View Single Post
Old 02-12-24, 04:23 PM
  #210  
squirtdad
Senior Member
 
squirtdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Jose (Willow Glen) Ca
Posts: 9,911

Bikes: Kirk Custom JK Special, '84 Team Miyata,(dura ace old school) 80?? SR Semi-Pro 600 Arabesque

Mentioned: 107 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2364 Post(s)
Liked 2,887 Times in 1,574 Posts
Originally Posted by terrymorse
The truth is that carbon fiber composite is amazingly resistant to fatigue -- way, way better than metals. When I write that carbon fiber "does not fatigue", that is for real world applications true -- if the composite was properly designed and manufactured. Fatigue life is one of the features driving increased CF use in aircraft:


FAA Report 2011


The other truth about composite structures is that they are complex, and manufacturing defects can occur that may alter their fatigue life. That's why well-designed composites include a margin of safety. Even with this margin of safety, CF's still stronger, lighter, and much longer lasting than an equivalent metal structure.
What I don't get is why people want to compare plane wings and fuselages with bike frames.

The materials and build process are are not identical, and the structures, forces, designs, and function are not at all similar

what should be also be noted is that there are lots of different building methods using carbon composites in order to max out material strengths. Pre Preg, heat bonding and curing, resin and vacuum bag, positive form, negative form etc
__________________
Life is too short not to ride the best bike you have, as much as you can
(looking for Torpado Super light frame/fork or for Raleigh International frame fork 58cm)



squirtdad is offline