
Jim Floyd:RAeS Lecture
Jim Floyd: |
![]() |
![]()
The Fourteenth British Commonwealth LectureThe Canadian Approach to All-Weather
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
The
arrangement of the intakes is shown in Fig. 8, and
consists basically of the following. T'he structure of the CF-105 is relatively conventional. but the thin low aspect ratio delta configuration and the two engines buried in the fuselage have introduced a number of interesting structural problems (Fig. 9). The
outer wing consists of a multi-spar, highly swept,
box beam, with heavy 75ST6 tapered skins and ribs
running normal to the main spars. The trailing edge
consists of a control box housing the aileron control
linkage system, to which the aileron is attached
by a continuous piano hinge. The outer wing is attached
to the inner wing, by a peripheral bolted joint,
covered by a fairing. The
fuselage has been basically designed around the two
engines and their intake system, with the crew cockpit
nesting in between the intake ducts. The engines
are suspended from the inner wing and they are enclosed
by fuselage at the sides and bottom. Underneath the
inner wing spars, heavy formers attach the fuselage
to the wing. The fuselage sides are attached to the
One
of the most difficult structural problems has been
the stowage of the undercarriage gear, which is relatively
long, in view of the high wing arrangement and the
large angles of attack at takeoff and landing.
With
the low aspect ratio delta wing arrangement it was
not possible to consider the wing acting as a beam
attached to a rigid fuselage. The wing deflects chordwise
under the inertial, lift and elevator loads, and
this in turn affects fuselage bending, and the whole
structure was analysed as a fuselage-wing combination,
with the wing considered to act as a plate. We
felt it was important that the structure had a relatively
uniform fatigue life, and that there should be no
point where the stress concentration factors exceeded
the average value by any great amount. A great deal
of attention was paid to obtaining the best possible
fatigue life without too much of a weight penalty,
by careful detail design and detailed stress analysis. A
great deal of ad hoc and basic research testing
was conducted on representative structures in a sound
chamber, since much of the structure is exposed to
the high acoustic potential damage from afterburner
operation. Many
structural components have been tested, ranging from
complete tests of the whole aircraft, down to very
minor tests such as rivets. Approximately 120 major
structural tests have been carried out, some consisting
of tests of 30 to 40 specimens to get a representative
figure.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CONVERTED TO HTML,
AND HYPERLINKS ADDED, MARCH 28, 2001.
Scott McArthur.
![]()
ONLINE
STORE FEATURED ITEM: |
|---|
| |
|---|
| | HOME | STORE | NEW INFO | CONTACT US | ABOUT US | |
© C© Copyright AvroArrow.Org, 2009. Materials may be freely copied and distributed subject to the inclusion of the copyright notice, and credit must be given to AvroArrow.Org. The site is intended for historical and informational purposes. This site contains links to other Internet sites. These links are not endorsements of any products or services in such sites, and no information in such sites has been endorsed or approved by this site. |




A
number of modifications were made to the ramps as a result of these
tests. One of the problems encountered was an interaction between the
inlet shock and the boundary layer from the ramp, which caused fluctuating
conditions inside the intake similar to the commonly known " intake
buzz." Perforations were installed on the face of the ramp, and
the boundary layer air from the ramp was sucked through these per-
forations by an extractor, seen below the intake, which has a series
of cascades.
The
1/6th scale model, tested in the N.A.C.A. 8 ft. x 6 ft. Lewis
tunnel, represented the full scale aircraft configuration
as far rearward as the engine compressor, face. It included
the canopy, fuselage inlet ducts, and bleed, to determine
the interaction of the fuselage and canopy surfaces with
the air flowing through the intake.