Wing Box Design 1

[admiral007]

I am reviewing a design of a wing. This is a very large wing, and for manufacturing purposes, it has been split into several parts (leading edge, control surface and the wing box).

The designers also split up the wing box. My question has to do with how they split up the wing box. They split the box into three sections, but the breaks are parallel to the root of the wing (in between ribs) and not perpendicular to the root of the wing (in between spars).

Also, the current design connects the wing box sections (which are laminate) together using NAS bolts. There is no structure to provide a load path between the leading or trailing edges of each box section.

I've attached a simplified sketch. DESIGN 1 is what the design currently calls for (breaks parallel to the root). DESIGN 2 is what I would have thought would be a better way to break up the wing (breaks perpendicular to the root).

It's important to note that because of the size of this wing that there are cables attached to the tip of the wing to help stabilize it in flight.

Any thoughts on either of these designs? Which way is better to have the breaks and why?

I think that the current design (DESIGN 1) would see high bending moments that would cause the structure to fail.

Any thoughts or comments will be appreciated.

Thanks!

--Erik

 

[rb1957]

i'd doubt it, i expect the partner has design responsibility (design, build, substantiation, possibly certification) and the prime is "just" doing due diligence (checking, verifying).

the prize piece of BS who'll hear is ...
"the partner has the best interest of the project at heart ['cause that's how they'll make money]"

the reality is they got skrewed on price (by your procurement folks), there's no room in the budget for extras that come along (the spec is nearly always missing some stuff), there's no room to improve the design as it matures (you're already seeing some of that ... "this is the design we've chosen and we're not changing"), and bottom line it's your name (not the partner's) on the plane so you carry the can (more important in the commercial world).

 

[admiral007]

@rb1957
everything you said, you nailed spot on.