over 95% by area), with only select
patches having any core material.

Take care,

--Noel

[[email protected]]

IIRC the Swiss built Diamants had a sandwich construction fuselage.

John Galloway

[Eric Greenwell]

wrote:
> Can anyone comment on which manufacturers use "sandwich" construction
> in the fuselage and which ones don't? I'm particularly interested in
> the LS ships, but I'm also curious about what others are doing or have
> done.

What is the reason for your interest? Do you want to design such a fuselage?

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

[[email protected]]

As others have said, it is more aircraft-specific versus manufacturer.

Some models that have sandwich construction: AS-K21, AS-W15, AS-W17,
AS-W12, Diamant, ASC Spirit / Falcon, Phoebus, Russia.

I do not believe LS ever made a sandwich fuselage.