Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
And more time for aluminumThe wood will start to burn but it takes time for the wood to burn.
Again it depends what type of aluminum piece - Casting? Forging? Extrusion? Plate? Sheet? 2024? 2114? 7075? For the most part a piece of 7075 T6 the same size of your wood example will not burn and will probably melt when its eutectic point is reached, and comparing it to a same size piece of wood, (as the sizes you've given) could actually take more than minutes and depending on application and the fire source, hours to completely fail.Say you have a 2X6 and ignite it uniformly on all sides, How long does it take to to burn (char) it 1/2in deep all around? at this point you have about a 1X5 which while quite a bit weaker is still there.
What condition will the aluminum piece be in given the SAME duration of flame impingement?
I do get the point - you need to understand how aluminum is made, the type of aluminum alloys that go into structural components and how they are put together. Be it set on fire or taking it a point where it will structurally fail, an aluminum structure will be more resilient to any type of wood.I know that aircraft members are not made of 2x6s but I hope you get the point. Flames/heat can do a lot more to glues and joints than to solid bits of wood (and cut outs don't help) but there is a difference between setting something on fire and having the same thing structurally fail.
All true, but again we need to specify materialeach design, or even each area of each design is going to respond differently depending on the exact materials, the cross section, the amount of heat both temperature and total btu's and other factors.
So am I and I'm telling you from experience you're wrong. I've inspected many a wood aircraft and they could be very troublesome if not properly maintained and stored. I've seen wood aircraft have structural failures that aluminum aircraft would never have and seen leftovers after a crash that resulted in fire. All these reasons are why many manufacturers today stay away from wood and only home builders still use it as a building material.I think that to say one type of construction is always superior to the other is not realistic. Again I am talking about the time from the start of a fire to the point of something failing structurally.
For those who are interested, I found this study into the auto ignition properties needed to make certain woods burn
http://www.waset.org/journals/waset/v47/v47-13.pdf
The Link attached below is a study into spruce plywood, a major component of the Mosquito. I believe the Mosquito also used hardwod laminar framing, which, depending on the materials used and its moisture content, apparently, has an auto-ignition temperature of around 550-600 C (which I was unaware of until today)
http://www.doctorfire.com/wood_ign.pdf
Good info but I couldn't find the reference to spruce plywood
FLYBOYJ said:For the most part a piece of 7075 T6 the same size of your wood example will not burn and will probably melt when its eutectic point is reached, and comparing it to a same size piece of wood, (as the sizes you've given) could actually take more than minutes and depending on application and the fire source, hours to completely fail.
True - it has to reach a temperature where any heat treat temper is diminished. Ultimate failure will most likely depend on thesize of material and alloying.I am not expecting the aluminum, especially in large sections to burn.
"...same size of your wood example will not burn and will probably melt when its eutectic point is reached"
The aluminum doesn't have to reach it's eutectic point in order to fail structurally. It just has to reach a point at which is strength is considerably diminished. This can be several hundred degrees below it's melting point.
Yes. If we were to paint this discussion with a broad brush, an aircraft with an aluminum primary structure will hold up better to fire and elevated temperatures than wood."So am I and I'm telling you from experience you're wrong. I've inspected many a wood aircraft and they could be very troublesome if not properly maintained and stored. I've seen wood aircraft have structural failures that aluminum aircraft would never have. All these reasons are why many manufacturers today stay away from wood and only home builders still use it as a building material."
I thought we were talking about the different types (materials) of structure and how they might fail under a fire load. There is no doubt that your last three sentences are true but they don't have a lot to do with behavior in a fire do they?
You seem to have the idea that aluminium alloy member has to melt in order to fail.
In reality it will fail long before that, as the yield point is reduced by temperature.
Read my last post and the example I was giving. I never said "melt" in that statement. An aluminum material such as 7075 may reach its lower eutectic point without melting
FLYBOYJ said:For the most part a piece of 7075 T6 the same size of your wood example will not burn and will probably melt when its eutectic point is reached!
Sorry, I don't really understand.
1: What is your definition of "eutectic point" ?
2. What's is the relation to strength (defined as yield point or proof stress)?
Merry Christmas btw.
The mosquito couldn't carry torpedoes
Ju 88P did well agianst tanks
ProbablyColin am not sure which bomber or recon variant that is of the Ju 88 but it is not a night fighter