cfrp vs. metal

interesting discussion accessible to the peanut gallery...

http://runryder.com/helicopter/t308959p1/

On Jan 16, 12:12*am, jim beam wrote:
interesting discussion accessible to the peanut gallery...

http://runryder.com/helicopter/t308959p1/



cT=1.0



BD

On Jan 16, 12:12*am, jim beam wrote:
interesting discussion accessible to the peanut gallery...

http://runryder.com/helicopter/t308959p1/



cT=1.0



BD

wrote:
On Jan 16, 12:12�am, jim beam wrote:
interesting discussion accessible to the peanut gallery...

http://runryder.com/helicopter/t308959p1/



cT=1.0



BD


wow - posting something on-topic, factual and informative is trolling?
it seems r.b.t is at a new low.

jim beam wrote:

wow - posting something on-topic,

We don't fly RC helos. Not sure how much an application dominated by
high frequency vibration bears relevant comparison to our application,
which is characterized by a broad spectrum of loads up to and
exceeding yield stress.

factual

There's a lot more lore than data there. More than here even.

and informative

Looks like pretty much the same "carbon is awesome"-- "yeah well why
don't they make real airplanes out of it then?"-- "they would if they
were more awesome" kind of discussion we have seen many times here in
r.b.t land.

is trolling?
it seems r.b.t is at a new low.

No, but it seems you'd like to revisit the same old stuff for another
go 'round.

Chalo

Chalo wrote:
jim beam wrote:
wow - posting something on-topic,

We don't fly RC helos.

some inhabitants of this group don't ride bikes much either.



Not sure how much an application dominated by
high frequency vibration bears relevant comparison to our application,

that's evident - you're one of the people that denies the benefits of
cfrp in deadening vibration.



which is characterized by a broad spectrum of loads up to and
exceeding yield stress.

by no stretch of eve a fevered imagination does vibration imply yield.



factual

There's a lot more lore than data there. More than here even.

there is factual data chalo. and it's dumbed down for even simpletons
to understand.




and informative

Looks like pretty much the same "carbon is awesome"-- "yeah well why
don't they make real airplanes out of it then?"-- "they would if they
were more awesome" kind of discussion we have seen many times here in
r.b.t land.

it that's all you gathered from that thread, then your reading
comprehension skills need some work.



is trolling?
it seems r.b.t is at a new low.

No, but it seems you'd like to revisit the same old stuff for another
go 'round.

it seems we need to given that some people are still resistant to facts
and learning.

On Jan 16, 11:44 pm, Chalo wrote:
jim beam wrote:

wow - posting something on-topic,

We don't fly RC helos. Not sure how much an application dominated by
high frequency vibration bears relevant comparison to our application,
which is characterized by a broad spectrum of loads up to and
exceeding yield stress.

factual

There's a lot more lore than data there. More than here even.

and informative

Looks like pretty much the same "carbon is awesome"-- "yeah well why
don't they make real airplanes out of it then?"-- "they would if they
were more awesome" kind of discussion we have seen many times here in
r.b.t land.

is trolling?
it seems r.b.t is at a new low.

No, but it seems you'd like to revisit the same old stuff for another
go 'round.

Chalo

Yep. The discussion jim's linking to is no more astute than those
we've had, and it's less applicable. It's about toy helicopters.

- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Jan 16, 11:44 pm, Chalo wrote:
jim beam wrote:

wow - posting something on-topic,
We don't fly RC helos. Not sure how much an application dominated by
high frequency vibration bears relevant comparison to our application,
which is characterized by a broad spectrum of loads up to and
exceeding yield stress.

factual
There's a lot more lore than data there. More than here even.

and informative
Looks like pretty much the same "carbon is awesome"-- "yeah well why
don't they make real airplanes out of it then?"-- "they would if they
were more awesome" kind of discussion we have seen many times here in
r.b.t land.

is trolling?
it seems r.b.t is at a new low.
No, but it seems you'd like to revisit the same old stuff for another
go 'round.

Chalo

Yep. The discussion jim's linking to is no more astute than those
we've had, and it's less applicable. It's about toy helicopters.


among others, it covers two most relevant items pertinent to recent
discussion:

1. stiffness
2. fatigue

that you failed to pick up on that means only one thing - you're a
****ing idiot krygowski. but we already knew that. and it's nothing new.

jim beam wrote:

Chalo wrote:
*
Not sure how much an application dominated by
high frequency vibration bears relevant comparison to our application,

that's evident - you're one of the people that denies the benefits of
cfrp in deadening vibration.

which is characterized by a broad spectrum of loads up to and
exceeding yield stress.

by no stretch of eve a fevered imagination does vibration imply yield.

It doesn't, and I didn't say that. If you reread my sentence
excerpted here, you may see what I was saying.

Chalo

jim beam wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote:

Yep. *The discussion jim's linking to is no more astute than those
we've had, and it's less applicable. *It's about toy helicopters.

among others, it covers two most relevant items pertinent to recent
discussion:

1. stiffness
2. fatigue

These are a couple of the few areas in which CFRP ekes out some
advantage over metals, which you seem to think are the only qualities
that matter. For the rest of us, there are materials properties such
as

- impact resistance
- abrasion resistance
- notch sensitivity
- ductility
- toughness

that matter quite a lot in making a bike frame or component suitable
or unsuitable to our conditions. For many if not most of us, the
qualities I mentioned above are far more relevant to how long we can
use our bikes than fatigue life, specific stiffness, damping, or
whatever other property you choose to make plastic seem superior.

The polyethylene in a milk jug has much better fatigue properties and
vibration damping than aluminum or steel. Do you think that makes it
a better pick for a bike frame, crank, or handlebar than metal?
Bottle glass has excellent specific stiffness and fatigue resistance.
You want a seatpost made of it?

Chalo