[D_Alex]

I have a problem with every statement you made in your first reply, starting with "aerospace engineer here", which implies you are specially qualified to discuss airplane structural design.

There are many disciplines in "aerospace engineering", and if you say work on instrumentation, then saying "aerospace engineer here" in this context is about as misleading as saying "circles are just squares with large radius corners" (they are also "triangles with large radius corners").

What do you actually do in our job?

[na85]

>What do you actually do in our job?

I work in airworthiness and maintenance, so I deal with aerostructures on a daily basis. You?

>about as misleading as saying "circles are just squares with large radius corners"

What happens if you take a square with sides of length x, and smooth the corners down until the radius of each corner is x/2?

[D_Alex]

>I work in airworthiness and maintenance, so I deal with aerostructures on a daily basis. You?

I know you work in airworthiness from your post history. It also indicates you work with flight systems, and not structures. Amirite? What is your professional qualification?

You can see what I do in my profile.

>What happens if you take a square with sides of length x, and smooth the corners down until the radius of each corner is x/2?

Same thing as happens with any regular polygon with sides of length x.

You said "It's not the shape of the window but the radius of the corner". This, like every other statement in your initial comment, is a misleading half truth at best. The true picture is complex, but the shape definitely matters, because you want to avoid abrupt local changes of stiffness in the direction of most stress (this can happen without any openings even, for example by adding a local bracket).

[na85]

>Amirite?

You are not quite rite, no. "Flight systems" is ill-defined but if you mean flight controls like elevators and ailerons and whatnot, then yes. I also work with structures as a routine part of maintenance, repair and overhaul. Why would you assume my HN comments are a good way to accurately determine my area of professional expertise? Most of my comments are just shitposting about javascript anyways.

>The true picture is complex, but the shape definitely matters

Of course it matters in a general context, but what matters more in the context of fatigue-related crack growth and stress concentration is the radius of the corner. This is why we stop-drill cracks. This is basic undergrad stuff.

In any case, I see from your profile you work in oil and gas. Not sure why you have so much emotional investment in this topic but this quote of yours:

>Don't listen to the "aerospace engineer" that answered you. The reason why cockpit windows are so angular is of course for visibility.

Doesn't refute or rebut anything I've written on this topic. In fact I was not attempting to explain why cockpit windows are polygonal in shape, only that the corners aren't as sharp as it might seem at first glance/long distance because it seemed like OP was equating "rectangular" with "causes structural problems".

I probably won't reply again, have a great day bro.

[D_Alex]

> Not sure why you have so much emotional investment in this topic

I can't sleep when someone is wrong on the internet!! :)

Peace.