cadddict...
I has been my experience that 2024-T42 is only specified where forming -T3 sheet for skins is not feasible. I'll bet a paycheck that these skins were specified as 2024-O HT to -T42 on the PL [or -T4 depending on how old the drawing is]. The implied fab process is solution HT, quench, form in the W temper and then age HT to -T42... which ususlly resulted in extremely high fidelity contour matches.
For a -T3 doubler to work on a compound-formed -T42 skin, the contour at the doubler location [on the skin] MUST be essentially flat, or an easily formed single curvature [rolled or draped]. Otherwise there will be a doubler-skin contor miss-match that could be significant; and the -T3 doubler will have to be formed to contour by hammering, stretching, peening, "english-wheel" forming, cross-rolling, etc.
I am working a skin issue where the compound curvature is slight but definitely significant for the area in question. The material was defined originally as Clad 2024-O sheet HT -T42 [as described above]. Formed internal doublers and triplers were added later-on in production. A new generation skin was specified as thicker clad 2024-T3 sheet, special quality, to eliminate the doublers and tripplers. The material is supposed-to-be strech-formed in the -T3 temper, stress relieved, then chem-milled to effectively mimick the added doublers/tripplers and original skins thickness. The new skins have a almost flat-rolled appearance and obviously do not fit the area in question. Nothing is working-out for these new skins which will probably have to be trashed. I have my suspicions as to what went wrong... but am not at liberty to explain.
Regards, Wil Taylor
Trust - But Verify!
We believe to be true what we prefer to be true.
For those who believe, no proof is required; for those who cannot believe, no proof is possible.