Before anyone else jumps on the bandwagon, I still stand by my "replace the extrusion" comment. Here's the deal... I believe that beating that spar cap back into shape would never be an approved repair - not by the FAA, not by any aircraft manufacturer, and I would hazard a guess that it would not be by John Thorp either. If I'm wrong about that I'll stand corrected. This is a major component of a main wing spar. True, it is towards the outer end of the wing, and therefore subject to less stress than if further inboard. It would possibly be plenty strong still, but do you know that? We go to extreme measures to avoid the slightest scratch or nick on spar components during manufacture because of the adverse effect on the fatigue strength & possibility of cracks forming in the structure. A spar cap that has been deformed has had it's yield strength exceeded, regardless of any surface damage. It's strength has quite likely been compromised. Bending the aluminum back again compounds the effect. I'm open to hearing a good reason, or analysis, about why I might be wrong about this. I think some of you guys are taking this issue too lightly, in my humble opinion. These are standards that have been developed over many years... many times learned the hard way.
|
I would have to look at the plans , but I believe a splice on the rear spar is permitted . As far as the main spar I vote with the other two and replace the top main spar cap rather than splice . When my butt is in the cradle I like have a solid piece holding me up at 12,000 ft ! 
We have structural engineers in the group and they may be able to weigh in here as to what may be permitted . 
