I take some issue with statement “the data that faklord has presented is incorrect”:BayAreaKite wrote: ↑Thu Jan 12, 2023 2:11 amThis is my last response to this topic. I am not arguing anything, I am giving factual engineering principles and analysis techniques which support my conclusion that this test method is an inaccurate representation of mast loading conditions. Furthermore, the data that faklord has presented is incorrect because the boundary conditions and lengths used for each mast are different. You are arguing that it is correct, without any engineering analysis or supporting data other than the statement that what faklord has done must be correct because he did it, and I have not.
Secondly, saying an aluminum mast is superior in torsion to a carbon mast is again an inaccurate statement. Aluminum and carbon fiber are materials, and materials are only 1/2 (actually less than 1/2) of the equation for stiffness/strength. The other, and more important influence on structural properties, is design. The shape, the chord length, and thickness. So there are a lot of carbon masts that are way stiffer (in both torsion and bending) than aluminum masts, Project Cedrus being one of them, because of the design (layup, thickness, chord length, etc). Carbon has a much higher modulus of elasticity (stiffness) than aluminum, but if not designed properly, will not necessarily be as stiff in a finished product.
You can learn a lot on my blog. I have a whole post devoted to structural materials and solid mechanics: https://projectcedrus.com/general/solid ... sites-101/ At some point, I will get around to benchmarking the latest batch of masts, through proper testing/analysis.
These tests are now documented here viewtopic.php?f=196&t=2414890 and are considered to be more realistic of real use loading.
Users browsing this forum: bragnouff, downunder, gl, hydroholic and 180 guests