Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   Digital Photography (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f37-digital-photography.html)
-   -   Plastic strikes again! (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t752833-plastic-strikes-again.html)

RichA 08-14-2011 05:41 PM

Plastic strikes again!
 
Damn that contraction plastic experiences after hot molding!!

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=39111658


PeterN 08-14-2011 06:29 PM

Re: Plastic strikes again!
 
On 8/14/2011 1:41 PM, RichA wrote:
> Damn that contraction plastic experiences after hot molding!!
>
> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=39111658
>


Is shoddy manufacturing, or the material used?

--
Peter

Robert Coe 08-14-2011 09:22 PM

Re: Plastic strikes again!
 
On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 10:41:35 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
: Damn that contraction plastic experiences after hot molding!!
:
: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=39111658

IOW, you can make a bad product out of a good material if you cut corners or
don't handle the material properly. Actually, I think we knew that, but thanks
anyway for reminding us. It's a dog-eat-bone world out there, and one can
hardly be too careful.

Bob

PeterN 08-14-2011 11:38 PM

Re: Plastic strikes again!
 
On 8/14/2011 5:22 PM, Robert Coe wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 10:41:35 -0700 (PDT), RichA<rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
> : Damn that contraction plastic experiences after hot molding!!
> :
> : http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=39111658
>
> IOW, you can make a bad product out of a good material if you cut corners or
> don't handle the material properly. Actually, I think we knew that, but thanks
> anyway for reminding us. It's a dog-eat-bone world out there, and one can
> hardly be too careful.
>


I wonder how much effort Rich has put in to compare the coefficient of
expansion used, with the coefficient of expansion of likely metallic.
And if so, how they are treated in the finished product.


--
Peter

MG 08-15-2011 05:10 PM

Re: Plastic strikes again!
 
"RichA" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bdd29679-28c9-489d-8cbd-4905400c59d2@o11g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
> Damn that contraction plastic experiences after hot molding!!
>
> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=39111658
>


I heard a rumour that Boeing is building an aeroplane out of plastic.

MG



RichA 08-15-2011 06:43 PM

Re: Plastic strikes again!
 
On Aug 15, 1:35*pm, Alan Browne <alan.bro...@FreelunchVideotron.ca>
wrote:
> On 2011-08-15 13:26 , Savageduck wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 2011-08-15 10:10:40 -0700, "MG" <nos...@nospam.com> said:

>
> >> "RichA" <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:bdd29679-28c9-489d-8cbd-4905400c59d2@o11g2000yql.googlegroups.com....
> >>> Damn that contraction plastic experiences after hot molding!!

>
> >>>http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=39111658

>
> >> I heard a rumour that Boeing is building an aeroplane out of plastic.

>
> >> MG

>
> > Aerospace composites are an old story, and you are a lot closer than you
> > might have intended, see the Boeing 777 with several major airfoil and
> > floor components built with composites, and then there is the AirBus
> > A320 & A380;

>
> 787 takes it quite a bit further with composites - main fuselage is a
> composite structure. *This allows higher cruise altitude (no metal
> fatigue from the pressurization cycle) thus saving fuel and allowing
> higher cruise speed. *(787 pushes in many areas: vastly reduced
> hydraulics and no hydraulic pumps hanging on the engines; pressurization
> is not from the engines but separate electrical compressors (saves a lot
> press ducting ...) etc.)
>
> The A350 will make similar pushes.
>
> --
> gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.


People need to understand that a frigging jetplane isn't using the
plastic scrap used in a cheap camera body. Example: A carbon fiber
tube, aircraft grade, 2" wide and about 4ft long costs about $500.00.
The polycarbone scrap used in the cameras is about 1/1,000th of that
cost. The two also have VASTLY different structure. So WHY are you
people comparing the two, there is no KINSHIP between them!

PeterN 08-15-2011 11:19 PM

Re: Plastic strikes again!
 
On 8/14/2011 11:49 PM, Rich wrote:
> PeterN<peter.new@nospam.verizon.net> wrote in
> news:4e485c8a$0$12494$8f2e0ebb@news.shared-secrets.com:
>
>> On 8/14/2011 5:22 PM, Robert Coe wrote:
>>> On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 10:41:35 -0700 (PDT), RichA<rander3127@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> : Damn that contraction plastic experiences after hot molding!!
>>> :
>>> : http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...message=391116
>>> : 58
>>>
>>> IOW, you can make a bad product out of a good material if you cut
>>> corners or don't handle the material properly. Actually, I think we
>>> knew that, but thanks anyway for reminding us. It's a dog-eat-bone
>>> world out there, and one can hardly be too careful.
>>>

>>
>> I wonder how much effort Rich has put in to compare the coefficient of
>> expansion used, with the coefficient of expansion of likely metallic.
>> And if so, how they are treated in the finished product.
>>
>>

>
> Lots. Metal is no where as bad as plastic.


Proof, please!

--
Peter

PeterN 08-15-2011 11:20 PM

Re: Plastic strikes again!
 
On 8/14/2011 11:50 PM, Rich wrote:
> PeterN<peter.new@nospam.verizon.net> wrote in news:4e481427$0$12461
> $8f2e0ebb@news.shared-secrets.com:
>
>> On 8/14/2011 1:41 PM, RichA wrote:
>>> Damn that contraction plastic experiences after hot molding!!
>>>
>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=39111658
>>>

>>
>> Is shoddy manufacturing, or the material used?
>>

>
> Could be that, partly. Panasonic shifted solid production from Japan to
> China.


It's in their blood, right?


--
Peter

PeterN 08-15-2011 11:21 PM

Re: Plastic strikes again!
 
On 8/15/2011 1:26 PM, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2011-08-15 10:10:40 -0700, "MG" <nospam@nospam.com> said:
>
>> "RichA" <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:bdd29679-28c9-489d-8cbd-4905400c59d2@o11g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
>>> Damn that contraction plastic experiences after hot molding!!
>>>
>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=39111658
>>>

>>
>> I heard a rumour that Boeing is building an aeroplane out of plastic.
>>
>> MG

>
> Aerospace composites are an old story, and you are a lot closer than you
> might have intended, see the Boeing 777 with several major airfoil and
> floor components built with composites, and then there is the AirBus
> A320 & A380;
>
> <
> http://www.compositesworld.com/colum...druple-by-2026
>
>>

> < http://www.acpsales.com/aerospace.htm >
>
>

A stealthy comment.

--
Peter

PeterN 08-15-2011 11:23 PM

Re: Plastic strikes again!
 
On 8/15/2011 2:43 PM, RichA wrote:
> On Aug 15, 1:35 pm, Alan Browne<alan.bro...@FreelunchVideotron.ca>
> wrote:
>> On 2011-08-15 13:26 , Savageduck wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 2011-08-15 10:10:40 -0700, "MG"<nos...@nospam.com> said:

>>
>>>> "RichA"<rander3...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:bdd29679-28c9-489d-8cbd-4905400c59d2@o11g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> Damn that contraction plastic experiences after hot molding!!

>>
>>>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=39111658

>>
>>>> I heard a rumour that Boeing is building an aeroplane out of plastic.

>>
>>>> MG

>>
>>> Aerospace composites are an old story, and you are a lot closer than you
>>> might have intended, see the Boeing 777 with several major airfoil and
>>> floor components built with composites, and then there is the AirBus
>>> A320& A380;

>>
>> 787 takes it quite a bit further with composites - main fuselage is a
>> composite structure. This allows higher cruise altitude (no metal
>> fatigue from the pressurization cycle) thus saving fuel and allowing
>> higher cruise speed. (787 pushes in many areas: vastly reduced
>> hydraulics and no hydraulic pumps hanging on the engines; pressurization
>> is not from the engines but separate electrical compressors (saves a lot
>> press ducting ...) etc.)
>>
>> The A350 will make similar pushes.
>>
>> --
>> gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.

>
> People need to understand that a frigging jetplane isn't using the
> plastic scrap used in a cheap camera body. Example: A carbon fiber
> tube, aircraft grade, 2" wide and about 4ft long costs about $500.00.
> The polycarbone scrap used in the cameras is about 1/1,000th of that
> cost. The two also have VASTLY different structure. So WHY are you
> people comparing the two, there is no KINSHIP between them!


Plastic is plastic.

A rose by any other name .....

--
Peter


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.