Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-im
October 24, 2009 - November 03, 2009
pol, can a person ever pull 1760 lbs. on the cable?- If they could, would
n't a wood structure fail first...I don't know...like the elevator itself?
- Since no one here seems to have heard of a control cable failure, that
must mean no Pietenpol has seen 1760 lbs. of force on a 1/8" control cable,
so what are the REAL loads on this plane and it's controls?- I think peo
ple get a little too extreme and have a plane built for mach 2 when it real
ly only flies at 70 MPH.
-
HOWEVER, my disclaimer...I have been wrong before and have abandoned other
"great" ideas that I have had, this may yet be another. But that decision w
on't be made until I have some facts, and some REAL numbers.
-
Anyone have another formula for pull out stress or bolt sheer?
-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Jack, I got as far as finding the area using the formula you gave me. That
number is .11733.- I am not clear how to figure tube dia. and wall thickn
ess to this number.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
Sounds to me like this push-pull tube idea is opening the preverbial Pando
ra's Box of "if I change this, then I must change that,.......... and that
, and that................
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Sat, Oct 24, 2009 3:03 pm
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
Jack, I got as far as finding the area using the formula you gave me. That
number is .11733. I am not clear how to figure tube dia. and wall thickn
ess to this number.
========================
===========
-= - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Whoa - what comments are you responding to Mike?
The only reply to your post that I saw was from Jack, and all I saw in his reply
were sound reasons explaining why the cables are a better system FOR THIS AIRPLANE.
As he stated, the geometry of the Air Camper will result in a heavier
and more expensive linkage as compared to the cables. Tony Bingelis says that
push/pull tubes MAY weigh less than a cable system. That will depend on the layout
of the airplane, and in this case, the control system has to go under the
seat, and then get back up into alignment with the elevators and rudder. Cables
can change direction with the addition of a simple pulley, where push/pull
tubes will require bellcranks - which one do you think is heavier? It is not possible
to run a tube straight from the firewall to the rudder in this airplane,
unless you have a properly sized and located hole in your torso for the tube
to pass through. Also, in THIS airplane, the elevators are separate entities,
so you would either have to redesign them so that they are tied together, or
run two push/pull tubes for the elevators.
To quote your original post "I'm all about saving weight on my plane". Jack's reply
explained that the push/pull system will end up being heavier than the cable
system. So what IS the motivation to change to the push/pull system?
Regarding your request for a formula, the thing to keep in mind is that in designing
a mechanism like a push/pull system, you need to analyze each component
and each connection in the system, and the loads that could be imposed on each
component. Those loads are used to determine the size and shape that each component
will assume. There are the different tubes that need material, diameter
and wall thickness to be determined, and the size of all the threaded connections,
and the design and positioning and fastening of the bellcranks, etc. It's
not simple. Not something that I would feel like spending a couple of days working
on - especially since there doesn't appear to be any benefit to changing
the system. Or do you know of a REAL benefit? (not just an opinion or guess)
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269255#269255
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
Hosey Challis built his 8Th Piet, Challis Chafinch with a push-pull tube that operated
from the stick up to the wing centersection it eliminated the cross control
wires.
This is the Piet that I flew for many years, all worked perfect, is in a Museum
now in England
Pieti Lowell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269256#269256
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
The equation you introduced is effective for the pull-out strength of
the threads in a hole. The "(shear load)" you mentioned is the shear
stress that the material can take, not the applied load.
A good (in fact, one of the best) sources for structural analysis is
free:
http://euler9.tripod.com/analysis/asm.html
It's not really for beginners, though, so be careful if this is new to
you. This is reasonably comprehensive.
While the Piet isn't an FAA certified airplane, it often makes sense to
use the certification requirements for determining the loads. Federal
Air Regulations, Part 23, covers this:
http://www.flightsimaviation.com/data/FARS/part_23.html
Control system loads are covered in 23.395 and more to the point in
23.397:
http://www.flightsimaviation.com/data/FARS/part_23-397.html
As you see, the control system doesn't need to be stronger than these
forces applied to the control stick. It's a simple matter to go from
there to the loads in any single part of the system.
Without looking at the system you are designing, but thinking only of
push-pull tubes, it strikes me that the major things to look at are:
a) the end fittings, which can get complicated. Look at the holes, the
pins, the clevis (if any) and the connection to the tube, including any
welds or fasteners, and their holes if there are any.
b) the tension strength of the tube, that is, accounting for any holes
or threads,
c) the compression strength,
d) the Euler buckling strength,
e) and finally the local crippling, sometimes referred to as D/t
crippling.
f) It's also important to make sure that the new system is no more
flexible than the old one. You'll need to know the effective modulus of
elasticity of the cabling, and that often seems to be around 11 x10^6
psi, based upon the nominal area. You can get better data from
MIL-HDBK-5, I think. There might not be much, though, I simply don't
remember. But the 11 msi value is ball-park.
I'm sorry that I don't have a handy link to MIL-HDBK-5H, the best source
for metal data, but after you download a copy, which should be free,
look at the end of Chapter 2 for steel or 3 for aluminum; chapter 2.8 or
3.11. There are handy graphs of element properties for tubes, which
include both forms of buckling. Incidentally, H is the best version. The
newer letters miss some of the data more applicable to general aviation
and are harder to use.
David Paule
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 1:05 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
Push/pull tubes are used in all kinds of aircraft safely. All of
which have more aggressive performance then a slow, draggy, 80+ year old
designed Piet. Yet most seem to think to make the switch to push/pull is
a bad idea...why? I know most just get upset because I stray from the
sacred bible of building the Pietenpol...the prints. Yet non have
legitimate reasons for not doing it...at least not any they share. If
you guys have facts for NOT using them, please, do tell. To make a
statement and not back it up is useless.
The Bingelis books talks about aluminum tubes for push/pull...
you know, the books everyone raves over. He also talks about how these
systems MAY weigh less then a cable system with the cables, pulleys,
brackets, shackles, bearings, nicopress fittings, etc.
If you could run a tube from the firewall to the rudder and
support the length along the way with, say bushings, there would be no
flexing/bending, yes?
I don't have the answers...yet, that is why I am here. I am
looking for ANSWERS, not opinion, guesses, or dialog on how this 80 year
old plane built by a guy in his garage can't be improved upon with some
common sense and some homework.
Here is what one engineer sent me:
Pull out load = (1/3)(dia rod)(pi)(shear load)(length of
engagement)
For some generic heavy wall tube from McMaster Carr and a 1/4-28
male thread rod end, I get: 1962 lbs. worse case with .500" thread
engagement, 2944 lbs. with .75" engagement.
The 7X19 SS cable is rated at 1760 lbs. Using the controls in
the Pietenpol, can a person ever pull 1760 lbs. on the cable? If they
could, wouldn't a wood structure fail first...I don't know...like the
elevator itself? Since no one here seems to have heard of a control
cable failure, that must mean no Pietenpol has seen 1760 lbs. of force
on a 1/8" control cable, so what are the REAL loads on this plane and
it's controls? I think people get a little too extreme and have a plane
built for mach 2 when it really only flies at 70 MPH.
HOWEVER, my disclaimer...I have been wrong before and have
abandoned other "great" ideas that I have had, this may yet be another.
But that decision won't be made until I have some facts, and some REAL
numbers.
Anyone have another formula for pull out stress or bolt sheer?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com> |
Mike,
I believe the statement you are referring to regarding weight is as follows:
"It is well to reflect on the fact that although individual cables are
lighter then push-pull tubes, the cable systems in high wing aircraft do
require the fabrication and installation of many pulleys, brackets and
guards. As a consequence the cable installation tends to become heavier and
more complex than *you would expect*."
No direct comparison is made to one being heavier than the other. A
nitpicking point I know....
Anywho...if you want a Tony B. statement in support of control cables you
can find it on page 120 of 'The Sportplane Builder' (the blue book):
"I marvel at the genius of the old time aircraft builder. His basic concepts
have hardly been changed or improved. Whatever improvements there have been,
it seems, are mostly in the development of improved designs and
sophisticated materials. The cable-operated control system is a good
example. It's as popular and as useful today as it ever was, and you can
find it in use on the most up-to-date aircraft as well as the oldest
antique. It's quite reasonable to say that using aircraft cables to activate
your controls surfaces gives you the lightest, simplest, safest, most
economical, and most effective way of doing the job ever conceived."
He then talks about cable specs for a paragraph or two. A bit farther down
the page he states:
"The advantages of cables are many. They are light, strong, and flexible.
They do not require line-of-sight routing, and slight deviations to bypass
structural obstacles present no problem. The cables can be deflected by
simple fairleads and even routed around pulleys to change direction. Try
that with a push-pull tube! Since the cable is light in weight, it can be
installed over considerable lengths without intermediate support.
Cable-operated surfaces respond instantly and precisely to cockpit control
movements because they are used in pairs and are stretched to the proper
tension by turnbuckles. This effectively eliminates all play in the control
system."
Etc, etc.
Tony B thinks cables work pretty darn good. So did Bernard Pietenpol, as he
designed his airplane with a cable operated control system, and in all the
years and all the other aircraft he built he apparently didn't see the
benefit to designing a push-pull tube control system for it. I'm not a
betting man, but I would feel confident in wagering that an overwhelming
majority of all of those that successfully built and flew Piets in the past
80 years used a cable control system as well.
I don't think the resistance to your proposed changes is because of some
"stick to the plans, just because" snobbery. I think it is because if you
build to the plans, the airplane will work (and work well). 80 years of
Pietenpol building has shown that to be the case. Are there certain
deficiencies here and there, or areas that can be changed to improve certain
things here and there? Sure, it's not a 100% perfect design. You can emulate
what other builder's have done, or come up with your own solutions. A wider
center section for more fuel in the wing, tilt the seat back for comfort, so
on and so forth. However in this case I don't see the need to "improve" this
area of the design. I can't recall having heard anyone with a properly
constructed flying Pietenpol say that the cable operated control is
deficient in practical application.
You don't have a flying Pietenpol (and neither do I), so we can't speak from
firsthand experience. We can compare it to other types of control systems,
and run the numbers, which is all well and good. But I would look at what
those that have well built and nice flying Pietenpols have to say about it.
What they have built and are successfully and happily flying (a cable
actuated control system) would indicate that it works well. Therefore, I
would also say that I fail to see how you can improve here; it just seems to
be a change for the sake of change. And if that is what you want to do, go
right ahead. It is your airplane, you can do what you would like with it.
Have a good day,
Ryan
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Michael Perez wrote:
> Push/pull tubes are used in all kinds of aircraft safely. All of which have
> more aggressive performance then a slow, draggy, 80+ year old designed Piet.
> Yet most seem to think to make the switch to push/pull is a bad idea...why?
> I know most just get upset because I stray from the sacred bible of building
> the Pietenpol...the prints. Yet non have legitimate reasons for not doing
> it...at least not any they share. If you guys have facts for NOT using
> them, please, do tell. To make a statement and not back it up is useless.
>
> The Bingelis books talks about aluminum tubes for push/pull... you know,
> the books everyone raves over. He also talks about how these systems MAY
> weigh less then a cable system with the cables, pulleys, brackets, shackles,
> bearings, nicopress fittings, etc.
>
> If you could run a tube from the firewall to the rudder and support the
> length along the way with, say bushings, there would be no flexing/bending,
> yes?
>
> I don't have the answers...yet, that is why I am here. I am looking for
> ANSWERS, not opinion, guesses, or dialog on how this 80 year old plane built
> by a guy in his garage can't be improved upon with some common sense and
> some homework.
>
> Here is what one engineer sent me:
>
>
> Pull out load = (1/3)(dia rod)(pi)(shear load)(length of engagement)
>
>
> For some generic heavy wall tube from McMaster Carr and a 1/4-28 male
> thread rod end, I get: 1962 lbs. worse case with .500" thread engagement,
> 2944 lbs. with .75" engagement.
>
>
> The 7X19 SS cable is rated at 1760 lbs. Using the controls in the
> Pietenpol, can a person ever pull 1760 lbs. on the cable? If they could,
> wouldn't a wood structure fail first...I don't know...like the elevator
> itself? Since no one here seems to have heard of a control cable failure,
> that must mean no Pietenpol has seen 1760 lbs. of force on a 1/8" control
> cable, so what are the REAL loads on this plane and it's controls? I think
> people get a little too extreme and have a plane built for mach 2 when it
> really only flies at 70 MPH.
>
>
> HOWEVER, my disclaimer...I have been wrong before and have abandoned other
> "great" ideas that I have had, this may yet be another. But that decision
> won't be made until I have some facts, and some REAL numbers.
>
>
> Anyone have another formula for pull out stress or bolt sheer?
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Here's a link to some photos of the Challis Chaffinch that Lowell referred to.
http://www.shhas.co.uk/GALLERY_files/photos/Challis%20Chaffinch%20Test%20Flight/image_14.html
The aileron push/pull tube can be seen on the right side. Interesting to note that
it is officially not a Pietenpol Air Camper - it is a Challis Chaffinch. The
builder made a number of visible changes - including the shape of the empennage,
a widened center-section (although the fuel tank appears to be in the fuselage).
Undoubtedly there are other changes that are not visible. I would think
that any builder building their EIGHTH copy of a plane might have a few ideas
about ways they would like to change things.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269260#269260
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Michael,
I'm not an engineer.not even college educated, so I cannot answer, directly,
the question you raise about engineering push tubes.
So what bothers me about this post?
First is an emotional response - that to someone who feels that Mr.
Pientenpol was, ".a guy in his garage." and that you can improve upon his
design with ".some common sense and some homework." I am sure that I'm not
the only one on this list who reveres the designer of this airplane as a
genius! And, since you bring up the "sacred Bible", it is a near religious
experience for me, as I have wanted to build a Pietenpol for over 35 years!
You may as well be saying that Jesus was a fraud, or that my mother wears
combat boots! I'm pretty sure Bernard Pietenpol used both common sense and
homework, along with a wealth of experience and education.
My second response, after spending 30 minutes attaching the hand-hold at the
tail, was the realization that you, nor anyone, can "improve" his design.
All you can do is illustrate the genius and flexibility of a fantastic set
of plans. Plans that allow you to make many variations to suit your
personality (or cover your mistakes!). Have I made changes to that design?
ABSOLUTELY! Including push rods similar to, and inspired by, Peter in
Australia. But I am reminded of a friend of mine who lives in the woods of
Montana, who insists on a family prayer every time they cut down a tree. I
am grateful to the Man who designed and built this little plane, and know
that I cannot improve it.only personalize it!
Just a suggestion, as I am sure you are a decent person and obviously a
skilled woodworker capable of building a show piece and eventually
hob-nobbing with all the Pieters, a simple, "Thanks, Jack, I'll take that
into consideration," would have been far more 'politic.'
I look forward to the day than you & I can toast a beer (Pale Ale, of
course) to this incredible journey made possible by one man.
Gary Boothe
Cool, Ca.
Pietenpol
WW Corvair Conversion, mounted
Tail done, Fuselage on gear
(15 ribs down.)
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Perez
Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 12:06 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
Push/pull tubes are used in all kinds of aircraft safely. All of which have
more aggressive performance then a slow, draggy, 80+ year old designed Piet.
Yet most seem to think to make the switch to push/pull is a bad idea...why?
I know most just get upset because I stray from the sacred bible of building
the Pietenpol...the prints. Yet non have legitimate reasons for not doing
it...at least not any they share. If you guys have facts for NOT using
them, please, do tell. To make a statement and not back it up is useless.
The Bingelis books talks about aluminum tubes for push/pull... you know, the
books everyone raves over. He also talks about how these systems MAY weigh
less then a cable system with the cables, pulleys, brackets, shackles,
bearings, nicopress fittings, etc.
If you could run a tube from the firewall to the rudder and support the
length along the way with, say bushings, there would be no flexing/bending,
yes?
I don't have the answers...yet, that is why I am here. I am looking for
ANSWERS, not opinion, guesses, or dialog on how this 80 year old plane built
by a guy in his garage can't be improved upon with some common sense and
some homework.
Here is what one engineer sent me:
Pull out load = (1/3)(dia rod)(pi)(shear load)(length of engagement)
For some generic heavy wall tube from McMaster Carr and a 1/4-28 male thread
rod end, I get: 1962 lbs. worse case with .500" thread engagement, 2944
lbs. with .75" engagement.
The 7X19 SS cable is rated at 1760 lbs. Using the controls in the
Pietenpol, can a person ever pull 1760 lbs. on the cable? If they could,
wouldn't a wood structure fail first...I don't know...like the elevator
itself? Since no one here seems to have heard of a control cable failure,
that must mean no Pietenpol has seen 1760 lbs. of force on a 1/8" control
cable, so what are the REAL loads on this plane and it's controls? I think
people get a little too extreme and have a plane built for mach 2 when it
really only flies at 70 MPH.
HOWEVER, my disclaimer...I have been wrong before and have abandoned other
"great" ideas that I have had, this may yet be another. But that decision
won't be made until I have some facts, and some REAL numbers.
Anyone have another formula for pull out stress or bolt sheer?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Historically, the major benefit to a push rod control system compared to a
cable control system is that the push rod system has lower friction since
there's no need for the cable tension in the cable system. No preload
tension, and you've eliminated a major part of the friction. Also,
typically, they have rod-end or other bearings for the joints, again with
lower friction.
Another benefit is that they can be stiffer, but that's generally only
beneficial for larger, faster aircraft.
Push-rod systems are almost always heavier.
There's an often unanticipated benefit of building per the plans: it reduces
the chances of inadvertently designing in some unanticipated failure mode.
So if weight or simplicity or safety matters, follow the plans.
David Paule
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca>
Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 2:55 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
>
>
> Whoa - what comments are you responding to Mike?
> The only reply to your post that I saw was from Jack, and all I saw in his
> reply were sound reasons explaining why the cables are a better system FOR
> THIS AIRPLANE. As he stated, the geometry of the Air Camper will result in
> a heavier and more expensive linkage as compared to the cables. Tony
> Bingelis says that push/pull tubes MAY weigh less than a cable system.
> That will depend on the layout of the airplane, and in this case, the
> control system has to go under the seat, and then get back up into
> alignment with the elevators and rudder. Cables can change direction with
> the addition of a simple pulley, where push/pull tubes will require
> bellcranks - which one do you think is heavier? It is not possible to run
> a tube straight from the firewall to the rudder in this airplane, unless
> you have a properly sized and located hole in your torso for the tube to
> pass through. Also, in THIS airplane, the elevators are separate entities,
> so you would either have to redesign them so that !
> they are tied together, or run two push/pull tubes for the elevators.
> To quote your original post "I'm all about saving weight on my plane".
> Jack's reply explained that the push/pull system will end up being heavier
> than the cable system. So what IS the motivation to change to the
> push/pull system?
>
> Regarding your request for a formula, the thing to keep in mind is that in
> designing a mechanism like a push/pull system, you need to analyze each
> component and each connection in the system, and the loads that could be
> imposed on each component. Those loads are used to determine the size and
> shape that each component will assume. There are the different tubes that
> need material, diameter and wall thickness to be determined, and the size
> of all the threaded connections, and the design and positioning and
> fastening of the bellcranks, etc. It's not simple. Not something that I
> would feel like spending a couple of days working on - especially since
> there doesn't appear to be any benefit to changing the system. Or do you
> know of a REAL benefit? (not just an opinion or guess)
>
> Bill C.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269255#269255
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Michael,
I got behind in answering emails because I had to watch my alma mater
(Tennessee) almost beat the #1 team in the nation (Alabama). Final score,
Alabama 12, Tennessee 10 but it wasn't decided until Bama blocked a
Tennessee field goal with 4 seconds left in the game. So Bill Church
basically said the same thing I was going to say. Here is what I had
started to write before the game.
"Michael, you can certainly put a pushrod control system in. But the design
geometry is much different than the geometry that the Pietenpol has. For
example, the elevators of a Pietenpol are not connected to each other. Each
elevator has its own pair of cables to deflect it. If you run pushrods, you
will either have to find a way to connect the elevators, or run individual
pushrods to each side. More modern airplanes using pushrods are designed
with a single elevator horn internal to the fuselage, requiring a single
pushrod. They also typically have a control system that allows the pushrod
which connects the front and rear sticks to run under the floorboard so it
can then connect behind the cockpit with the psuhrod which runs aft to the
elevators. You can accomplish all this with your Pietenpol, but it will not
be easy, or cheap, or simple. The cable system is light, simple and
well-proven. You are attempting to solve a problem where no problem exists.
You are looking to "improve" the design. Where will the improvement be if
it costs more and weighs more and does no better job?"
I'm certainly no purist, and in building my Pietenpol I made a number of
changes to the "pure" Pietenpol design, such as widening the fuselage by 1"
(bad idea), widening the centersection by 6" (good idea), changing the
design of the lift strut fittings to incorporate the steel band that runs
under the belly (good idea), adding a baggage compartment behind the
firewall (good idea), adding a trim system modeled after Mike Cuy's (good
idea), incorporating the heat muffs into construction of the exhaust pipes
(bad idea). I'm all for making changes that intend to serve a purpose. The
airplane is yours to do as you please, but there are some changes that
really need to be well engineered. I'm a licensed professional engineer who
worked many years in the aircraft industry (my first job out of college was
working on the design team for the F-16), and I wouldn't want to tackle
redesigning the control system of the Pietenpol. I just don't see what
purpose such a change might fulfill, if it will make it heavier, more
complicated and more expensive (those rod end bearings are not cheap).
If you really intend to do this, the way you calculate the area of the
pushrod tube is to use the formula : A = p(Doutside2 - Dinside2)/4. While
you're at it, calculate the weight of the tube, then compare to the weight
of an equivalent length of steel cable. Be sure to add the weight of the
end fitting for the tube, and the rod end bearing at each end, plus all the
bellcranks that will be required, as well as the brackets and bushings to
support those bellcranks.
As Bill Stout, designer of the Ford trimotor is supposed to have said:
"Simplicate and Add Lightness"
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Perez
Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
Push/pull tubes are used in all kinds of aircraft safely. All of which have
more aggressive performance then a slow, draggy, 80+ year old designed Piet.
Yet most seem to think to make the switch to push/pull is a bad idea...why?
I know most just get upset because I stray from the sacred bible of building
the Pietenpol...the prints. Yet non have legitimate reasons for not doing
it...at least not any they share. If you guys have facts for NOT using
them, please, do tell. To make a statement and not back it up is useless.
The Bingelis books talks about aluminum tubes for push/pull... you know, the
books everyone raves over. He also talks about how these systems MAY weigh
less then a cable system with the cables, pulleys, brackets, shackles,
bearings, nicopress fittings, etc.
If you could run a tube from the firewall to the rudder and support the
length along the way with, say bushings, there would be no flexing/bending,
yes?
I don't have the answers...yet, that is why I am here. I am looking for
ANSWERS, not opinion, guesses, or dialog on how this 80 year old plane built
by a guy in his garage can't be improved upon with some common sense and
some homework.
Here is what one engineer sent me:
Pull out load = (1/3)(dia rod)(pi)(shear load)(length of engagement)
For some generic heavy wall tube from McMaster Carr and a 1/4-28 male thread
rod end, I get: 1962 lbs. worse case with .500" thread engagement, 2944
lbs. with .75" engagement.
The 7X19 SS cable is rated at 1760 lbs. Using the controls in the
Pietenpol, can a person ever pull 1760 lbs. on the cable? If they could,
wouldn't a wood structure fail first...I don't know...like the elevator
itself? Since no one here seems to have heard of a control cable failure,
that must mean no Pietenpol has seen 1760 lbs. of force on a 1/8" control
cable, so what are the REAL loads on this plane and it's controls? I think
people get a little too extreme and have a plane built for mach 2 when it
really only flies at 70 MPH.
HOWEVER, my disclaimer...I have been wrong before and have abandoned other
"great" ideas that I have had, this may yet be another. But that decision
won't be made until I have some facts, and some REAL numbers.
Anyone have another formula for pull out stress or bolt sheer?
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | "chase143" <chase143(at)aol.com> |
Jack- BTW you did a heck of a job on the Fly-by-wire system on the F-16, but what
was with that second arm rest!? ;-)
Just to add my two cents: building a Pietenpol reminds me of the friends I have
refurbishing cars. Some refurbish to classic original condition (my favorite),
and some take a beautiful vintage automobile and refurbish it into a streetrod.
Sure, a Model-T ford or a 57' chevy with a 400hp V-8, glass pack exhausts
and racing wheels has a lot more power, but to me losses something in translation.
I don't think the term purist need have a negative connotation. Rather, it
is a tribute to the originator of this design, who through his brilliance and
adventurous spirit, created a successful aircraft design and unselfishly authorized
others to share in it. It's challenge enough crafting a Piet with all
the power tools available today, the Internet, and live samples at Brodhead ever
year (thanks guys), so save for the small changes like Jack mentions, I always
challenge myself to stick as close as possible to the original, reproduction
being the highest form of flattery, but thats just me.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269277#269277
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Second arm rest? Which side? Right or left? The original versions
(F-16A's) had a fixed side stick that didn't move at all - just sensed
forces. Too many pilots had trouble getting used to that so they changed it
to have a slight amount of movement, but still it communicated with the
Flight Control Computer through 4 load cells at the base of the stick which
sensed the force the pilot was applying to the stick. There was an armrest
behind the stick to support the pilot's arm during high G maneuvers so the
g-forces wouldn't make him pull even harder on the stick. There was talk
about providing a second armrest on the left side to support the throttle
arm for the same reason, but that was not done before I left.
Jack
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of chase143
Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 8:26 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
Jack- BTW you did a heck of a job on the Fly-by-wire system on the F-16, but
what was with that second arm rest!? ;-)
Just to add my two cents: building a Pietenpol reminds me of the friends I
have refurbishing cars. Some refurbish to classic original condition (my
favorite), and some take a beautiful vintage automobile and refurbish it
into a streetrod. Sure, a Model-T ford or a 57' chevy with a 400hp V-8,
glass pack exhausts and racing wheels has a lot more power, but to me losses
something in translation. I don't think the term purist need have a negative
connotation. Rather, it is a tribute to the originator of this design, who
through his brilliance and adventurous spirit, created a successful aircraft
design and unselfishly authorized others to share in it. It's challenge
enough crafting a Piet with all the power tools available today, the
Internet, and live samples at Brodhead ever year (thanks guys), so save for
the small changes like Jack mentions, I always challenge myself to stick as
close as possible to the original, reproduction being the highest form of
flattery, but thats jus!
t me.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269277#269277
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
You might also note that the airfoil is a 4412., shortened 2 Ft and with an 85
HP Cont it could cruse 105 plus. The center- section is 3 Ft. wide.
Pieti Lowell
Bill Church wrote:
> Here's a link to some photos of the Challis Chaffinch that Lowell referred to.
>
> http://www.shhas.co.uk/GALLERY_files/photos/Challis%20Chaffinch%20Test%20Flight/image_14.html
>
> The aileron push/pull tube can be seen on the right side. Interesting to note
that it is officially not a Pietenpol Air Camper - it is a Challis Chaffinch.
The builder made a number of visible changes - including the shape of the empennage,
a widened center-section (although the fuel tank appears to be in the
fuselage). Undoubtedly there are other changes that are not visible. I would think
that any builder building their EIGHTH copy of a plane might have a few ideas
about ways they would like to change things.
>
> Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269291#269291
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Clif Dawson" <CDAWSON5854(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
As Michael has stated that he wants to thread the tube no one
so far has considered what that means.
The depth of those threads eliminates that much of the wall thickness
from the overall thickness of the tube for stress
calculations. So to get the strength you want you'r egoing to
have to have wall thickness to handle that PLUS the wall
thickness to take the threads. Now you've got this fat tube
half of which is useless weight unless you can lathe that
long length down. This assumes the threads are on the
outside. However, if they happen to be on the inside........
I have a tube joining my throttles that's off some I-know-not-
what, expensive military hardware. It's 1" dia and VERY thin
wall for most of it's length. If I put helium in it it would float
away. Then it narrows down to take a 1/4" threaded ball end which is
inside a 3/8" dia. weldment at the end. So tubes
can be made light but then KISS disappears from the
equation. :-)
Clif
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes.
Art is knowing which ones to keep." (Scott Adams)
Michael,
If you really intend to do this, the way you calculate the area of the
pushrod tube is to use the formula : A = p(Doutside2 - Dinside2)/4.
While you're at it, calculate the weight of the tube, then compare to
the weight of an equivalent length of steel cable. Be sure to add the
weight of the end fitting for the tube, and the rod end bearing at each
end, plus all the bellcranks that will be required, as well as the
brackets and bushings to support those bellcranks.
As Bill Stout, designer of the Ford trimotor is supposed to have said:
"Simplicate and Add Lightness"
Jack Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com> |
Ask a Grega builder, I think it uses a tube.
Russell
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Jack Phillips wro
te:
> Are you planning on re-designing the entire elevator control system with
> pushrods, requiring a pushrod attached to each elevator, a pushrod from t
he
> bellcrank to the rear stick and a pushrod between sticks? It probably wi
ll
> require an additional pushrod and bellcrank to enable you to pass underne
ath
> the rear seat (where the cable from the stick to the bellcrank makes a be
nd,
> with the plans showing it just passing through a hole drilled in the wood
'
> I added a pulley here).
>
>
> If so, figure out the yield strength of whatever alloy of aluminum you
> intend to use, then determine what area will be required to withstand the
> load (1760 lbs, if you want to equal the cable strength) without exceedin
g
> that stress level. Use the formula Stress = Load divided by Area (s
> P/A), and solve for area (A) since you know the load (P = 1760) and yo
u
> know the stress (s = yield strength of your alloy times whatever safety
> factor you feel like throwing in). Once you know the area, then determin
e
> what wall thickness and tube diameter will produce the required area. Of
> course, there will be machined fittings required on each end of the
> pushrods, and rod end bearings to reduce the amount of slop.
>
>
> As an engineer, I have to wonder why are you doing this? The cables work
> well. Any arrangement with pushrods is going to be much more complicated
,
> due to the geometry of the airplane. Pushrods will end up being far more
> expensive and heavier. I don=92t understand what advantage you are tryin
g to
> achieve here, other than to be =93different=94. You could accomplish tha
t by
> painting it Pink.
>
>
> Jack Phillips
>
> NX899JP
>
> Raleigh, NC
>
> Enjoying a rainy day by building the wings of my RV-10 in the basement
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Michael Perez
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 24, 2009 10:52 AM
> *To:* pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> *Subject:* Pietenpol-List: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
>
>
> I am trying to figure out what size and material tube to use to go from t
he
> control stick to the elevator bell crank. I see in the Bingelis books, h
e
> talks about heavy wall aluminum threaded tubing. Since I am all about
> saving weight on my plane, I would prefer aluminum. The plans call for 1/
8"
> cable, which is rated between 1760 and 2100 lbs. I would hope that a
> tube/rod end combination that rated at these numbers would work. So, I a
m
> trying to figure out what size tube and threaded rod end will give me the
> 1760-2100 lb. rating. If someone can prvide a usable formula, I may be
> able to figure it out myself.
>
>
> Thanks group.
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List*
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *http://forums.matronics.com*
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
>
> * *
>
> *
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | Ameet Savant <ameetsavant(at)gmail.com> |
I have the three NASA Aeronautic Structural Manuals in PDF format (one file
per volume) if anyone is interested. Send me an email (
ameetsavant(at)gmail.com) and I can send them to you. Thanks David for point
out such a great resource!
Ameet
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 3:25 PM, David Paule wrote:
> The equation you introduced is effective for the pull-out strength of the
> threads in a hole. The "(shear load)" you mentioned is the shear stress that
> the material can take, not the applied load.
>
> A good (in fact, one of the best) sources for structural analysis is free:
> http://euler9.tripod.com/analysis/asm.html
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Perhaps they could be posted on the West Coast Pietenpol site....
David Paule
From: Ameet Savant
I have the three NASA Aeronautic Structural Manuals in PDF format
(one file per volume) if anyone is interested. Send me an email
(ameetsavant(at)gmail.com) and I can send them to you. Thanks David for
point out such a great resource!
Ameet
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
David, thank you, sir, for your input.- You offered a lot of solid use fu
ll info...thanks.- Allow me to read some of the other replies, then I'll
come back with some questions. (of course.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Ryan, I appreciate your response. As you stated, we do not have flying plan
es yet, so the proof that a change is a benefit or not can't yet be verifie
d. Since, again as you stated, this plane has flown 80 years with cables.
- It works well and I don't think anyone has ever complained about the sy
stem. But maybe someone, either on this list or a friend of a person on thi
s list, or maybe knows someone, who knows someone who has, in fact installe
d tubes on a Piet. Maye they would have some real world data to share, so I
post to see if maybe someone has already "been there, done that".- Since
it appears that no one has, I don't think anyone can say one system is bet
ter or worse then the other..on this plane.- Bingelis and others state th
at the cable system is a good, solid system with many benefits...but no one
has done a cable -V- tube on comparison on THIS plane...so it seems.
-
Again, as I always revert to, I am no expert and I am finding my way in bui
lding AC. So I search, research and ask. I hope some one from the "been the
re done that" group will chime in and be able to give me some solid real wo
rld advice, but in this case it appears I may be the pioneer.- Basically,
I want to find out what size/material tube, (the lightest I can use) will
be a good replacement for the cables.- Once I have that, then I can see w
hat it would take to implement that system into the AC. It may prove to be
a bad idea, but I won't know until I get into it.- I am not going to both
er if it proves out that the only solid replacement for the cable system is
some big nasty 3/4" steel tube with 5 pound fittings on each end.- So, I
am back to my original quest, finding out what CAN be used safely.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | Lloyd Smith <lesmith240(at)gmail.com> |
Dick Navatril (sp?) has push-pull tubes to the elevator in the Rotec powered
Piet. He could probably give some insight into this. He did say there is a
"walking beam" aft of the rear seat to allow for shorter tubes and to change
angle of motion.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Michael Perez wrote:
> Ryan, I appreciate your response. As you stated, we do not have flying
> planes yet, so the proof that a change is a benefit or not can't yet be
> verified. Since, again as you stated, this plane has flown 80 years with
> cables. It works well and I don't think anyone has ever complained about
> the system. But maybe someone, either on this list or a friend of a person
> on this list, or maybe knows someone, who knows someone who has, in fact
> installed tubes on a Piet. Maye they would have some real world data to
> share, so I post to see if maybe someone has already "been there, done
> that". Since it appears that no one has, I don't think anyone can say one
> system is better or worse then the other..on this plane. Bingelis and
> others state that the cable system is a good, solid system with many
> benefits...but no one has done a cable -V- tube on comparison on THIS
> plane...so it seems.
>
> Again, as I always revert to, I am no expert and I am finding my way in
> building AC. So I search, research and ask. I hope some one from the "been
> there done that" group will chime in and be able to give me some solid real
> world advice, but in this case it appears I may be the pioneer. Basically,
> I want to find out what size/material tube, (the lightest I can use) will be
> a good replacement for the cables. Once I have that, then I can see what it
> would take to implement that system into the AC. It may prove to be a bad
> idea, but I won't know until I get into it. I am not going to bother if it
> proves out that the only solid replacement for the cable system is some big
> nasty 3/4" steel tube with 5 pound fittings on each end. So, I am back to
> my original quest, finding out what CAN be used safely.
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
--
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or
not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." --British
publisher and writer Ernest Benn (1875-1954)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Bill, if I may quote you:
-
"Regarding your request for a formula, the thing to keep in mind is that in
designing a mechanism like a push/pull system, you need to analyze each co
mponent and each connection in the system, and the loads that could be impo
sed on each component."-
-
I agree. Does anyone know these loads for each component currently used?-
I do not. I ASSUMED that a good place to start was with the cables.- Sin
ce the plans state 1/8" cable to drive both elevators, I started there with
the weaker cable, SS, rated at 1760 lbs.- Maybe I should find the weakes
t link in the current cable system and go from there. What is it? Is it the
attachment of the elevator horn to the elevator? Can this attachment take
a 1760 lb. load like the cable? Or how about a pulley...can-it and it att
aching brackets-withstand 1760?- Is 1760 overkill to begin with?
-
Is there a tube system that can be made as a substitute?- What about thes
e tube end fittings and attaching bell cranks,etc?- A simple-1/4-28 mal
e threaded rod end from McMaster Carr has a static radial load rating of-
2168 lbs.- If this was somehow attached to the 1760 lb. SS cable, no one
would have an issue with it...yes?- That led me to the tubes and the que
stion of what will strip the connection between the tube and this rod end?
What if the same bell cranks and horns were used, but connected to rod ends
and tubes?-However since you-no longer -need an attachment for both
an upper and lower cable, that same bell crank now weighs less because you
can "lop off" those unused attaching levers.-
-
I appreciate Jack's response, most of the time he does offer good facts. (a
long with some not always good opinion...)- But until someone has built a
nd flown a push/pull setup on a Piet., then no one can say for sure that on
e is better overall then another.- Frankly to outright say one is better
then the other, at this point, is unfounded.
-
"Cables can change direction with the addition of a simple pulley, where pu
sh/pull tubes will require bell cranks - which one do you think is heavier?
"-
-
Has anyone done a load analysis on this "simple pulley" as you stated shoul
d be done on all the components for the tube system?- Or do you just use
what everyone else uses and has been proven safe?- What about the attachm
ent of this pulley...load tested, or just following the crowd?-- No one
questions if the original modification was analyzed out the wazoo first. I
t seems most- believe that a change requires over the top analysis, testi
ng, etc. I believe it is SOMETIMES overkill and some simple common sense an
d homework will yield just as safe results.
-
A "bell crank" needs to be nothing more then a pivot point to allow the pus
h/pull tube to change direction. (see Gary Booth's and others pictures on t
he West Coast Piets site...I believe it is...)- If you could, you use the
same attaching bracket/hardware and just substitute this pivot in place of
the pulley...I don't know which one now weighs less.
-
"Jack's reply explained that the push/pull system will end up being heavier
than the cable system. So what IS the motivation to change to the push/pul
l system?"-
-
Again, I don't know how anyone can say this is definite without having a fl
ying example...it is a guess at best.
-
I appreciate most peoples responses, weather they agree with me or not, tha
t stick to the original question and respond with some good numbers, facts,
or references. Guessing, opinions and the like don't really help.- If it
can be proved that this push/pull is no good, I will not proceed to waste
my time.- I don't have the answers so I ask. Since it appears no Piet has
such a system, then I guess I will have to really figure out what is what
and decide what to do.
-
My original question still stands...what size material tube/ rod end will b
e a good replacement? I have gotten some replies that use language and form
ulas that are over my head. If you intelligent guys want to do the calculat
ions for me, I would be much obliged.
-
Thanks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Thank you Pieti. Had I thought about the tube idea sooner, I would have bui
lt my wings to accommodate such a system. (THAT post would have gotten some
good replies...)
-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Thanks Bill. I would love to see pictures of his setup. I would guess he us
es the same setup for all controls?
-
I guess since this is my first plane build, I am ahead of the curve. By my
eighth, I will have redesigned the space shuttle.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Gary,
-
my apologies to you and all on this list if I in anyway offended. I get eas
ily frustrated when, to me, I ask a simple question and get a lot of- "wh
y do you want to do that" replies. Or the ever popular, stop wasting time a
nd build to the prints."
-
I meant no disrespect to the late Mr. Pietenpol, you, members on this list,
the bible, God, etc.
-
I am humbled that there are people who would take the time to get on their
computer, load the list, read my question and try to help me. I need to kee
p in mind that no one is required to help in the first place.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Thank you Jack.- My initial thought was to go with push/pull from the sti
ck, back to the original bell crank. From there, use cables. Then I started
to think about those cables and replacing them with push rods. That would
require a different bell crank design and horn design on the elevators. I w
as thinking of basically, using the bell crank design as is, but lop off th
e un-needed top levers. Same on the elevators...lop of the tops of the cont
rol horns. (in simple terms...I am sure some mods will be needed and not ju
st run these parts on a band saw.)- Then I mocked up my tail section usin
g clamps to hold it all and found that the angle from the elevator horns to
the bell crank levers were- not tube friendly...to much angle. So, then
I thought, I could move the bell crank back to the next pair of verticals o
n the fuselage, (which are closer together, so the bell crank tube is short
er and in theory weigh less and be stiffer because it is shorter.
(along with the lopped of top horns, this component is quite a bit lighter
then the original, but just a strong.)-- Then I could move the elevato
r horns closer towards the fuselage to have a more straight shot for the tu
bes.- My concern here is now the-horns are off towards the fuselage end
s of the elevators and the elevators may twist.- But, I could re-enforce
them not to twist, but that ads weight. But if the tube system over all is
lighter, then some added wood may not hurt much. (My general thought proces
s...I'm a nut!)
-
Whew!- So, I backed up and figured non of this matters if the tubes have
to be so large and heavy that is makes no sense. This is when I set out to
find the smallest, lightest tube/rod ends I can get. But in order to do tha
t, I must know what forces these tubes see and what loads they can handle i
n the various sizes/materials.
-
I then found the info. In the Bingelis books about the aluminum threaded tu
be, rod ends and a jamb nut. (no machined fittings, no rivets or bolts) Tha
t idea really appealed to me, but I still need to know what CAN be used for
THIS plane and ITS flight loads.- I hope to be able to give someone the
numbers they need to run these equations and see if what I am thinking can
be done. I can do it myself if I had a step by step procedure and some simp
le formulas. I have seen on the web a lot of equations, all of which seem t
o not be appropriate or too complicated. How hard is it to figure out when
an aluminum tube at a given size and its rod end fail? (pull apart?)- May
be it is harder to figure out then I thought.
-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
I would like that "fly by wire" feel in my plane...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
I-have some- 3/8" 6063 heavy wall aluminum tube. (hollow all the way th
rough) It has an ID of .145. (wall of .115) Yield strength of 15,000 PSI.
- I can drill this out and tap it for a 1/4-28" male threaded rod end. Ab
out 75%+ thread engaugement and I figure, for the calculations, .75" depth.
(no machined fitting...just thread the rod end into the tube with a jamb n
ut...as shown in the bingelis book.)- I have no idea, other then using th
e formula that my NASA engineer gave me, if this is a suitable replacement
for the 1760 lb. rated SS cable, or what tube/rod end would be suitable. Us
ing this example and that formula, I get an answer of over 2,000 lbs...bett
er then the 1760lb. rated-cable. Is this good? It it enough? Is the math
right?- I'm going crazy! (but enjoy the challange.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
"As you see, the control system doesn't need to be stronger than these forc
es applied to the control stick. It's a simple matter to go from there to t
he loads in any single part of the system."
-
How do you do this? I would like to know the loads on the individual tubes.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
That equation you supplied is ONLY for the shear-out strength of the
threads. And that is only one of the things to check for.
It does not apply to the net tension strength of the tube, which you'll
find is considerably lower than that cable strength.
It does not apply to the Euler column strength of the tube, which is
dependent upon the length from pin to pin as well as that very low yield
strength.
However, with that thickness wall, it won't have the D/t crippling I
mentioned earlier.
There are probably other things to check for, but without an overall
design we don't know what those might be.
If you are trying to save weight, 6063 heavy wall tube won't get you
there. What's more, in general, 6063 is much weaker than most aircraft
metals.
It's time to draw out the control system to scale, apply the loads that
I found for you in FAR Part 23, and work them through to see what the
individual loads are in the various parts. Please bear in mind that you
need to consider yield and ultimate conditions here.
David Paule
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Perez
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
I have some 3/8" 6063 heavy wall aluminum tube. (hollow all the
way through) It has an ID of .145. (wall of .115) Yield strength of
15,000 PSI. I can drill this out and tap it for a 1/4-28" male threaded
rod end. About 75%+ thread engaugement and I figure, for the
calculations, .75" depth. (no machined fitting...just thread the rod end
into the tube with a jamb nut...as shown in the bingelis book.) I have
no idea, other then using the formula that my NASA engineer gave me, if
this is a suitable replacement for the 1760 lb. rated SS cable, or what
tube/rod end would be suitable. Using this example and that formula, I
get an answer of over 2,000 lbs...better then the 1760lb. rated cable.
Is this good? It it enough? Is the math right? I'm going crazy! (but
enjoy the challange.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Without doing all the calculations myself I can't tell if your math is good
or not. But one thing to consider with small diameter pushrods is that
under compression loading they may buckle pretty easily, which could ruin
your whole day. Euler's (pronounced oilers) equation is used to determine
the critical load, beyond which the pushrod will "buckle", displacing the
middle of the pushrod sideways. This equation is:
Pe = p2EI
l 2
Where Pe is the critical load, beyond which any load will cause buckling, p
= 3.1415926., E is the modulus of elasticity (Young's Modulus) for the
material, I is the moment of inertia (for a circular annulus, I
p(do4-di4)/64 ), and l = the length of the pushrod. Once you have your tube
chosen, plug its numbers into Euler's equation and see what the buckling
load will be. If you think this is close to the load that the elevators can
put on the pushrod, then you may have to go to a larger diameter pushrod
tube.
If you use pushrods connected directly to the elevators, it would be best to
position the pushrods on top of the elevator, rather than underneath. The
reason for this is that you are more likely to put large loads into pulling
the nose of the airplane up than you will in pushing the nose down. If the
pushrods are on the bottom, any up-elevator inputs will be putting the
pushrod in compression, so if you prefer to have the pushrods under the
elevators, you will probably have to use larger diameter tubing.
Good luck,
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Perez
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
I have some 3/8" 6063 heavy wall aluminum tube. (hollow all the way
through) It has an ID of .145. (wall of .115) Yield strength of 15,000 PSI.
I can drill this out and tap it for a 1/4-28" male threaded rod end. About
75%+ thread engaugement and I figure, for the calculations, .75" depth. (no
machined fitting...just thread the rod end into the tube with a jamb
nut...as shown in the bingelis book.) I have no idea, other then using the
formula that my NASA engineer gave me, if this is a suitable replacement for
the 1760 lb. rated SS cable, or what tube/rod end would be suitable. Using
this example and that formula, I get an answer of over 2,000 lbs...better
then the 1760lb. rated cable. Is this good? It it enough? Is the math right?
I'm going crazy! (but enjoy the challange.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Look, I don't mean to be critical at all, but it takes a design concept
with dimensions and angles, and then applying forces and finding
reactions to them. The techniques are in every basic high school physics
books in the chapter on statics. You'll probably need the same sorts of
equations as used in the weight and balance calculations, and some
general algebra. What you are dealing with here are levers and fulcrums
and cables.
As a modest suggestion, don't even begin to calculate the strength of
the pieces until you have a firm grasp of the loads in the design.
David Paule
From: Michael Perez
"As you see, the control system doesn't need to be stronger than
these forces applied to the control stick. It's a simple matter to go
from there to the loads in any single part of the system."
How do you do this? I would like to know the loads on the
individual tubes.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | Lloyd Smith <lesmith240(at)gmail.com> |
I can't recall the location, but it seems to me Mr. Wainfan addressed the
calculation of the airloads on a deflected control surface. This plus the
force required to overcome the hinge friction of the control surface should
be the total seen by the control circuit. As I remember, the load was a
function of the size of the surface(s), the amount of deflection, and the
Vne of the aircraft. It seems this would be a better way to determine the
actual forces seen in the control circuit rather than work from the old
cable figures. Chances are Mr. Pietenpol didn't do a destructive test on
the controls. He went with what worked for other installations in similar
aircraft. The actual forces seen might be considerable less than thought.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Michael Perez wrote:
> "As you see, the control system doesn't need to be stronger than these
> forces applied to the control stick. It's a simple matter to go from there
> to the loads in any single part of the system."
>
> How do you do this? I would like to know the loads on the individual tubes.
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
--
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or
not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." --British
publisher and writer Ernest Benn (1875-1954)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | Lloyd Smith <lesmith240(at)gmail.com> |
I should have noted, Mr. Wainfan writes the "Wind Tunnel" column in
"Kitplanes" magazine.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Lloyd Smith wrote:
>
> I can't recall the location, but it seems to me Mr. Wainfan addressed the
> calculation of the airloads on a deflected control surface. This plus the
> force required to overcome the hinge friction of the control surface should
> be the total seen by the control circuit. As I remember, the load was a
> function of the size of the surface(s), the amount of deflection, and the
> Vne of the aircraft. It seems this would be a better way to determine the
> actual forces seen in the control circuit rather than work from the old
> cable figures. Chances are Mr. Pietenpol didn't do a destructive test on
> the controls. He went with what worked for other installations in similar
> aircraft. The actual forces seen might be considerable less than thought.
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Michael Perez wrote:
>
>> "As you see, the control system doesn't need to be stronger than these
>> forces applied to the control stick. It's a simple matter to go from there
>> to the loads in any single part of the system."
>>
>> How do you do this? I would like to know the loads on the individual
>> tubes.
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists
> or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." --British
> publisher and writer Ernest Benn (1875-1954)
>
--
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or
not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." --British
publisher and writer Ernest Benn (1875-1954)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Can anyone supply more info on Mr. Wainfan and his calculations? The proces
s of surface area, speed and deflection to determine load seems to be more
relevant in a 80 mph Piet. then doing algebra, trig., calculus, etc. on eve
ry nut bolt bracket, rod in the system.- (Although, there is nothing wron
g with that...and a lot more precise/accurate.)
-
I have gotten some very, very good formulas/equations from the list that ar
e just to complicated and over my head to try and use. If this turns out to
be the only way to solve my issues, I will be installing cables. Still, I
would think I could at least figure out what tubes would work...even if the
y turn out to be too large and heavy to consider.
-
Thanks crew...some good stuff is now coming from this thread.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Jack, thanks for the equations, I will see if I understand the terms, and s
ee what I can do with them.
-
Good point on the elevator horns. (Something I would not have thought of an
d would never have considered had I not posted my original question.)
-
My pilot stick is currently made with the bottom of the stick bolted to the
torque tube. (the pivot point)- 6.5" (6.25?") above that, (print dimensi
on), I welded in two tangs for my rod end to bolt between. (this puts the r
od end and tube on center with the stick and not off to one side. It also r
elieves the twist that a side mounted rod end may put on the stick..if that
matters...) With the rod end between the tangs, I do not need to worry abo
ut it coming off if the rod end bearing fails. (No need for extra large was
hers.)
-
Anyhoo, if I pull the stick back, it pushes the rod back and that linear mo
tion would then have to go to a horn under the elevator to move it in the p
roper direction. This would also give the plane, while on the ground, a cle
aner look with no cables/horns on top of the elevators, as well as no cable
rub on top.- To get the horn on top of the elevator, I would need that b
ell crank to have a top and bottom lever, (as drawn on the plans) then plac
e the rod ends accordingly to get the proper deflection... easy to do.- I
like the idea of having at least some "pull" rather then all "push" as you
suggested.- I could introduce a second bell crank, say right behind the
pilot seat, low, so the "push" tube from the stick can be short. From there
run to the original bell crank, now having the majority of tubes in the "p
ull" arena...in theory.- (that adds weight though.) The other thing I lik
e about this setup, is with the various pivots, idler arms, bell cranks,
etc., one can play with the lengths and locations of the levers and attach
ing points of the rod ends to change throw travel on the stick, deflection
angle of the control surfaces and mechanical leverage. (Trying for that fly
by wire feel!) Good stuff...hope it all works out. If not, I know the cabl
e system works and that is not a bad thing to fall back on.
-
-
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Right, like there aren't ANY threads in the archives that are lame, off top
ic, boring, or just plan ol' stupid.- Everything in there must be all goo
d usefull information with no useless responses from people who have all th
e answers.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends -- Chaffinch |
Now I don't want to start anything about a guy who has built eight Piets,
but I found very strange his position of the "Chaffinch's" jury struts, very near
the end of the lift struts. My thought has been that you want to place the
jury strut near, but not at the middle of the lift strut. The "not at the middle"
has to do with avoiding the harmonic cited in other posts on our message
board. Near the middle is to optimize the reduction of buckling, as also previously
discussed.
His other changes seem a matter of taste, esp. since he claims no "Pietenpol"
in the plane's name.
Tim in central TX
-----Original Message-----
>From: Pieti Lowell <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com>
>Sent: Oct 24, 2009 9:39 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
>
>
>You might also note that the airfoil is a 4412., shortened 2 Ft and with an 85
HP Cont it could cruse 105 plus. The center- section is 3 Ft. wide.
> Pieti Lowell
>Bill Church wrote:
>> Here's a link to some photos of the Challis Chaffinch that Lowell referred to.
>>
>> http://www.shhas.co.uk/GALLERY_files/photos/Challis%20Chaffinch%20Test%20Flight/image_14.html
>>
>> The aileron push/pull tube can be seen on the right side. Interesting to note
that it is officially not a Pietenpol Air Camper - it is a Challis Chaffinch.
The builder made a number of visible changes - including the shape of the empennage,
a widened center-section (although the fuel tank appears to be in the
fuselage). Undoubtedly there are other changes that are not visible. I would
think that any builder building their EIGHTH copy of a plane might have a few
ideas about ways they would like to change things.
>>
>> Bill C.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Take it from me.... starting with the government's forces at the control
stick and working out from there is the easy way to do the job.
Make it easy on yourself and install the controls exactly as the plans
describe them.
David Paule
Can anyone supply more info on Mr. Wainfan and his calculations? The
process of surface area, speed and deflection to determine load seems to
be more relevant in a 80 mph Piet. then doing algebra, trig., calculus,
etc. on every nut bolt bracket, rod in the system. (Although, there is
nothing wrong with that...and a lot more precise/accurate.)I have gotten
some very, very good formulas/equations from the list that are just to
complicated and over my head to try and use. If this turns out to be the
only way to solve my issues, I will be installing cables. Still, I would
think I could at least figure out what tubes would work...even if they
turn out to be too large and heavy to consider.Thanks crew...some good
stuff is now coming from this thread.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | Lloyd Smith <lesmith240(at)gmail.com> |
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 8:01 PM, David Paule wrote:
> starting with the government's forces at the control stick
>
????
--
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or
not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." --British
publisher and writer Ernest Benn (1875-1954)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | "ivan.todorovic" <tosha(at)sezampro.rs> |
[quote="dpaule(at)frii.com"]Take it from me.... starting with the government's
forces at the control stick and working out from there is the easy way to do
the job.
Make it easy on yourself and install the controls exactly as the plans describe
them.
David Paule
[quote]
OK, why would I (for instance, and anyone else) take it from you, when the authority
like Pieti Lowell says on this very thread says the opposite: his personal
plane had the push/pull tube AND flew perfectly AND safe for many years? Have
you got any better argument?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269402#269402
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
This will be my last comment on this thread.
First off, Michael, if you follow through with a push/pull system, you will not
be the first. It has been done before. Refer to the following link for a photo
of a GN-1 with such a system:
http://www.westcoastpiet.com/images/Pete%20Smith/Brodhead__20070720_028.JPG
Note that the control tube for the rudder is not tiny. The control tube for the
elevators is likely buried inside the fuselage, and the elevators are most likely
built of steel tube, in order to be able to transfer the torque adequately.
My thoughts are that if this system was an improvement, we would see more flying
examples of it. Just because it has been done does not mean it's a good
idea.
Secondly, all of the "opinions" that have been expressed regarding the negative
aspects of attempting to use a push/pull system on this aircraft have been based
on sound engineering principles. The reason why nobody has offered data to
prove your theory wrong is that your "system" has no data behind it. There are
no dimensions to work with. Not even a basic sketch. There are often a thousand
ways to achieve the same basic goal, with some being better than others, but
no one being the "right" way. For instance, as one reply stated, the proper
size for the tubes is dependent on the length, in reference to buckling strength.
Thirdly, unless someone out there decides that they want to do all the calculations
for you, you will eventually have to deal with all of that "language and
formulas" that, as you put it, are "over your head". As I said before, it's not
simple. Once the routing of the system is determined (including all pivot points),
you will need to determine the loads that will be imposed on the system
(plus an appropriate factor of safety). From there you will be able to determine
the loads that will be carried by each component, and based on those numbers,
you will determine the sizes of each component. (There's a reason why it takes
four years of university to obtain a degree in Engineering).
And finally, all of the above is my OPINION. But my opinion is based on more than
twenty years experience working as a Professional Engineer. Take it or leave
it.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269403#269403
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
No politics at all here, folks, move along.
Just to recap (yet again), I'd previously linked to the FAA's rules for
certified aircraft, and particularly to where they specified what the
maximum loads at the control stick could be. Then I said to start with
those, and figure out the loads as they worked their way to the control
surface. This is the easy way to do it, if you want to do it at all.
Regardless of how you feel about governmental actions in general, in
this instance, here, the specific regulations are sensible and to the
point. It's kind of heartening to know that once in a while the
government got it right.
David Paule
--
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it
exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong
remedy." --British publisher and writer Ernest Benn (1875-1954)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Because the gentleman who wants to learn how to do this basic engineering is
finding it difficult to begin the problem, and is getting overwhelmed with
the information that's been presented.
Obviously a push-pull system can be designed and if done properly, it will
work well. That's not the issue. Nor is it an issue whether a redesigned
control system should be made; that's a matter of choice. There are pros and
cons to any variation to the plans, and the plans design is an excellent
"control" to test the goodness of any particular redesign.
It can be designed if someone wants to take the effort to do so, although
it's not necessary, and they might find it just as enlightening as actually
building the aircraft. My motive for writing has been to facilitate his
learning and to point out appropriate information which he might find of
use. In fact, which anyone who wants to embark on an aircraft design
project, might find of use.
Here, though, it was becoming apparant that the resources of this List would
not extend to providing the requestor with sufficient capability to actually
make an engineering judgement of his design, which has been his expressed
goal. In light of that, it was proper to advise him to built it stock.
David Paule
========================
>
> [quote="dpaule(at)frii.com"]Take it from me.... starting with the
> government's forces at the control stick and working out from there is
> the easy way to do the job.
>
> Make it easy on yourself and install the controls exactly as the plans
> describe them.
>
> David Paule
> [quote]
>
> OK, why would I (for instance, and anyone else) take it from you, when the
> authority like Pieti Lowell says on this very thread says the opposite:
> his personal plane had the push/pull tube AND flew perfectly AND safe for
> many years? Have you got any better argument?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269402#269402
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | Lloyd Smith <lesmith240(at)gmail.com> |
We don't need no steenkin' Part 23 here! :-)
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 8:41 PM, David Paule wrote:
> No politics at all here, folks, move along.
>
> Just to recap (yet again), I'd previously linked to the FAA's rules for
> certified aircraft, and particularly to where they specified what the
> maximum loads at the control stick could be. Then I said to start with
> those, and figure out the loads as they worked their way to the control
> surface. This is the easy way to do it, if you want to do it at all.
>
> Regardless of how you feel about governmental actions in general, in this
> instance, here, the specific regulations are sensible and to the point. It's
> kind of heartening to know that once in a while the government got it right.
>
> David Paule
>
>
> --
> "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists
> or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." --British
> publisher and writer Ernest Benn (1875-1954)
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
--
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or
not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." --British
publisher and writer Ernest Benn (1875-1954)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | "ivan.todorovic" <tosha(at)sezampro.rs> |
dpaule(at)frii.com wrote:
> Here, though, it was becoming apparant that the resources of this List would
> not extend to providing the requestor with sufficient capability to actually
> make an engineering judgement of his design, which has been his expressed
> goal. In light of that, it was proper to advise him to built it stock.
>
> David Paule
>
He didn't get as far as discussing the tube diameter and wall thickness before
he was flooded with "don't do it" messages, let alone more complicated meters.
Requester had no chance.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269413#269413
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | Lloyd Smith <lesmith240(at)gmail.com> |
Or Part 25...
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Lloyd Smith wrote:
> We don't need no steenkin' Part 23 here! :-)
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 8:41 PM, David Paule wrote:
>
>> No politics at all here, folks, move along.
>>
>> Just to recap (yet again), I'd previously linked to the FAA's rules for
>> certified aircraft, and particularly to where they specified what the
>> maximum loads at the control stick could be. Then I said to start with
>> those, and figure out the loads as they worked their way to the control
>> surface. This is the easy way to do it, if you want to do it at all.
>>
>> Regardless of how you feel about governmental actions in general, in this
>> instance, here, the specific regulations are sensible and to the point. It's
>> kind of heartening to know that once in a while the government got it right.
>>
>> David Paule
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists
>> or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." --British
>> publisher and writer Ernest Benn (1875-1954)
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists
> or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." --British
> publisher and writer Ernest Benn (1875-1954)
>
--
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or
not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." --British
publisher and writer Ernest Benn (1875-1954)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | And the real work begins... |
| From: | Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Well, after futzing around for a few weeks with my 613.5 rib jib jig,
I have finally invested in some rough cut poplar, and turned it into
little sticks yesterday. I went over to my friend Ray's house, and we
spent the day cutting about 15 or so board feet of wood into 109 6
foot long sticks 1/4" x 1/2". We had a lot of fun, and I am looking
forward to getting the T-88 and beginning to glue them all together. I
still need some 1/16" marine ply (any suggestions on a cheaper source
on this?) but I can at least start cutting the poplar into even
smaller sticks now.
It took us 7 hours, and a lot of sweat, but we had a lot of fun doing
it. Ray and I cut parts for 2 cradles in this same area 19 years ago
when my wife and I found out we were going to have twins. He had the
plans, and we cut the parts in the same drive way we cut the poplar in
yesterday. Funny how things repeat and how important good friends
really are.
I posted all of the pictures we took during the process, including the
peg jig I made for the Riblett 613.5 jig I made. I finally decided on
this airfoil based on a lot of thought. I drew out the rib plot in my
CAD program, then offset the lines by 1/8" and used that line to place
a series of 1/4" holes .75" deep. I made a bunch of 1.25" long pegs
out of 1/4" diameter maple dowels and hammered/glued them into place.
I used my 3 axis mill to do the drilling so I have a 'perfect' plot of
the airfoil, and all the alignments of the pieces are perfect! It's
nice to slide the 1/4" pieces into place and have them fit like a
glove!
So, all I need now is to order the T-88 and some plywood for the
gussets and I can start the assembly process. Oh, yeah, before that I
need to cut those little sticks into many smaller sticks! Well, let
the cutting begin!
Here's a link to the picture folio of the day yesterday, with shots of
the jig as well.
http://picasaweb.google.com/RobertsChristmas2007/PietenpolProject?authkey=Gv1sRgCJiF__Tq2bugtgE&feat=directlink
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave and Connie <dmatt(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: And the real work begins... |
Mark,
No need to order the T-88 if there is a Woodcraft store near you. They
stock it. You might find it in a boat store too.
Dave
Mark Roberts wrote:
>
> Well, after futzing around for a few weeks with my 613.5 rib jib jig,
> I have finally invested in some rough cut poplar, and turned it into
> little sticks yesterday. I went over to my friend Ray's house, and we
> spent the day cutting about 15 or so board feet of wood into 109 6
> foot long sticks 1/4" x 1/2". We had a lot of fun, and I am looking
> forward to getting the T-88 and beginning to glue them all together. I
> still need some 1/16" marine ply (any suggestions on a cheaper source
> on this?) but I can at least start cutting the poplar into even
> smaller sticks now.
>
> It took us 7 hours, and a lot of sweat, but we had a lot of fun doing
> it. Ray and I cut parts for 2 cradles in this same area 19 years ago
> when my wife and I found out we were going to have twins. He had the
> plans, and we cut the parts in the same drive way we cut the poplar in
> yesterday. Funny how things repeat and how important good friends
> really are.
>
> I posted all of the pictures we took during the process, including the
> peg jig I made for the Riblett 613.5 jig I made. I finally decided on
> this airfoil based on a lot of thought. I drew out the rib plot in my
> CAD program, then offset the lines by 1/8" and used that line to place
> a series of 1/4" holes .75" deep. I made a bunch of 1.25" long pegs
> out of 1/4" diameter maple dowels and hammered/glued them into place.
> I used my 3 axis mill to do the drilling so I have a 'perfect' plot of
> the airfoil, and all the alignments of the pieces are perfect! It's
> nice to slide the 1/4" pieces into place and have them fit like a
> glove!
>
> So, all I need now is to order the T-88 and some plywood for the
> gussets and I can start the assembly process. Oh, yeah, before that I
> need to cut those little sticks into many smaller sticks! Well, let
> the cutting begin!
>
> Here's a link to the picture folio of the day yesterday, with shots of
> the jig as well.
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/RobertsChristmas2007/PietenpolProject?authkey=Gv1sRgCJiF__Tq2bugtgE&feat=directlink
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com> |
This guy must be expecting a party there are two big red barbecue grills up
by the double wide.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Bill Church wrote:
> billspiet(at)sympatico.ca>
>
> This will be my last comment on this thread.
>
> First off, Michael, if you follow through with a push/pull system, you will
> not be the first. It has been done before. Refer to the following link for a
> photo of a GN-1 with such a system:
>
> http://www.westcoastpiet.com/images/Pete%20Smith/Brodhead__20070720_028.JPG
>
> Note that the control tube for the rudder is not tiny. The control tube for
> the elevators is likely buried inside the fuselage, and the elevators are
> most likely built of steel tube, in order to be able to transfer the torque
> adequately. My thoughts are that if this system was an improvement, we would
> see more flying examples of it. Just because it has been done does not mean
> it's a good idea.
>
> Secondly, all of the "opinions" that have been expressed regarding the
> negative aspects of attempting to use a push/pull system on this aircraft
> have been based on sound engineering principles. The reason why nobody has
> offered data to prove your theory wrong is that your "system" has no data
> behind it. There are no dimensions to work with. Not even a basic sketch.
> There are often a thousand ways to achieve the same basic goal, with some
> being better than others, but no one being the "right" way. For instance, as
> one reply stated, the proper size for the tubes is dependent on the length,
> in reference to buckling strength.
>
> Thirdly, unless someone out there decides that they want to do all the
> calculations for you, you will eventually have to deal with all of that
> "language and formulas" that, as you put it, are "over your head". As I said
> before, it's not simple. Once the routing of the system is determined
> (including all pivot points), you will need to determine the loads that will
> be imposed on the system (plus an appropriate factor of safety). From there
> you will be able to determine the loads that will be carried by each
> component, and based on those numbers, you will determine the sizes of each
> component. (There's a reason why it takes four years of university to obtain
> a degree in Engineering).
>
> And finally, all of the above is my OPINION. But my opinion is based on
> more than twenty years experience working as a Professional Engineer. Take
> it or leave it.
>
> Bill C.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269403#269403
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends -- Chaffinch |
| From: | "Pieti Lowell" <Lowellcfrank(at)yahoo.com> |
Tim: The strut design that Hosie chose for the Chaffinich was a round tube with
stream-lining with balsa wood covered with cloth. In all the maneuvers that this
airplane went through I never had one incident of vibrations that were in
any way a concern, Something that paralleled Allen's struts, his struts had no
jury strut help.
Pieti Lowell
timothywillis(at)earthlin wrote:
> Now I don't want to start anything about a guy who has built eight Piets, but
I found very strange his position of the "Chaffinch's" jury struts, very near
the end of the lift struts. My thought has been that you want to place the jury
strut near, but not at the middle of the lift strut. The "not at the middle"
has to do with avoiding the harmonic cited in other posts on our message board.
Near the middle is to optimize the reduction of buckling, as also previously
discussed.
> His other changes seem a matter of taste, esp. since he claims no "Pietenpol"
in the plane's name.
> Tim in central TX
>
> --
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269424#269424
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Douwe Blumberg <douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net> |
It's funny how the last mile of the marathon seems longer than the rest. I'm in
the final mile with the piet, and my list of "little tidbits" seems miles long,
and the little jobs that appear simple often end up being surprisingly hard.
I just finished the cockpit coamings. Two weeks ago I went out to the workshop
one morning thinking "I"ll do the coamings today, that'll be a fun and rewarding
afternoon job". Two weeks later I'm finishing up. Not all that time was
working on it, but what I thought was an afternoon job, ended up taking me probably
three days.
I also have to be really disciplined with myself not to rush through these things,
as so many are cosmetic, and though not structurally important, are the items
that I will see everytime I look at my Piet. But let me also say for those
who are in earlier in their projects, IT'S ALL WORTH IT!!!!KEEP GOING!!! TRY
TO TOUCH IT EVERY DAY, EVEN IF IT'S FOR TEN MINUTES!!!
I also want to write about something I've been thinking about for the last couple
of years.
Let me encourage all of you who can, to fly your Piet to Brodhead each year, and
once there, to fly it often. Dreamy-eyed enthusiasts come from all over this
country and the world to see Piets flying. There are many builders, or wanna
be builders who have never even seen a real Piet, let alone seen one fly. As
I"m sure most of you know, the sight of the Pietenpols flying at Brodhead is
a powerful shot in the arm of encouragement to dozens to keep building for another
year. I seriously doubt that I would be finishing my plane if it weren't
for my annual pilgrimage to Brodhead.
I have been struck at the last two Brodheads, that while there ended up being a
good turnout, there was noticably less flying than in years past. I attributed
it to the lack of fuel these last two yeras, and some very worn-out pilots
this year. However, please remember what it was like when you were building and
dreaming of the day when your project would take wing. Don't forget how hard
you ran after each taxing plane just to watch it lift off, or how you shot
dozen of photographs of it landing, and how much that first ride meant. If every
pilot did two or three short flights each day, this would add up to a LOT
of flying and encouragement.
I pray that when mine is done, it is reliable enough for me to get up there and
serve my brother and sister builders as others have served me through the years
by treating them to the unforgettable sights and sounds of this magnificent
flying machine from a bygone era patrolling the beautiful skies of Brodhead.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: some thoughts |
| From: | Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com> |
Nice,
Thanks
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Douwe Blumberg <
douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net> wrote:
> douweblumberg(at)earthlink.net>
>
> It's funny how the last mile of the marathon seems longer than the rest.
> I'm in the final mile with the piet, and my list of "little tidbits" seems
> miles long, and the little jobs that appear simple often end up being
> surprisingly hard.
>
> I just finished the cockpit coamings. Two weeks ago I went out to the
> workshop one morning thinking "I"ll do the coamings today, that'll be a fun
> and rewarding afternoon job". Two weeks later I'm finishing up. Not all
> that time was working on it, but what I thought was an afternoon job, ended
> up taking me probably three days.
>
> I also have to be really disciplined with myself not to rush through these
> things, as so many are cosmetic, and though not structurally important, are
> the items that I will see everytime I look at my Piet. But let me also say
> for those who are in earlier in their projects, IT'S ALL WORTH IT!!!!KEEP
> GOING!!! TRY TO TOUCH IT EVERY DAY, EVEN IF IT'S FOR TEN MINUTES!!!
>
> I also want to write about something I've been thinking about for the last
> couple of years.
>
> Let me encourage all of you who can, to fly your Piet to Brodhead each
> year, and once there, to fly it often. Dreamy-eyed enthusiasts come from
> all over this country and the world to see Piets flying. There are many
> builders, or wanna be builders who have never even seen a real Piet, let
> alone seen one fly. As I"m sure most of you know, the sight of the
> Pietenpols flying at Brodhead is a powerful shot in the arm of encouragement
> to dozens to keep building for another year. I seriously doubt that I would
> be finishing my plane if it weren't for my annual pilgrimage to Brodhead.
>
> I have been struck at the last two Brodheads, that while there ended up
> being a good turnout, there was noticably less flying than in years past. I
> attributed it to the lack of fuel these last two yeras, and some very
> worn-out pilots this year. However, please remember what it was like when
> you were building and dreaming of the day when your project would take wing.
> Don't forget how hard you ran after each taxing plane just to watch it lift
> off, or how you shot dozen of photographs of it landing, and how much that
> first ride meant. If every pilot did two or three short flights each day,
> this would add up to a LOT of flying and encouragement.
>
> I pray that when mine is done, it is reliable enough for me to get up there
> and serve my brother and sister builders as others have served me through
> the years by treating them to the unforgettable sights and sounds of this
> magnificent flying machine from a bygone era patrolling the beautiful skies
> of Brodhead.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Charvet <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: And the real work begins... |
Glad to hear someone is building.....and a new thread has started.
Building ribs is a good test of your stamina to complete the project. I
believe you can get all your rib gussets from a 2ft x 4ft piece of
aircraft plywood, that can be shipped cheaply from Aircraft Spruce.
That is what I did. Just be sure to sand the plywood before you cut it
up so the T-88 will adhere well. I used the little 3/8 inch aircraft
nails to hold the gussets in place.
On another note, just finished up my paperwork package for my
Airworthiness Certificate. Hang in there, it only took me 5 years
Ben Charvet
Mims, Fl
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: And the real work begins... |
| From: | "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net> |
Now you're doing it! Get some T-88 and get crackin. I found the ribs to be a
lot of fun. Once I figured out how to build them, it was kind of like a little
assembly line. Not a whole lot of study required on those once you get going...
just keep putting the little sticks with the big sticks and soon you'll look
up and have a whole pile of em.
Not real sure on the 2' x 4' plywood for all the gussets. I burnt through a 4'
x 4', and then some. I cut my gussets a little large, but close to what the
plans showed... plus I have a vertical in front and behind each spar, so that
consumed a little more material.
Good luck, and keep us posted.
--------
Mark - working on wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269434#269434
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | And the real work begins... |
Looking good, Ben! I can hardly wait for a full report of your first
flight.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ben Charvet
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 10:21 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: And the real work begins...
Glad to hear someone is building.....and a new thread has started.
Building ribs is a good test of your stamina to complete the project. I
believe you can get all your rib gussets from a 2ft x 4ft piece of
aircraft plywood, that can be shipped cheaply from Aircraft Spruce.
That is what I did. Just be sure to sand the plywood before you cut it
up so the T-88 will adhere well. I used the little 3/8 inch aircraft
nails to hold the gussets in place.
On another note, just finished up my paperwork package for my
Airworthiness Certificate. Hang in there, it only took me 5 years
Ben Charvet
Mims, Fl
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: And the real work begins... |
| From: | "Jerry Dotson" <jdotson(at)erec.net> |
Ben,
I used 2 each 2 x 4 sheets from Aircraft Spruce. If you have access to a CNC router
with 0.050" router bits I will send you the DXF file and also the
G-code to cut them. The code is just enough for 1 rib. Just press the start button
about 30 times and they will all be cut. I am referring to the
plywood gussets.
--------
Jerry Dotson
59 Daniel Johnson Rd
Baker, FL 32531
Started building NX510JD July, 2009
Ribs all done
using Lycoming O-235
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269457#269457
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/dsc00105_289.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | NEW HOME FOR NX510JD |
| From: | "Jerry Dotson" <jdotson(at)erec.net> |
My hangar is finally finished.( 40 X 50 ) If I can now get power, air and water
out there to it I can get started assembly on that 1 piece wing. No wait...need
a 30 foot long work bench, light fixtures, etc. I am just proud to finally
get it built. The contractor was about 2 months late getting started.
--------
Jerry Dotson
59 Daniel Johnson Rd
Baker, FL 32531
Started building NX510JD July, 2009
Ribs and tailfeathers done
using Lycoming O-235
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269462#269462
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/335_961.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Thank you Ivan. I see I am not alone in changing the Pietenpol to suit my o
wn personal need/wants.
-
I do not mind people who disagree with me...discussion is the best way to c
ome up with new ideas and solutions. (if there is a problem to begin with.)
- I don't like the ones who nothing intelligent to say, or have no facts
to share to back up their claims.- Other then that, I welcome all replies
.
--- On Sun, 10/25/09, ivan.todorovic wrote:
From: ivan.todorovic <tosha(at)sezampro.rs>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
Date: Sunday, October 25, 2009, 7:54 PM
I see it exactly the opposite of you. The main reason to consider (I'm not
saying build) deviating from the plans is to honor the B. Pietenpol spirit
of always build safer and better flying aircraft. There is no need to cure
the deficiency in the design, reason enough is to make B.P. happy in heaven
s, as he is known not to build two exactly the same aircraft and to be as f
ar from "purist" as he can be. After all he abandoned one of the most signi
ficant marks of his design (Ford engine) as soon as he got a chance to do i
t. I deeply beleive if he can see someone building Piet with Ford enigne in
2009 he would think for him self "Oh, no, another ..... building by the pl
ans".
The amount of hate in the form "Oh, I just flew my Piet, and you morons tal
k about something better instead to build by the plans like me" is getting
quite disturbing. There is no wonder people got annoyed. There is no single
thread in which some deviation from the plans is mentioned that is not rap
idly shut with flood of "Why, why, why, when this design confirmed it self
for 80 years?" messegaes. To honor B.P, is there any other reason needed?
Regards,
and please don't mind the rough tone, I got excited how this thread is cut
of, and I am very interested in building with pushrods for several reasons,
Ivan Todorovic
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Bill, I respect you replies to may various questions.-You make very good
points in you post below. It is becoming clear to me that this is not a sim
ple matter of replacing the cables with tubes. Although for the life of me,
I struggle with that...how hard can it be!?
-
A good point you made which I never thought of...which is exactly how I usu
ally think...since over the 80 years of this plane, very, very few use tube
s, it may be because it is not such a great idea.- The last issue of the
Broadhead Newsletter shows tubes on a Piet...a steel fuse Piet.
-
Thanks for your input Bill.
--- On Sun, 10/25/09, Bill Church wrote:
From: Bill Church <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
Date: Sunday, October 25, 2009, 8:24 PM
>
This will be my last comment on this thread.
First off, Michael, if you follow through with a push/pull system, you will
not be the first. It has been done before. Refer to the following link for
a photo of a GN-1 with such a system:
http://www.westcoastpiet.com/images/Pete%20Smith/Brodhead__20070720_028.JPG
Note that the control tube for the rudder is not tiny. The control tube for
the elevators is likely buried inside the fuselage, and the elevators are
most likely built of steel tube, in order to be able to transfer the torque
adequately. My thoughts are that if this system was an improvement, we wou
ld see more flying examples of it. Just because it has been done does not m
ean it's a good idea.
Secondly, all of the "opinions" that have been expressed regarding the nega
tive aspects of attempting to use a push/pull system on this aircraft have
been based on sound engineering principles. The reason why nobody has offer
ed data to prove your theory wrong is that your "system" has no data behind
it. There are no dimensions to work with. Not even a basic sketch. There a
re often a thousand ways to achieve the same basic goal, with some being be
tter than others, but no one being the "right" way. For instance, as one re
ply stated, the proper size for the tubes is dependent on the length, in re
ference to buckling strength.
Thirdly, unless someone out there decides that they want to do all the calc
ulations for you, you will eventually have to deal with all of that "langua
ge and formulas" that, as you put it, are "over your head". As I said befor
e, it's not simple. Once the routing of the system is determined (including
all pivot points), you will need to determine the loads that will be impos
ed on the system (plus an appropriate factor of safety). From there you wil
l be able to determine the loads that will be carried by each component, an
d based on those numbers, you will determine the sizes of each component. (
There's a reason why it takes four years of university to obtain a degree i
n Engineering).
And finally, all of the above is my OPINION. But my opinion is based on mor
e than twenty years experience working as a Professional Engineer. Take it
or leave it.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269403#269403
le, List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
".I see I am not alone in changing the Pietenpol to suit my own personal
need/wants."
Those are words I can live with. Change - Yes, Improve - NO. Have you
checked out www.cpc-world.com <http://www.cpc-world.com/> ? You will see an
excellent job of incorporating push rods.
Gary Boothe
Cool, Ca.
Pietenpol
WW Corvair Conversion, mounted
Tail done, Fuselage on gear
(15 ribs down.)
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Perez
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:54 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
Thank you Ivan. I see I am not alone in changing the Pietenpol to suit my
own personal need/wants.
I do not mind people who disagree with me...discussion is the best way to
come up with new ideas and solutions. (if there is a problem to begin with.)
I don't like the ones who nothing intelligent to say, or have no facts to
share to back up their claims. Other then that, I welcome all replies.
--- On Sun, 10/25/09, ivan.todorovic wrote:
From: ivan.todorovic <tosha(at)sezampro.rs>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
Date: Sunday, October 25, 2009, 7:54 PM
<http://us.mc833.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=tosha@sezampro.rs> >
I see it exactly the opposite of you. The main reason to consider (I'm not
saying build) deviating from the plans is to honor the B. Pietenpol spirit
of always build safer and better flying aircraft. There is no need to cure
the deficiency in the design, reason enough is to make B.P. happy in
heavens, as he is known not to build two exactly the same aircraft and to be
as far from "purist" as he can be. After all he abandoned one of the most
significant marks of his design (Ford engine) as soon as he got a chance to
do it. I deeply beleive if he can see someone building Piet with Ford enigne
in 2009 he would think for him self "Oh, no, another ..... building by the
plans".
The amount of hate in the form "Oh, I just flew my Piet, and you morons talk
about something better instead to build by the plans like me" is getting
quite disturbing. There is no wonder people got annoyed. There is no single
thread in which some deviation from the plans is mentioned that is not
rapidly shut with flood of "Why, why, why, when this design confirmed it
self for 80 years?" messegaes. To honor B.P, is there any other reason
needed?
Regards,
and please don't mind the rough tone, I got excited how this thread is cut
of, and I am very interested in building with pushrods for several reasons,
Ivan Todorovic
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
Douwe, you are right about the fact that one of the things that has produced
fewer Pietenpol flights at Brodhead recently being fatigue. For me at
least, that fatigue has been brought on by bad weather.
Last year (2008) I had planned to fly my Pietenpol there on Thursday, so I
would have Friday to rest and be fresh for flying on Saturday. For me the
trip is 650 nautical miles, with the first third of that flying over the
Appalachian Mountains. Thursday's weather was bad, and I couldn't fly, so
Friday I made the entire trip in one day - 12 hours of flying (averaging 27
knots groundspeed crossing the Blue Ridge Mountains in Virginia), taking off
from Raleigh at dawn and landing at Brodhead just before sunset. I did hop
a few rides on Saturday last year, in spite of my butt protesting at sitting
in that cockpit again.
This year I planned to leave on Tuesday and take my time getting there, to
arrive by Wednesday evening. It took me 3 days to get there, spending all
day Wednesday trying to cross the West Virginia / Virginia border (a 4,000'
ridge). I finally arrived at noon on Friday. But the primary reason I only
hopped 2 rides on Saturday was the crosswinds that lashed the field most of
Saturday. Flying a Pietenpol in crosswinds like that is just work, and not
much fun, particularly when you are tired.
It will be a while before I fly mine to Brodhead again. My wife is not very
happy when I fly it over the mountains. I was able to use the excuse of
wanting to be there for the 80th anniversary, but it will be a while before
I make the trip again with the Pietenpol. I'll still go to Brodhead, but
I'll probably use the RV-4. Much cheaper on gas and able to outrun weather.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP "Icarus Plummet"
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Douwe
Blumberg
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 10:19 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: some thoughts
It's funny how the last mile of the marathon seems longer than the rest.
I'm in the final mile with the piet, and my list of "little tidbits" seems
miles long, and the little jobs that appear simple often end up being
surprisingly hard.
I just finished the cockpit coamings. Two weeks ago I went out to the
workshop one morning thinking "I"ll do the coamings today, that'll be a fun
and rewarding afternoon job". Two weeks later I'm finishing up. Not all
that time was working on it, but what I thought was an afternoon job, ended
up taking me probably three days.
I also have to be really disciplined with myself not to rush through these
things, as so many are cosmetic, and though not structurally important, are
the items that I will see everytime I look at my Piet. But let me also say
for those who are in earlier in their projects, IT'S ALL WORTH IT!!!!KEEP
GOING!!! TRY TO TOUCH IT EVERY DAY, EVEN IF IT'S FOR TEN MINUTES!!!
I also want to write about something I've been thinking about for the last
couple of years.
Let me encourage all of you who can, to fly your Piet to Brodhead each year,
and once there, to fly it often. Dreamy-eyed enthusiasts come from all over
this country and the world to see Piets flying. There are many builders, or
wanna be builders who have never even seen a real Piet, let alone seen one
fly. As I"m sure most of you know, the sight of the Pietenpols flying at
Brodhead is a powerful shot in the arm of encouragement to dozens to keep
building for another year. I seriously doubt that I would be finishing my
plane if it weren't for my annual pilgrimage to Brodhead.
I have been struck at the last two Brodheads, that while there ended up
being a good turnout, there was noticably less flying than in years past. I
attributed it to the lack of fuel these last two yeras, and some very
worn-out pilots this year. However, please remember what it was like when
you were building and dreaming of the day when your project would take wing.
Don't forget how hard you ran after each taxing plane just to watch it lift
off, or how you shot dozen of photographs of it landing, and how much that
first ride meant. If every pilot did two or three short flights each day,
this would add up to a LOT of flying and encouragement.
I pray that when mine is done, it is reliable enough for me to get up there
and serve my brother and sister builders as others have served me through
the years by treating them to the unforgettable sights and sounds of this
magnificent flying machine from a bygone era patrolling the beautiful skies
of Brodhead.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
David, you make a good point. I know next to nothing on making this change.
I am gathering information to do so, as I have stated many, many times. If
it proves to be too involved, too heavy, too expensive, too math intensive
, etc. then I will not bother. Originally, again, as I have said before, I
had hopped someone that had "been there, done that" would post a real world
"for" or "against" response.
-
As you all have seen, some good info has been posted and the usual worthles
s posts.- I try to weed out the facts from the knee jerk reactions and ex
tract useful, intelligent information. As I sit here typing this, I am lean
ing towards just having a push/pull tube from the stick to the elevator bel
l crank, cables everywhere else.-
-
Still, I am yet to have my original question answered. (well, those who hav
e posted the calculations/formulas have really helped a lot...thank you.)
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: And the real work begins... |
I think I figured it would take a 4' x 4' sheet for all of the gussets.
Last night I cut up a 1' x 4' strip of plywood to give me gussets for the
next 8 or 9 ribs.
--Ken
wrote:
> Glad to hear someone is building.....and a new thread has started.
> Building ribs is a good test of your stamina to complete the project. I
> believe you can get all your rib gussets from a 2ft x 4ft piece of
> aircraft plywood, that can be shipped cheaply from Aircraft Spruce.
> That is what I did. Just be sure to sand the plywood before you cut it
> up so the T-88 will adhere well. I used the little 3/8 inch aircraft
> nails to hold the gussets in place.
>
> On another note, just finished up my paperwork package for my
> Airworthiness Certificate. Hang in there, it only took me 5 years
>
> Ben Charvet
> Mims, Fl
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Group, I believe this thread has provided me with all the useful intelligen
ce it is going to. Thank you to those who genuinely tried to help in some w
ay.
-
Before this thread degrades further into a name calling tiff, I would like
to stop it here and move on to better things.--
-
Looks to me like a full tube control system is not in my realm of time and
effort I am willing to invest to see it through safely.
-
Until my next post...cheers.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Yes Gary, I have seen your setup.=C2- Any issues with the pivit behgind t
he pilot seat twisting or pushing off to one side?
--- On Mon, 10/26/09, Gary Boothe wrote:
From: Gary Boothe <gboothe5(at)comcast.net>
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
Date: Monday, October 26, 2009, 10:06 AM
=9CI see I am not alone in changing the Pietenpol to suit my
own personal need/wants=9D
=C2-
Those are words I can live with. Change =93 Yes, Improve =93 NO
. Have you checked out www.cpc-world.com? You will see an excellent job of
incorporating push rods.
=C2-
Gary Boothe
Cool, Ca.
Pietenpol
WW Corvair Conversion, mounted
Tail done,=C2-Fuselage=C2-on gear
(15 ribs down)
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-lis
t-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael Perez
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 6:54 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
=C2-
Thank you Ivan. I see I am not alone in changing the Pietenpol to suit my o
wn personal need/wants.
=C2-
I do not mind people who disagree with me...discussion is the best way to c
ome up with new ideas and solutions. (if there is a problem to begin with.)
=C2- I don't like the ones who nothing intelligent to say, or have no fac
ts to share to back up their claims.=C2- Other then that, I welcome all r
eplies.
--- On Sun, 10/25/09, ivan.todorovic wrote:
From: ivan.todorovic <tosha(at)sezampro.rs>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
Date: Sunday, October 25, 2009, 7:54 PM
I see it exactly the opposite of you. The main reason to consider (I'm not
saying build) deviating from the plans is to honor the B. Pietenpol spirit
of always build safer and better flying aircraft. There is no need to cure
the deficiency in the design, reason enough is to make B.P. happy in heaven
s, as he is known not to build two exactly the same aircraft and to be as f
ar from "purist" as he can be. After all he abandoned one of the most signi
ficant marks of his design (Ford engine) as soon as he got a chance to do i
t. I deeply beleive if he can see someone building Piet with Ford enigne in
2009 he would think for him self "Oh, no, another ..... building by the pl
ans".
The amount of hate in the form "Oh, I just flew my Piet, and you morons tal
k about something better instead to build by the plans like me" is getting
quite disturbing. There is no wonder people got annoyed. There is no single
thread in which some deviation from the plans is mentioned that is not rap
idly shut with flood of "Why, why, why, when this design confirmed it self
for 80 years?" messegaes. To honor B.P, is there any other reason needed?
Regards,
and please don't mind the rough tone, I got excited how this thread is cut
of, and I am very interested in building with pushrods for several reasons,
Ivan Todorovic
=C2- =C2-http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-Listhttp://forum
s.matronics.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution =C2-
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: some thoughts |
| From: | "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net> |
Well, I feel real lucky to have had the opportunity to look at your airplane on
my first trip to Brodhead. What a beauty.
--------
Mark - working on wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269508#269508
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: some thoughts |
Thanks, Mark. I wish I had met you while we were there. Sometimes I think
Brodhead should last a week and Oshkosh shouldn't be more than two days.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of K5YAC
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 1:23 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: some thoughts
Well, I feel real lucky to have had the opportunity to look at your airplane
on my first trip to Brodhead. What a beauty.
--------
Mark - working on wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269508#269508
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: some thoughts |
| From: | "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net> |
Actually, we did meet just briefly. You were getting ready for a Saturday flight...
I asked a couple of questions about you fuselage and got out of the way.
Hopefully I won't feel too intimidated by you veterans next year, and I'll make
it a point to seek some of you guys out. I really didn't have any reason
to feel intimidated... everyone was super nice (except for that bum John Racine),
but I didn't really figure that out until late in the event.
Just kidding John... I'll see you tomorrow night. Markle said he'll be providing
some pizza and I've got the beer.
--------
Mark - working on wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269530#269530
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: some thoughts |
| From: | "John Recine" <amsafetyc(at)aol.com> |
I am in route and will catch up with you guys tomorrow night after work.
See ya then
John
------Original Message------
From: Mark Chunard
Sender: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
ReplyTo: Pietenpol builders Board
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: some thoughts
Sent: Oct 26, 2009 2:54 PM
Actually, we did meet just briefly. You were getting ready for a Saturday flight...
I asked a couple of questions about you fuselage and got out of the way.
Hopefully I won't feel too intimidated by you veterans next year, and I'll make
it a point to seek some of you guys out. I really didn't have any reason
to feel intimidated... everyone was super nice (except for that bum John Racine),
but I didn't really figure that out until late in the event.
Just kidding John... I'll see you tomorrow night. Markle said he'll be providing
some pizza and I've got the beer.
--------
Mark - working on wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269530#269530
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
The advantage of the threaded inserts are that the proper materials can
be chosen, stress concentrations avoided and rolled threads used. They
ought to have excellent fatigue life. On the other hand they are usually
either riveted, bolted or welded to the tube, so they do need that joint
taken into consideration.
However, if the tube is otherwise a suitable size and material, there's
no reason why properly-made internal threads can't work nicely. As
Michael Perez pointed out correctly they can potentially have enough
strength. The tube also will need enough net section to carry the load,
and sufficient moment of inertia to avoid Euler buckling, and sufficient
wall thickness to avoid local crippling. The threaded hole will need
appropriate alignment, of course, and it would be good to have a tapered
run-out to the threads.
Usually when such elements are designed, there's a threaded insert such
as a Helicoil for the actual threads. That's a refinement that is
probably unlikely for a homebuilder to install, so it would be desirable
to assess why that's such a common design detail, and what the issues
are.
I think it's unlikely that such a pushrod would be anything like
weight-efficient for any serious element of the control system. But it's
worth the try, if anyone is interested enough to spend the time to do
it. It's not something to be ruled out arbitrarily. It's also not
something to be adopted without completely understanding and accounting
for all the aspects involved.
David Paule
From: Matt Redmond
Just a thought. I'm not so sure about cutting threads inside the
pushrod.
My experience is limited but all the pushrods I've seen have inserts
on the ends of the pushrod - the rod-end bearing screws into the insert.
Like this:
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/appages/pushrodthdfit.php
Or this:
http://rv9a.pacificrimsound.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/dsc06230.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
I had a Robertson B1-RD and the elevator pushrod was done that way. It onl
y had on guide but I'm sure the forces were much less as the cruise speed w
as only 33mph. In anything but a very light breeze the bicycles passed me
=3B-)
BTW - these last comments are more like the ones I'm used to on this list
Doug Dever
In beautiful Stow Ohio-working on ribs.
From: dpaule(at)frii.com
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
Date: Mon=2C 26 Oct 2009 13:30:45 -0600
The advantage of the threaded inserts are that the proper materials can be
chosen=2C stress concentrations avoided and rolled threads used. They ought
to have excellent fatigue life. On the other hand they are usually either
riveted=2C bolted or welded to the tube=2C so they do need that joint taken
into consideration.
However=2C if the tube is otherwise a suitable size and material=2C there's
no reason why properly-made internal threads can't work nicely. As Michael
Perez pointed out correctly they can potentially have enough strength. The
tube also will need enough net section to carry the load=2C and sufficient
moment of inertia to avoid Euler buckling=2C and sufficient wall thickness
to avoid local crippling. The threaded hole will need appropriate alignmen
t=2C of course=2C and it would be good to have a tapered run-out to the thr
eads.
Usually when such elements are designed=2C there's a threaded insert such a
s a Helicoil for the actual threads. That's a refinement that is probably u
nlikely for a homebuilder to install=2C so it would be desirable to assess
why that's such a common design detail=2C and what the issues are.
I think it's unlikely that such a pushrod would be anything like weight-eff
icient for any serious element of the control system. But it's worth the tr
y=2C if anyone is interested enough to spend the time to do it. It's not so
mething to be ruled out arbitrarily. It's also not something to be adopted
without completely understanding and accounting for all the aspects involve
d.
David Paule
From: Matt Redmond
Just a thought. I'm not so sure about cutting threads inside the pushrod.
My experience is limited but all the pushrods I've seen have inserts on the
ends of the pushrod - the rod-end bearing screws into the insert.
Like this: http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/appages/pushrodthdfit.php
Or this: http://rv9a.pacificrimsound.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/dsc062
30.jpg
_________________________________________________________________
Windows 7: It helps you do more. Explore Windows 7.
http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/windows-7/default.aspx?ocid=PID24727::T:
WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_evergreen3:102009
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Charvet <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: And the real work begins... |
K5YAC wrote:
> Not real sure on the 2' x 4' plywood for all the gussets. I burnt through a
4' x 4', and then some. I cut my gussets a little large, but close to what the
plans showed... plus I have a vertical in front and behind each spar, so that
consumed a little more material.
>
>
Maybe I bought 2 pieces of 2' x 4', but it was cheaper to ship than a
4X4 piece.
Ben
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
Mr.Peitenpol was always making changes, just look at the Sky Scout plans.
He talks about changing the gear, the tail wheel, and a brace in the rib.
He wanted these changes to be used for the Air Camper and the Scout. People
are just always trying to make things better. I believe it's called
progress. I hear of those who would not change a thing, but when you talk to
them they really did make some small changes. I guess that doesn't count.
Some people don't trust themselves to make a change. Others have the
experience or knowledge to feel fine with their changes. We are all different,
that's what makes life worth living.
I had trouble with my cables between the stick and the bellcrank. The
cables were tight when the stick was centered, but loose when I had full
stick forward or full stick back. I came close to using a push/pull tube
there. My glider has push/pull tubes and they work great.
I can't see it adding more then 2 or 3 pounds at tops. Not near as
much as a cubby hole with a tie down kit.
Howdy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: And the real work begins... |
Check with Boulter Plywood in greater Boston-- google them, and see what they have.
You can shop online and then call to discuss shipping and place your order,
including cutting instructions-- perhaps with Chris Boulter, a principal there.
Two 2 X 4 sheets ship a lot cheaper than one 2 X 8.
Tim in central TX
-----Original Message-----
>From: Ben Charvet <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net>
>Sent: Oct 26, 2009 3:23 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: And the real work begins...
>
>
>K5YAC wrote:
>> Not real sure on the 2' x 4' plywood for all the gussets. I burnt through a
4' x 4', and then some. I cut my gussets a little large, but close to what the
plans showed... plus I have a vertical in front and behind each spar, so that
consumed a little more material.
>>
>>
>Maybe I bought 2 pieces of 2' x 4', but it was cheaper to ship than a
>4X4 piece.
>
>Ben
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends |
| From: | "Billy McCaskill" <billmz(at)cox.net> |
This is only my opinion, and we all know what opinions are like...
Michael, change your plane to suit your needs and desires. It's YOUR airplane.
You will be the one who must trust his life to the design changes, and none
of us are obligated to fly in your plane.
I will be building mine as close to the prints as possible, as I don't care to
change things just for the sake of change. However, IF there was a change that
I wanted to make (and there are a few) that I could justify the time/effort/expense,
then I would do it. But if there was no logical justification for changing
any aspect of MY plane, then that aspect will be built according to the
plans.
I personally don't see what there is to be gained by going to the push/pull instead
of the pull/pull cables. To me, the external control cables and control
horns add just as much to the nostalgic air of this timeless airplane as the Jenny
style gear and wire wheels do.
If indeed you posed the question of push/pull just from the interest of learning
about the engineering involved, I support your decision to do this.
As for the forces in the control system, look for the weakest link in the cable
system. What it is the breaking strength in tension of a typical turnbuckle
in the elevator cable system? The threaded portions of the eye or fork ends don't
have a very large cross section... What is the shear strength of the clevis
pin that hooks the eye of the turnbuckle to the bellcrank/control horn? How
much force is required to tear the clevis pin out of the the thin sheet metal
bellcrank/control horn?
I would think that the pulling force exerted by the elevator on the cables would
be the same as the pushing force applied to a pushrod tube, and you could use
that loading to calculate the diameter and wall thickness of the pushrod tube
you would need to use to prevent buckling in compression loading. You could
build a mock-up and test it with weights or scales to simulate the flight loads
encountered, provided you had an accurate way to calculate or measure those
flight loads. Or you could copy the design of another existing plane that uses
push/pull elevator controls. What do the RV's use? I think those are push/pull,
and that plane imparts much larger flight loads than a Piet could impose
on the system.
Again, just my $.02 on this topic. Returning to lurk mode now...
Billy McCaskill
Urbana, IL/Baker, LA
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269561#269561
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Model A head |
It IS a cool head! I seen it!
>
>I bought a Lion Speed Head from Charlie Yapp and it felt a bit
>heavier than the "C" head that I have been running so I did a weight
>comparison. The "C" head weighed 27 lbs and the new head is 46.5
>lbs. That's dang near 10 lbs more in the nose!!!
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Model A head |
| From: | "Billy McCaskill" <billmz(at)cox.net> |
"Hope your engineering is better than your math 46.5 - 27 = 19.5 almost 20 lbs.
"
Come on now, don't bash his engineering... he did say 'dang near'. That ought
to qualify as engineering speak. :)
Billy McCaskill
Urbana, IL/Baker, LA[/quote]
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269611#269611
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
| Subject: | Re: humped center section] |
Clif, Gary, Rick,
Thanks for the info guys. I'll probably go the "commercial" route and
sub this work out to an exhaust shop - there are a couple in the Twin
Cities area. If it takes me 4 days to reply to a simple email - how
long would it take me to get the pipes done! I don't even want to
venture guess...
Thanks again,
Dan
--
Dan Yocum
Fermilab 630.840.6509
yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
Fermilab. Just zeros and ones.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: humped center section] |
I'd have an aviation-oriented guy do them, if I were you. I paid top
dollar for welds on my stainless pipes. One lasted a month, another
lasted three more. My hangar mate welded up a replacement for the one
that departed the plane (I've often wondered where it landed...) and
patch welded the other that was set to depart. His welds don't LOOK
as good, but they've lasted. Also, stick with mild steel. Stainless
costs more and still gives problems. I'd rather have slow rust than
immediate and catastrophic failure.
>
>Clif, Gary, Rick,
>
>Thanks for the info guys. I'll probably go the "commercial" route
>and sub this work out to an exhaust shop - there are a couple in the
>Twin Cities area. If it takes me 4 days to reply to a simple email
>- how long would it take me to get the pipes done! I don't even
>want to venture guess...
>
>Thanks again,
>Dan
>
>--
>Dan Yocum
>Fermilab 630.840.6509
>yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
>Fermilab. Just zeros and ones.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: humped center section] |
For those contemplating stainless steel ehaust systems, let me share a
little pearl of wisdom that I learned just a bit too late:
My original exhaust system on my Pietenpol was TIG welded stainless steel,
welded by my neighbor (who also welded my aluminum fuel tank). The welds
looked good, but after about 30 hours of operation, the left stack broke off
and was only kept from departing the airplane by the SCAT hose on the heat
muff. I had my neighbor re-weld it, with an additional strut to help
distribute the load. Then I flew the airplane to Brodhead and OSH (this was
in 2005). On the way home, the right side stack broke off and was again
held in place by the SCAT hose. I had to find a local welder make emergency
repairs so I could make it home.
I decided that stainless was simply not a good choice and made a whole new
set from plain carbon steel, which I could weld myself. No problem with it,
except that it has begun to rust. In another 10 years or so I'll have to
replace it.
Meanwhile, I was talking to a fellow who makes exhaust systems for race cars
(TIG welded stainless), telling him of my troubles. He asked "What did you
do to shield the inside of the tubing?"
I just looked at him with a stupid look on my face (fairly easy for me to
do), and said "Huh?"
He said, "TIG shields the area around the weld with argon gas to prevent the
weld from burning, but with such thin walled material, the metal on the
inside of the tube is just as hot as the outside. You've got to shield it
as well."
He said that when he does a job like this, he plugs one end of the tube,
then turns on the gas from the TIG torch and uses it to flood the entire
tube with Argon. He tests to see if he has enough by striking a match and
inserting it into the tube. If it doesn't go out immediately, he knows he
doesn't have enough Argon to shield the weld.
So when it comes time to replace my exhaust system again, I may give
stainless another try, using this technique.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
Boatright
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
section]
I'd have an aviation-oriented guy do them, if I were you. I paid top
dollar for welds on my stainless pipes. One lasted a month, another
lasted three more. My hangar mate welded up a replacement for the one
that departed the plane (I've often wondered where it landed...) and
patch welded the other that was set to depart. His welds don't LOOK
as good, but they've lasted. Also, stick with mild steel. Stainless
costs more and still gives problems. I'd rather have slow rust than
immediate and catastrophic failure.
>
>Clif, Gary, Rick,
>
>Thanks for the info guys. I'll probably go the "commercial" route
>and sub this work out to an exhaust shop - there are a couple in the
>Twin Cities area. If it takes me 4 days to reply to a simple email
>- how long would it take me to get the pipes done! I don't even
>want to venture guess...
>
>Thanks again,
>Dan
>
>--
>Dan Yocum
>Fermilab 630.840.6509
>yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
>Fermilab. Just zeros and ones.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Perez <speedbrake(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: humped center section] |
Is that an actual argon purge, (flowing of gas, such that comes from the TI
G head when welding) or did he just "cork" the tube closed while filled wit
h gas?
-
I am also curious if the same failure would result on the exact same tube/m
aterial/weld had it not been subjected to the heating/cool the exhaust sees
.
--- On Tue, 10/27/09, Jack Phillips wrote:
From: Jack Phillips <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: RE: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center sectio
n]
Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2009, 5:02 PM
et>
For those contemplating stainless steel ehaust systems, let me share a
little pearl of wisdom that I learned just a bit too late:
My original exhaust system on my Pietenpol was TIG welded stainless steel,
welded by my neighbor (who also welded my aluminum fuel tank).- The welds
looked good, but after about 30 hours of operation, the left stack broke of
f
and was only kept from departing the airplane by the SCAT hose on the heat
muff.- I had my neighbor re-weld it, with an additional strut to help
distribute the load.- Then I flew the airplane to Brodhead and OSH (this
was
in 2005).- On the way home, the right side stack broke off and was again
held in place by the SCAT hose.- I had to find a local welder make emerge
ncy
repairs so I could make it home.
I decided that stainless was simply not a good choice and made a whole new
set from plain carbon steel, which I could weld myself.- No problem with
it,
except that it has begun to rust.- In another 10 years or so I'll have to
replace it.
Meanwhile, I was talking to a fellow who makes exhaust systems for race car
s
(TIG welded stainless), telling him of my troubles.- He asked "What did y
ou
do to shield the inside of the tubing?"
I just looked at him with a stupid look on my face (fairly easy for me to
do), and said "Huh?"
He said, "TIG shields the area around the weld with argon gas to prevent th
e
weld from burning, but with such thin walled material, the metal on the
inside of the tube is just as hot as the outside.- You've got to shield i
t
as well."
He said that when he does a job like this, he plugs one end of the tube,
then turns on the gas from the TIG torch and uses it to flood the entire
tube with Argon.- He tests to see if he has enough by striking a match an
d
inserting it into the tube.- If it doesn't go out immediately, he knows h
e
doesn't have enough Argon to shield the weld.
So when it comes time to replace my exhaust system again, I may give
stainless another try, using this technique.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
Boatright
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
section]
I'd have an aviation-oriented guy do them, if I were you. I paid top
dollar for welds on my stainless pipes. One lasted a month, another
lasted three more. My hangar mate welded up a replacement for the one
that departed the plane (I've often wondered where it landed...) and
patch welded the other that was set to depart. His welds don't LOOK
as good, but they've lasted. Also, stick with mild steel. Stainless
costs more and still gives problems. I'd rather have slow rust than
immediate and catastrophic failure.
>
>Clif, Gary, Rick,
>
>Thanks for the info guys.- I'll probably go the "commercial" route
>and sub this work out to an exhaust shop - there are a couple in the
>Twin Cities area.- If it takes me 4 days to reply to a simple email
>- how long would it take me to get the pipes done!- I don't even
>want to venture guess...
>
>Thanks again,
>Dan
>
>--
>Dan Yocum
>Fermilab- 630.840.6509
>yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
>Fermilab.- Just zeros and ones.
le, List Admin.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: humped center section] |
| From: | Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com> |
Dan,
You may want to give Dawley Aviation a call: 800-338-5420, 262-763-3113,
info(at)dawley.net. They are located in Burlington, WI (closer to you than
MSP), and they do some pretty darned good work with exhaust systems. They
fabbed an exhaust system from scratch for a friend's R-680 on a Cessna
Bobcat, and did a very nice job. I don't know how they compare cost-wise to
the shops you are considering (for the work you are wanting done), but from
what I have seen in person and heard from others they do nice work.
Good luck!
Ryan
(We're actually going to be out to the airport this weekend!!! The heat will
be on too... :P )
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Dan Yocum wrote:
>
> Clif, Gary, Rick,
>
> Thanks for the info guys. I'll probably go the "commercial" route and sub
> this work out to an exhaust shop - there are a couple in the Twin Cities
> area. If it takes me 4 days to reply to a simple email - how long would it
> take me to get the pipes done! I don't even want to venture guess...
>
> Thanks again,
> Dan
>
>
> --
> Dan Yocum
> Fermilab 630.840.6509
> yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
> Fermilab. Just zeros and ones.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: humped center section] |
Don't know - I haven't seen the procedure done, just heard his description
of it. I believe he said he plugged one end of the tube and flowed argon
into the other end for several seconds until it had displaced the air in the
tube. He then checked the oxygen level by inserting a burning match.
As Yogi Berra said "I've already told you more than I know".
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
Perez
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 5:41 PM
Subject: RE: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
section]
Is that an actual argon purge, (flowing of gas, such that comes from the TIG
head when welding) or did he just "cork" the tube closed while filled with
gas?
I am also curious if the same failure would result on the exact same
tube/material/weld had it not been subjected to the heating/cool the exhaust
sees.
--- On Tue, 10/27/09, Jack Phillips wrote:
From: Jack Phillips <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: RE: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
section]
Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2009, 5:02 PM
http://us.mc833.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=pietflyr@bellsouth.net> >
For those contemplating stainless steel ehaust systems, let me share a
little pearl of wisdom that I learned just a bit too late:
My original exhaust system on my Pietenpol was TIG welded stainless steel,
welded by my neighbor (who also welded my aluminum fuel tank). The welds
looked good, but after about 30 hours of operation, the left stack broke off
and was only kept from departing the airplane by the SCAT hose on the heat
muff. I had my neighbor re-weld it, with an additional strut to help
distribute the load. Then I flew the airplane to Brodhead and OSH (this was
in 2005). On the way home, the right side stack broke off and was again
held in place by the SCAT hose. I had to find a local welder make emergency
repairs so I could make it home.
I decided that stainless was simply not a good choice and made a whole new
set from plain carbon steel, which I could weld myself. No problem with it,
except that it has begun to rust. In another 10 years or so I'll have to
replace it.
Meanwhile, I was talking to a fellow who makes exhaust systems for race cars
(TIG welded stainless), telling him of my troubles. He asked "What did you
do to shield the inside of the tubing?"
I just looked at him with a stupid look on my face (fairly easy for me to
do), and said "Huh?"
He said, "TIG shields the area around the weld with argon gas to prevent the
weld from burning, but with such thin walled material, the metal on the
inside of the tube is just as hot as the outside. You've got to shield it
as well."
He said that when he does a job like this, he plugs one end of the tube,
then turns on the gas from the TIG torch and uses it to flood the entire
tube with Argon. He tests to see if he has enough by striking a match and
inserting it into the tube. If it doesn't go out immediately, he knows he
doesn't have enough Argon to shield the weld.
So when it comes time to replace my exhaust system again, I may give
stainless another try, using this technique.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
<http://us.mc833.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-pietenpol-list-server@ma
tronics.com>
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
<http://us.mc833.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-pietenpol-list-server@ma
tronics.com> ] On Behalf Of Jeff
Boatright
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 4:27 PM
<http://us.mc833.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=pietenpol-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
section]
<http://us.mc833.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=jboatri@emory.edu> >
I'd have an aviation-oriented guy do them, if I were you. I paid top
dollar for welds on my stainless pipes. One lasted a month, another
lasted three more. My hangar mate welded up a replacement for the one
that departed the plane (I've often wondered where it landed...) and
patch welded the other that was set to depart. His welds don't LOOK
as good, but they've lasted. Also, stick with mild steel. Stainless
costs more and still gives problems. I'd rather have slow rust than
immediate and catastrophic failure.
<http://us.mc833.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yocum@fnal.gov> >
>
>Clif, Gary, Rick,
>
>Thanks for the info guys. I'll probably go the "commercial" route
>and sub this work out to an exhaust shop - there are a couple in the
>Twin Cities area. If it takes me 4 days to reply to a simple email
>- how long would it take me to get the pipes done! I don't even
>want to venture guess...
>
>Thanks again,
>Dan
>
>--
>Dan Yocum
>Fermilab 630.840.6509
>yocum(at)fnal.gov
<http://us.mc833.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yocum@fnal.gov> ,
http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
>Fermilab. Just zeros and ones.
nbsp; --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List< -->
http://forums.matronbsp; - List
Contribution Web Site -http://www======================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: humped center section] |
Something to said for gas welding. Don't have that problem. Tig and Mig i
s fast=2C but I'll take gas any day of the week. The best sheet metal men
almost always use gas. You can weld 4130 without preheating or fear of cra
cking. You can weld all weldable aluminum=2C stainless and titanium (Haven
't done that one yet.) With tig or mig even the slightest breeze will blow
the gas off the weld. With 4130 the area will need to be preheated to pre
vent cracking. Tig and mig have thier place=2C especially in a controlled
production environment. I bet if you exhaust was gas welded by a competent
welder it wouldn't have cracked. Just my .02
Doug Dever
In beautiful Stow Ohio
> From: pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center sect
ion]
> Date: Tue=2C 27 Oct 2009 17:02:44 -0400
>
.net>
>
> For those contemplating stainless steel ehaust systems=2C let me share a
> little pearl of wisdom that I learned just a bit too late:
>
> My original exhaust system on my Pietenpol was TIG welded stainless steel
=2C
> welded by my neighbor (who also welded my aluminum fuel tank). The welds
> looked good=2C but after about 30 hours of operation=2C the left stack br
oke off
> and was only kept from departing the airplane by the SCAT hose on the hea
t
> muff. I had my neighbor re-weld it=2C with an additional strut to help
> distribute the load. Then I flew the airplane to Brodhead and OSH (this w
as
> in 2005). On the way home=2C the right side stack broke off and was again
> held in place by the SCAT hose. I had to find a local welder make emergen
cy
> repairs so I could make it home.
>
> I decided that stainless was simply not a good choice and made a whole ne
w
> set from plain carbon steel=2C which I could weld myself. No problem with
it=2C
> except that it has begun to rust. In another 10 years or so I'll have to
> replace it.
>
> Meanwhile=2C I was talking to a fellow who makes exhaust systems for race
cars
> (TIG welded stainless)=2C telling him of my troubles. He asked "What did
you
> do to shield the inside of the tubing?"
>
> I just looked at him with a stupid look on my face (fairly easy for me to
> do)=2C and said "Huh?"
>
> He said=2C "TIG shields the area around the weld with argon gas to preven
t the
> weld from burning=2C but with such thin walled material=2C the metal on t
he
> inside of the tube is just as hot as the outside. You've got to shield it
> as well."
>
> He said that when he does a job like this=2C he plugs one end of the tube
=2C
> then turns on the gas from the TIG torch and uses it to flood the entire
> tube with Argon. He tests to see if he has enough by striking a match and
> inserting it into the tube. If it doesn't go out immediately=2C he knows
he
> doesn't have enough Argon to shield the weld.
>
> So when it comes time to replace my exhaust system again=2C I may give
> stainless another try=2C using this technique.
>
> Jack Phillips
> NX899JP
> Raleigh=2C NC
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
> Boatright
> Sent: Tuesday=2C October 27=2C 2009 4:27 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
> section]
>
>
> I'd have an aviation-oriented guy do them=2C if I were you. I paid top
> dollar for welds on my stainless pipes. One lasted a month=2C another
> lasted three more. My hangar mate welded up a replacement for the one
> that departed the plane (I've often wondered where it landed...) and
> patch welded the other that was set to depart. His welds don't LOOK
> as good=2C but they've lasted. Also=2C stick with mild steel. Stainless
> costs more and still gives problems. I'd rather have slow rust than
> immediate and catastrophic failure.
>
>
> >
> >Clif=2C Gary=2C Rick=2C
> >
> >Thanks for the info guys. I'll probably go the "commercial" route
> >and sub this work out to an exhaust shop - there are a couple in the
> >Twin Cities area. If it takes me 4 days to reply to a simple email
> >- how long would it take me to get the pipes done! I don't even
> >want to venture guess...
> >
> >Thanks again=2C
> >Dan
> >
> >--
> >Dan Yocum
> >Fermilab 630.840.6509
> >yocum@fnal.gov=2C http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
> >Fermilab. Just zeros and ones.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Windows 7: Simplify your PC. Learn more.
http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/windows-7/default.aspx?ocid=PID24727::T:
WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_evergreen1:102009
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: humped center section] |
Actually, the repair on the way back from OSH was made by a professional
welder, TIG welded. It lasted nearly twice as long as the first one (50
hours). It cracked too. At the weld.
You've confused me a bit - in your 5th sentence you said "you can weld 4130
without preheating or fear of cracking." Then 3 sentences later you say
"With 4130 the area will need to be preheated to prevent cracking". Which
is it?
Anyway, to some extent I agree with you - I like oxyacetylene welding.
However, for some applications TIG is far better. I've tried gas welding
aluminum, I'll leave that for the pros. I also tried gas welding stainless
and burned up a lot of test material without any good welds. MIG I have no
experience with, but I know Champion Aircraft uses MIG to build Citabrias
and Decathlons (at least the Citabria I helped rebuild had a lot of little
twigs of welding rod stuck to it like MIG tends to leave behind).
This was just a tip given o me that I passed along. I have not tried it,
but it makes sense to me. Your mileage may vary.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doug Dever
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 6:26 PM
Subject: RE: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
section]
Something to said for gas welding. Don't have that problem. Tig and Mig is
fast, but I'll take gas any day of the week. The best sheet metal men
almost always use gas. You can weld 4130 without preheating or fear of
cracking. You can weld all weldable aluminum, stainless and titanium
(Haven't done that one yet.) With tig or mig even the slightest breeze will
blow the gas off the weld. With 4130 the area will need to be preheated to
prevent cracking. Tig and mig have thier place, especially in a controlled
production environment. I bet if you exhaust was gas welded by a competent
welder it wouldn't have cracked. Just my .02
Doug Dever
In beautiful Stow Ohio
> From: pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
section]
> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:02:44 -0400
>
>
> For those contemplating stainless steel ehaust systems, let me share a
> little pearl of wisdom that I learned just a bit too late:
>
> My original exhaust system on my Pietenpol was TIG welded stainless steel,
> welded by my neighbor (who also welded my aluminum fuel tank). The welds
> looked good, but after about 30 hours of operation, the left stack broke
off
> and was only kept from departing the airplane by the SCAT hose on the heat
> muff. I had my neighbor re-weld it, with an additional strut to help
> distribute the load. Then I flew the airplane to Brodhead and OSH (this
was
> in 2005). On the way home, the right side stack broke off and was again
> held in place by the SCAT hose. I had to find a local welder make
emergency
> repairs so I could make it home.
>
> I decided that stainless was simply not a good choice and made a whole new
> set from plain carbon steel, which I could weld myself. No problem with
it,
> except that it has begun to rust. In another 10 years or so I'll have to
> replace it.
>
> Meanwhile, I was talking to a fellow who makes exhaust systems for race
cars
> (TIG welded stainless), telling him of my troubles. He asked "What did you
> do to shield the inside of the tubing?"
>
> I just looked at him with a stupid look on my face (fairly easy for me to
> do), and said "Huh?"
>
> He said, "TIG shields the area around the weld with argon gas to prevent
the
> weld from burning, but with such thin walled material, the metal on the
> inside of the tube is just as hot as the outside. You've got to shield it
> as well."
>
> He said that when he does a job like this, he plugs one end of the tube,
> then turns on the gas from the TIG torch and uses it to flood the entire
> tube with Argon. He tests to see if he has enough by striking a match and
> inserting it into the tube. If it doesn't go out immediately, he knows he
> doesn't have enough Argon to shield the weld.
>
> So when it comes time to replace my exhaust system again, I may give
> stainless another try, using this technique.
>
> Jack Phillips
> NX899JP
> Raleigh, NC
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
> Boatright
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 4:27 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
> section]
>
>
> I'd have an aviation-oriented guy do them, if I were you. I paid top
> dollar for welds on my stainless pipes. One lasted a month, another
> lasted three more. My hangar mate welded up a replacement for the one
> that departed the plane (I've often wondered where it landed...) and
> patch welded the other that was set to depart. His welds don't LOOK
> as good, but they've lasted. Also, stick with mild steel. Stainless
> costs more and still gives problems. I'd rather have slow rust than
> immediate and catastrophic failure.
>
>
> >
> >Clif, Gary, Rick,
> >
> >Thanks for the info guys. I'll probably go the "commercial" route
> >and sub this work out to an exhaust shop - there are a couple in the
> >Twin Cities area. If it takes me 4 days to reply to a simple email
> >- how long would it take me to get the pipes done! I don't even
> >want to venture guess...
> >
> >Thanks again,
> >Dan
> >
> >--
> >Dan Yocum
> >Fermilab 630.840.6509
> >yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
> >Fermilab. Just zeros and ones.
>
>
>
>
>
&g=================
>
>
>
_____
Windows 7: Simplify your PC. Learn more.
<http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/windows-7/default.aspx?ocid=PID24727::T:WL
MTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_evergreen1:102009>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: exhaust manifold [was Re: humped center section] |
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
A few points:
Gas welding has a much steeper learning curve than TIG.
TIG equipment is much more expensive than gas.
Aluminum is FAR easier to weld with TIG than with gas.
MIG is just plain messy and difficult to control, especially with light gauge metal.
ALL welding for aircraft use (whatever method) should really be done indoors, shielded
from any air currents, since if the welds are not allowed to cool in still
air, you're asking for trouble. The resulting weld, and adjacent material
will not be Normalized if there are moving air currents while the weld is cooling,
and will likely develop cracks.
When TIG welding 4130, preheating is not necessary IF the material thickness is
1/8" or less - which in the Pietenpol, would be any of the metal parts.
(2 more cents)
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269738#269738
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: exhaust manifold |
Many years ago on another homebuilt, I had a stainless system built. It had
slip joints and ball joints where appropriate to allow for expansion. The
various pictures I've seen of the current batch of Pietenpol exhaust systems
don't have those; maybe they should.
It lasted past when I sold it, don't know how it fared after that, and I
sold it early on.
David Paule
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Wayne Bressler <wayne(at)taildraggersinc.com> |
| Subject: | Re: exhaust manifold |
I was starting to wonder if any of these failures were due to poor
exhaust system design. Tony Bingelis makes it very clear that any
system, regardless of material or welding technique, will fail if it
is not allowed to flex/expand/contract relatively unimpeded.
As David said, the use of ball joints, slip joints, etc would help to
ensure a long exhaust live.
I don't know if this was the problem with anybody here's exhaust. I'm
just sharing some info from the Bingelis books.
Wayne Bressler Jr.
Taildraggers, Inc.
taildraggersinc.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack" <jack(at)textors.com> |
| Subject: | Re: humped center section] |
Jack, great post, thanks! Just purchased a tig and have been reading up on
it. I thought to myself, why mess with "back filling with argon", well now
I know. Here is a fantastic site for welding tips,
http://www.weldingtipsandtricks.com/index.html and some info on shielding
the backside (not CYA-cover your ass).
One article...
"One thing I have to mention about welding stainless steel is that the back
side of the weld needs argon shielding just as much as the front. The photo
of the aircraft engine stator being prepared for welding displays special
tooling made for the purpose of shielding the back side of the weld. If the
penetration side is not shielded with argon, it will "sugar" which is a
slang word for oxidize. Granulation is another descriptive term that
accurately describes what happens. A close-up photo of the granulated or
sugared stainless steel weld reveals why sugared welds fail in service.
There are deep pits and crevices that are bound to develop into cracks".
They also have information on "how to" construct "back shield" devices.
Thanks again!
Jack
DSM
For those contemplating stainless steel ehaust systems, let me share a
little pearl of wisdom that I learned just a bit too late:
My original exhaust system on my Pietenpol was TIG welded stainless steel,
welded by my neighbor (who also welded my aluminum fuel tank). The welds
looked good, but after about 30 hours of operation, the left stack broke off
and was only kept from departing the airplane by the SCAT hose on the heat
muff. I had my neighbor re-weld it, with an additional strut to help
distribute the load. Then I flew the airplane to Brodhead and OSH (this was
in 2005). On the way home, the right side stack broke off and was again
held in place by the SCAT hose. I had to find a local welder make emergency
repairs so I could make it home.
I decided that stainless was simply not a good choice and made a whole new
set from plain carbon steel, which I could weld myself. No problem with it,
except that it has begun to rust. In another 10 years or so I'll have to
replace it.
Meanwhile, I was talking to a fellow who makes exhaust systems for race cars
(TIG welded stainless), telling him of my troubles. He asked "What did you
do to shield the inside of the tubing?"
I just looked at him with a stupid look on my face (fairly easy for me to
do), and said "Huh?"
He said, "TIG shields the area around the weld with argon gas to prevent the
weld from burning, but with such thin walled material, the metal on the
inside of the tube is just as hot as the outside. You've got to shield it
as well."
He said that when he does a job like this, he plugs one end of the tube,
then turns on the gas from the TIG torch and uses it to flood the entire
tube with Argon. He tests to see if he has enough by striking a match and
inserting it into the tube. If it doesn't go out immediately, he knows he
doesn't have enough Argon to shield the weld.
So when it comes time to replace my exhaust system again, I may give
stainless another try, using this technique.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
Boatright
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
section]
I'd have an aviation-oriented guy do them, if I were you. I paid top
dollar for welds on my stainless pipes. One lasted a month, another
lasted three more. My hangar mate welded up a replacement for the one
that departed the plane (I've often wondered where it landed...) and
patch welded the other that was set to depart. His welds don't LOOK
as good, but they've lasted. Also, stick with mild steel. Stainless
costs more and still gives problems. I'd rather have slow rust than
immediate and catastrophic failure.
>
>Clif, Gary, Rick,
>
>Thanks for the info guys. I'll probably go the "commercial" route
>and sub this work out to an exhaust shop - there are a couple in the
>Twin Cities area. If it takes me 4 days to reply to a simple email
>- how long would it take me to get the pipes done! I don't even
>want to venture guess...
>
>Thanks again,
>Dan
>
>--
>Dan Yocum
>Fermilab 630.840.6509
>yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
>Fermilab. Just zeros and ones.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
15:50:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: exhaust manifold |
| From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
Good people,
I TIG welded my 4130 exhaust stacks on the model A, and afterward had them
chrome-plated. I was informed that this was not a good idea, because they
would be prone to cracking for some reason I can't remember. Can anyone
knowledgeable fill me in on this? Thanks.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Bressler <wayne(at)taildraggersinc.com>
Sent: Tue, Oct 27, 2009 6:50 pm
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: exhaust manifold
c.com>
I was starting to wonder if any of these failures were due to poor exhaust
system design. Tony Bingelis makes it very clear that any system, regardl
ess of material or welding technique, will fail if it is not allowed to fl
ex/expand/contract relatively unimpeded.
As David said, the use of ball joints, slip joints, etc would help to ensu
re a long exhaust live.
I don't know if this was the problem with anybody here's exhaust. I'm just
sharing some info from the Bingelis books.
Wayne Bressler Jr.
Taildraggers, Inc.
taildraggersinc.com
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: humped center section] |
Jack=2C
sorry for the confusion. If you MIG or TIG weld=2C the area must be prehea
ted. If you are gas welding the preheating has already taken place before
the area is hot enough to puddle. With MIG and TIG it=2C of course=2C pudd
les immediately without the surrounding area being preheated. In a nutshel
l no prehaeating with gas. Must preheat with MIG & TIG. 4130=2C that is.
Also of importance is after welding 4130 must cool natually (slowly) to ro
om temp to prevent cracking.
What scares a lot of people away from gas welding is the perceived mystery
and "art'' involved. while there is some art to keeping a good puddle goin
g. most of it involves the science of proper flame=2C gas pressure=2C and t
ip size. Some good gas welding info can be found at www.tinmantech.com A
nother side benefit of gas welding... Good equipment is much cheaper.
Doug Dever
In beautiful Stow Ohio
From: pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net
Subject: RE: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center sectio
n]
Date: Tue=2C 27 Oct 2009 18:40:37 -0400
Actually=2C the repair on the way back from OSH was made by a professional
welder=2C TIG welded. It lasted nearly twice as long as the first one (50
hours). It cracked too. At the weld.
You=92ve confused me a bit ' in your 5th sentence you said =93you can wel
d 4130 without preheating or fear of cracking.=94 Then 3 sentences later y
ou say =93With 4130 the area will need to be preheated to prevent cracking
=94. Which is it?
Anyway=2C to some extent I agree with you ' I like oxyacetylene welding.
However=2C for some applications TIG is far better. I=92ve tried gas weld
ing aluminum=2C I=92ll leave that for the pros. I also tried gas welding s
tainless and burned up a lot of test material without any good welds. MIG
I have no experience with=2C but I know Champion Aircraft uses MIG to build
Citabrias and Decathlons (at least the Citabria I helped rebuild had a lot
of little twigs of welding rod stuck to it like MIG tends to leave behind)
.
This was just a tip given o me that I passed along. I have not tried it=2C
but it makes sense to me. Your mileage may vary.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh=2C NC
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-lis
t-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doug Dever
Sent: Tuesday=2C October 27=2C 2009 6:26 PM
Subject: RE: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center sectio
n]
Something to said for gas welding. Don't have that problem. Tig and Mig i
s fast=2C but I'll take gas any day of the week. The best sheet metal men
almost always use gas. You can weld 4130 without preheating or fear of cra
cking. You can weld all weldable aluminum=2C stainless and titanium (Haven
't done that one yet.) With tig or mig even the slightest breeze will blow
the gas off the weld. With 4130 the area will need to be preheated to pre
vent cracking. Tig and mig have thier place=2C especially in a controlled
production environment. I bet if you exhaust was gas welded by a competent
welder it wouldn't have cracked. Just my .02
Doug Dever
In beautiful Stow Ohio
> From: pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center sect
ion]
> Date: Tue=2C 27 Oct 2009 17:02:44 -0400
>
.net>
>
> For those contemplating stainless steel ehaust systems=2C let me share a
> little pearl of wisdom that I learned just a bit too late:
>
> My original exhaust system on my Pietenpol was TIG welded stainless steel
=2C
> welded by my neighbor (who also welded my aluminum fuel tank). The welds
> looked good=2C but after about 30 hours of operation=2C the left stack br
oke off
> and was only kept from departing the airplane by the SCAT hose on the hea
t
> muff. I had my neighbor re-weld it=2C with an additional strut to help
> distribute the load. Then I flew the airplane to Brodhead and OSH (this w
as
> in 2005). On the way home=2C the right side stack broke off and was again
> held in place by the SCAT hose. I had to find a local welder make emergen
cy
> repairs so I could make it home.
>
> I decided that stainless was simply not a good choice and made a whole ne
w
> set from plain carbon steel=2C which I could weld myself. No problem with
it=2C
> except that it has begun to rust. In another 10 years or so I'll have to
> replace it.
>
> Meanwhile=2C I was talking to a fellow who makes exhaust systems for race
cars
> (TIG welded stainless)=2C telling him of my troubles. He asked "What did
you
> do to shield the inside of the tubing?"
>
> I just looked at him with a stupid look on my face (fairly easy for me to
> do)=2C and said "Huh?"
>
> He said=2C "TIG shields the area around the weld with argon gas to preven
t the
> weld from burning=2C but with such thin walled material=2C the metal on t
he
> inside of the tube is just as hot as the outside. You've got to shield it
> as well."
>
> He said that when he does a job like this=2C he plugs one end of the tube
=2C
> then turns on the gas from the TIG torch and uses it to flood the entire
> tube with Argon. He tests to see if he has enough by striking a match and
> inserting it into the tube. If it doesn't go out immediately=2C he knows
he
> doesn't have enough Argon to shield the weld.
>
> So when it comes time to replace my exhaust system again=2C I may give
> stainless another try=2C using this technique.
>
> Jack Phillips
> NX899JP
> Raleigh=2C NC
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
> Boatright
> Sent: Tuesday=2C October 27=2C 2009 4:27 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
> section]
>
>
> I'd have an aviation-oriented guy do them=2C if I were you. I paid top
> dollar for welds on my stainless pipes. One lasted a month=2C another
> lasted three more. My hangar mate welded up a replacement for the one
> that departed the plane (I've often wondered where it landed...) and
> patch welded the other that was set to depart. His welds don't LOOK
> as good=2C but they've lasted. Also=2C stick with mild steel. Stainless
> costs more and still gives problems. I'd rather have slow rust than
> immediate and catastrophic failure.
>
>
> >
> >Clif=2C Gary=2C Rick=2C
> >
> >Thanks for the info guys. I'll probably go the "commercial" route
> >and sub this work out to an exhaust shop - there are a couple in the
> >Twin Cities area. If it takes me 4 days to reply to a simple email
> >- how long would it take me to get the pipes done! I don't even
> >want to venture guess...
> >
> >Thanks again=2C
> >Dan
> >
> >--
> >Dan Yocum
> >Fermilab 630.840.6509
> >yocum@fnal.gov=2C http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
> >Fermilab. Just zeros and ones.
>
>
>
>
>
&g=================
>
>
>
Windows 7: Simplify your PC. Learn more. http://www.matronics.com/Navigat
or?Pietenpol-Listhttp://forums.matronics.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contri
bution
_________________________________________________________________
New Windows 7: Find the right PC for you. Learn more.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pc-scout/default.aspx?CBID=wl&ocid=PID
24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_pcscout:102009
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: exhaust manifold |
I've also heard you don't have to worry about preheating thin material=2C b
ut some of the more knowledgable people in the business say yes to preheati
ng. FAA still recommends gas welding=2C but some production aircraft are
MIG welded. Go figure.
Doug Dever
In beautiful Stow Ohio
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: exhaust manifold
Date: Tue=2C 27 Oct 2009 20:28:33 -0400
From: helspersew(at)aol.com
Good people=2C
I TIG welded my 4130 exhaust stacks on the model A=2C and afterward had the
m chrome-plated. I was informed that this was not a good idea=2C because th
ey would be prone to cracking for some reason I can't remember. Can anyone
knowledgeable fill me in on this? Thanks.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove=2C IL.
-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Bressler <wayne(at)taildraggersinc.com>
Sent: Tue=2C Oct 27=2C 2009 6:50 pm
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: exhaust manifold
.com>
I was starting to wonder if any of these failures were due to poor exhaust
system design. Tony Bingelis makes it very clear that any system=2C regardl
ess of material or welding technique=2C will fail if it is not allowed to f
lex/expand/contract relatively unimpeded.
As David said=2C the use of ball joints=2C slip joints=2C etc would help to
ensure a long exhaust live.
I don't know if this was the problem with anybody here's exhaust. I'm just
sharing some info from the Bingelis books.
Wayne Bressler Jr.
Taildraggers=2C Inc.
taildraggersinc.com
===========
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
===========
://forums.matronics.com
===========
lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===========
_________________________________________________________________
Windows 7: It works the way you want. Learn more.
http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/windows-7/default.aspx?ocid=PID24727::T:
WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_evergreen2:102009
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: exhaust manifold |
The plating causes something called hydrogen embrittlement. Wikipedia
has a good article and explains it better than I can:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_embrittlement
The strength of 1,000 MPa that the article mentions as a threshold for
concern is 145,000 psi, considerably stronger than the ductile
materials used in exhaust systems, so probably there's not going to be
an issue. 4130, normalized, is about 90,000 psi and lower at the welds.
There's lots of margin there.
Although baking the parts after plating is the general solution to the
problem, according to the article it needs to be done relatively soon
after plating. So although we'd expect that the exhaust system is going
to get plenty hot enough in service, it won't happen soon enough.
It's worth mentioning that that often chrome plating companies don't
first plate with copper and then with nickel as the aerospace spec says
to do. They just plate directly with the chrome. Chrome doesn't stick
that well to steel if there's any flexing, since they have different
coefficients of thermal expansion and different modulus of elasticity
(no, I don't remember the chrome values off-hand, sorry). But we've all
seen plenty of motorcycle exhausts that were plated, successfully, so
don't worry about it. Odds are it'll be fine. Just something to check at
annual, and you'd do that anyway.
David Paule
I TIG welded my 4130 exhaust stacks on the model A, and afterward had
them chrome-plated. I was informed that this was not a good idea,
because they would be prone to cracking for some reason I can't
remember. Can anyone knowledgeable fill me in on this? Thanks.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: exhaust manifold |
| From: | Lloyd Smith <lesmith240(at)gmail.com> |
Hydrogen embrittlement.
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 8:28 PM, wrote:
> Good people,
>
> I TIG welded my 4130 exhaust stacks on the model A, and afterward had them
> chrome-plated. I was informed that this was not a good idea, because they
> would be prone to cracking for some reason I can't remember. Can anyone
> knowledgeable fill me in on this? Thanks.
>
> Dan Helsper
> Poplar Grove, IL.
>
>
--
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or
not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." --British
publisher and writer Ernest Benn (1875-1954)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: humped center section] |
| From: | Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com> |
Per the Lincoln Electric "TIG Weld 4130!" bulletin on the EAA website
(Homebuilders HQ / Building articles/ Tubing - Welded):
Q: Do I need to preheat?
A: Thin wall tubing (<0.120" wall) applications do not typically require th
e
normal 300 to 400F pre-heat to obtain acceptable results. However, tubing
should be at room temperature (70F) or above before welding.
Q: Do I need to heat treat (stress relieve) 4130 after welding?
A: Thin wall tubing normally does not require stress relief. For parts
thicker than .120", stress relieving is recommended and 1,100F is the
optimum temperature for tubing applications. An oxy/acetylene torch with
neutral flame can be used. It should be oscillated to avoid hot spots.
Ryan
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Doug Dever wr
ote:
> Jack,
>
> sorry for the confusion. If you MIG or TIG weld, the area must be
> preheated. If you are gas welding the preheating has already taken place
> before the area is hot enough to puddle. With MIG and TIG it, of course,
> puddles immediately without the surrounding area being preheated. In a
> nutshell no prehaeating with gas. Must preheat with MIG & TIG. 4130, th
at
> is. Also of importance is after welding 4130 must cool natually (slowly)
to
> room temp to prevent cracking.
>
> What scares a lot of people away from gas welding is the perceived myster
y
> and "art'' involved. while there is some art to keeping a good puddle
> going. most of it involves the science of proper flame, gas pressure, and
> tip size. Some good gas welding info can be found at www.tinmantech.com
> Another side benefit of gas welding... Good equipment is much cheaper.
>
>
> Doug Dever
> In beautiful Stow Ohio
>
>
> ------------------------------
> From: pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
> section]
> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:40:37 -0400
>
> Actually, the repair on the way back from OSH was made by a professional
> welder, TIG welded. It lasted nearly twice as long as the first one (50
> hours). It cracked too. At the weld.
>
>
> You=92ve confused me a bit ' in your 5th sentence you said =93you can w
eld
> 4130 without preheating or fear of cracking.=94 Then 3 sentences later y
ou
> say =93With 4130 the area will need to be preheated to prevent cracking
=94.
> Which is it?
>
>
> Anyway, to some extent I agree with you ' I like oxyacetylene welding.
> However, for some applications TIG is far better. I=92ve tried gas weldi
ng
> aluminum, I=92ll leave that for the pros. I also tried gas welding stain
less
> and burned up a lot of test material without any good welds. MIG I have
no
> experience with, but I know Champion Aircraft uses MIG to build Citabrias
> and Decathlons (at least the Citabria I helped rebuild had a lot of littl
e
> twigs of welding rod stuck to it like MIG tends to leave behind).
>
>
> This was just a tip given o me that I passed along. I have not tried it,
> but it makes sense to me. Your mileage may vary.
>
>
> Jack Phillips
>
> NX899JP
>
> Raleigh, NC
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Doug Dever
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 27, 2009 6:26 PM
>
> *To:* pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> *Subject:* RE: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
> section]
>
>
> Something to said for gas welding. Don't have that problem. Tig and Mig
> is fast, but I'll take gas any day of the week. The best sheet metal men
> almost always use gas. You can weld 4130 without preheating or fear of
> cracking. You can weld all weldable aluminum, stainless and titanium
> (Haven't done that one yet.) With tig or mig even the slightest breeze w
ill
> blow the gas off the weld. With 4130 the area will need to be preheated
to
> prevent cracking. Tig and mig have thier place, especially in a controll
ed
> production environment. I bet if you exhaust was gas welded by a compete
nt
> welder it wouldn't have cracked. Just my .02
>
> Doug Dever
> In beautiful Stow Ohio
>
>
> > From: pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: RE: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
> section]
> > Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:02:44 -0400
> >
> pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net>
>
> >
> > For those contemplating stainless steel ehaust systems, let me share a
> > little pearl of wisdom that I learned just a bit too late:
> >
> > My original exhaust system on my Pietenpol was TIG welded stainless
> steel,
> > welded by my neighbor (who also welded my aluminum fuel tank). The weld
s
> > looked good, but after about 30 hours of operation, the left stack brok
e
> off
> > and was only kept from departing the airplane by the SCAT hose on the
> heat
> > muff. I had my neighbor re-weld it, with an additional strut to help
> > distribute the load. Then I flew the airplane to Brodhead and OSH (this
> was
> > in 2005). On the way home, the right side stack broke off and was again
> > held in place by the SCAT hose. I had to find a local welder make
> emergency
> > repairs so I could make it home.
> >
> > I decided that stainless was simply not a good choice and made a whole
> new
> > set from plain carbon steel, which I could weld myself. No problem with
> it,
> > except that it has begun to rust. In another 10 years or so I'll have t
o
> > replace it.
> >
> > Meanwhile, I was talking to a fellow who makes exhaust systems for race
> cars
> > (TIG welded stainless), telling him of my troubles. He asked "What did
> you
> > do to shield the inside of the tubing?"
> >
> > I just looked at him with a stupid look on my face (fairly easy for me
to
> > do), and said "Huh?"
> >
> > He said, "TIG shields the area around the weld with argon gas to preven
t
> the
> > weld from burning, but with such thin walled material, the metal on the
> > inside of the tube is just as hot as the outside. You've got to shield
it
> > as well."
> >
> > He said that when he does a job like this, he plugs one end of the tube
,
> > then turns on the gas from the TIG torch and uses it to flood the entir
e
> > tube with Argon. He tests to see if he has enough by striking a match a
nd
> > inserting it into the tube. If it doesn't go out immediately, he knows
he
> > doesn't have enough Argon to shield the weld.
> >
> > So when it comes time to replace my exhaust system again, I may give
> > stainless another try, using this technique.
> >
> > Jack Phillips
> > NX899JP
> > Raleigh, NC
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
> > Boatright
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 4:27 PM
> > To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: exhaust manifold [was Re: Pietenpol-List: humped center
> > section]
> >
>
> >
> > I'd have an aviation-oriented guy do them, if I were you. I paid top
> > dollar for welds on my stainless pipes. One lasted a month, another
> > lasted three more. My hangar mate welded up a replacement for the one
> > that departed the plane (I've often wondered where it landed...) and
> > patch welded the other that was set to depart. His welds don't LOOK
> > as good, but they've lasted. Also, stick with mild steel. Stainless
> > costs more and still gives problems. I'd rather have slow rust than
> > immediate and catastrophic failure.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >Clif, Gary, Rick,
> > >
> > >Thanks for the info guys. I'll probably go the "commercial" route
> > >and sub this work out to an exhaust shop - there are a couple in the
> > >Twin Cities area. If it takes me 4 days to reply to a simple email
> > >- how long would it take me to get the pipes done! I don't even
> > >want to venture guess...
> > >
> > >Thanks again,
> > >Dan
> > >
> > >--
> > >Dan Yocum
> > >Fermilab 630.840.6509
> > >yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov
> > >Fermilab. Just zeros and ones.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> &g=================
> >
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Windows 7: Simplify your PC. Learn more.<http://www.microsoft.com/Windows
/windows-7/default.aspx?ocid=PID24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_ever
green1:102009>
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List*
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *http://forums.matronics.com*
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
>
> * *
>
> *
>
> st">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
> ronics.comww.matronics.com/contribution
> *
>
>
> ------------------------------
> New Windows 7: Find the right PC for you. Learn more.<http://www.microsof
t.com/windows/pc-scout/default.aspx?CBID=wl&ocid=PID24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON
:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_pcscout:102009>
>
> *
>
===========
w.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
===========
===========
com/contribution
===========
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Aircraft built by BHP (was) Push/pull tubes and rod |
ends
| From: | "Bill Church" <eng(at)canadianrogers.com> |
Not to start a whole new mess here, but the statement that BHP never
built two aircraft exactly the same is a bit of a stretch, I think. I
can't track down the exact number, but if my memory serves, he built
more than twenty Air Campers, and numerous kits during the Thirties. I
would bet dollars-to-donuts that the vast majority of those were built
EXACTLY the same, using the same jigs, and the same set-ups.
Yes, he designed the aircraft, and Yes, he made changes as the design
progressed, but to suggest that every plane was unique is stretching
things a bit far.
As for the statement about "you morons", where did that come from? In
following that thread, I didn't ever see anyone use those words.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
ivan.todorovic
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 7:54 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
-->
I see it exactly the opposite of you. The main reason to consider (I'm
not saying build) deviating from the plans is to honor the B. Pietenpol
spirit of always build safer and better flying aircraft. There is no
need to cure the deficiency in the design, reason enough is to make B.P.
happy in heavens, as he is known not to build two exactly the same
aircraft and to be as far from "purist" as he can be. After all he
abandoned one of the most significant marks of his design (Ford engine)
as soon as he got a chance to do it. I deeply beleive if he can see
someone building Piet with Ford enigne in 2009 he would think for him
self "Oh, no, another ..... building by the plans".
The amount of hate in the form "Oh, I just flew my Piet, and you morons
talk about something better instead to build by the plans like me" is
getting quite disturbing. There is no wonder people got annoyed. There
is no single thread in which some deviation from the plans is mentioned
that is not rapidly shut with flood of "Why, why, why, when this design
confirmed it self for 80 years?" messegaes. To honor B.P, is there any
other reason needed?
Regards,
and please don't mind the rough tone, I got excited how this thread is
cut of, and I am very interested in building with pushrods for several
reasons, Ivan Todorovic
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft built by BHP (was) Push/pull tubes and rod |
ends
| From: | Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com> |
Who cares I don't!
Russell
270 300 9725
don not archive
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Bill Church wrote:
> eng(at)canadianrogers.com>
>
>
> Not to start a whole new mess here, but the statement that BHP never
> built two aircraft exactly the same is a bit of a stretch, I think. I
> can't track down the exact number, but if my memory serves, he built
> more than twenty Air Campers, and numerous kits during the Thirties. I
> would bet dollars-to-donuts that the vast majority of those were built
> EXACTLY the same, using the same jigs, and the same set-ups.
> Yes, he designed the aircraft, and Yes, he made changes as the design
> progressed, but to suggest that every plane was unique is stretching
> things a bit far.
>
> As for the statement about "you morons", where did that come from? In
> following that thread, I didn't ever see anyone use those words.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> ivan.todorovic
> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 7:54 PM
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Push/pull tubes and rod ends
>
> -->
>
> I see it exactly the opposite of you. The main reason to consider (I'm
> not saying build) deviating from the plans is to honor the B. Pietenpol
> spirit of always build safer and better flying aircraft. There is no
> need to cure the deficiency in the design, reason enough is to make B.P.
> happy in heavens, as he is known not to build two exactly the same
> aircraft and to be as far from "purist" as he can be. After all he
> abandoned one of the most significant marks of his design (Ford engine)
> as soon as he got a chance to do it. I deeply beleive if he can see
> someone building Piet with Ford enigne in 2009 he would think for him
> self "Oh, no, another ..... building by the plans".
>
> The amount of hate in the form "Oh, I just flew my Piet, and you morons
> talk about something better instead to build by the plans like me" is
> getting quite disturbing. There is no wonder people got annoyed. There
> is no single thread in which some deviation from the plans is mentioned
> that is not rapidly shut with flood of "Why, why, why, when this design
> confirmed it self for 80 years?" messegaes. To honor B.P, is there any
> other reason needed?
>
> Regards,
> and please don't mind the rough tone, I got excited how this thread is
> cut of, and I am very interested in building with pushrods for several
> reasons, Ivan Todorovic
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | 106 years ago today-prelude to flight |
| From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
>From the diary of Orville Wright:
Wednesday, October 28, 1903
Kitty Hawk, N.C.
Spratt and I passed a very miserable night on account of cold.
We worked today on front rudder frame and uprights between rudder surfaces
till dinner at one o'clock. We spent afternoon in making a stove out of
a carbide can and putting it up. Tonight we are very comfortable. Spratt
put window in southwest corner of building. Dan struck on account of havi
ng to bring in wood for stove and left at 3 o'clock.
" ........about the only news is that of the strike last Wednesday. I bel
ieve I told you that about two weeks after we got here Dan came down one
Monday morning with the news that the price of fish had gone up, and that
he would like to know how long we expected to stay, and as to whether we
were depending on him for help. Well, what it finally sifted down to was
a demand for an increase of wages with the condition that we we were to
pay him by the week (seven dollars. Regular wages down here from $3.50 to
$4.50 per week), whether we had work for him or not. We agreed to this on
condition that he stay with us as long as we remained, and that he appear
for work every morning promptly at 8 o'clock, and work 10 hours. We volun
teered to allow him one hour a day for getting back and forth from work,
and to furnish him his dinner. Of course we had no work for him excepting
to do up the morning and noon dishes, with about a half day a week on the
hills gliding. Whenever we set him at any work about the building, he wou
ld do so much damage with his awkwardness that we found it more profitable
to let him sit around. Of course he was soon spoiled, and even went so fa
r as to complain when any work was wanted on the hill. No trouble develope
d, however, until the early part of this week when a cold snap struck us.
When Will told him to go over to the beach, and get some driftwood he str
uck, saying he wouldn't do it, as it was not reasonable when we could buy
a cord for $3.00 of Jesse Baum. The result was he took his hat and left
for home. " (Orville Wright to Katherine Wright, Nov. 1, 1903)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: exhaust manifold [was Re: humped center section] |
| From: | "tkreiner" <tkreiner(at)gmail.com> |
Doug,
DON'T attempt to weld Titanium with an oxyacetylene rig UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
When Ti is ignited, it burns with a white flame, way above 2500 degrees, and can
ignite anything in it's vicinity. If it's to be welded it MUST be done in an
inert atmosphere, as with Mig or Tig.
My .02.
--------
Tom Kreiner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269801#269801
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Boatright <jboatri(at)emory.edu> |
| Subject: | 106 years ago today-prelude to flight |
What, are you some kinda Blue Devils fan?
>Durned no good North Carolinians=8A
>
>Jack Phillips
>NX899JP
>Raleigh, NC
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: exhaust manifold [was Re: humped center section] |
Tom=2C
Din't realize I put Ti in with gas welding. would be kinda like trying to
weld Magnesium.
Doug Dever
In beautiful Stow Ohio
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: exhaust manifold [was Re: humped center section]
> From: tkreiner(at)gmail.com
> Date: Wed=2C 28 Oct 2009 05:02:03 -0700
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Doug=2C
>
> DON'T attempt to weld Titanium with an oxyacetylene rig UNDER ANY CIRCUMS
TANCES.
>
> When Ti is ignited=2C it burns with a white flame=2C way above 2500 degre
es=2C and can ignite anything in it's vicinity. If it's to be welded it MUS
T be done in an inert atmosphere=2C as with Mig or Tig.
>
> My .02.
>
> --------
> Tom Kreiner
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269801#269801
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Windows 7: It helps you do more. Explore Windows 7.
http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/windows-7/default.aspx?ocid=PID24727::T:
WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_evergreen3:102009
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | shad bell <aviatorbell(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | RE: exhaust manifold VHT header paint, ceramicoat |
Jack and others, have any of you considered ceramicoating (cost?)-your pl
ain steel exaust?- I have thought about doing that to any future -exaus
ts I may need to build.- Another option is to use VHT exaust header paint
and bake it in the oven when the old lady is gone.- I did this with the
piet intake and exaust this past spring just to spruce it up a bit.- The
exaust is s.s. and the intake is just mild steel tube.- It is holding up
well on both, but my guess is mild steel exaust would rust from the inside
out due to corrosive properties of exsaust gasses.
-
Shad=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | RE: exhaust manifold VHT header paint, ceramicoat |
I used clear VHT paint on the exhust, but it wouldn't fit in the oven so I
never got the full effect of it. It lasted well for about 4 years but is
beginning to rust now. I thought about pulling the exhaust and beadblasting
it and then repainting but being the lazy sort, I just sorta ignored it.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of shad bell
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 10:59 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: exhaust manifold VHT header paint, ceramicoat
Jack and others, have any of you considered ceramicoating (cost?) your plain
steel exaust? I have thought about doing that to any future exausts I may
need to build. Another option is to use VHT exaust header paint and bake it
in the oven when the old lady is gone. I did this with the piet intake and
exaust this past spring just to spruce it up a bit. The exaust is s.s. and
the intake is just mild steel tube. It is holding up well on both, but my
guess is mild steel exaust would rust from the inside out due to corrosive
properties of exsaust gasses.
Shad
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: exhaust manifold VHT header paint, ceramicoat |
I had the exhaust on my powered parachute ceramic coated about 8 years
ago, still going strong and still looks good.
Brian
SLC, UT
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of shad
bell
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:59 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: RE: exhaust manifold VHT header paint,
ceramicoat
Jack and others, have any of you considered ceramicoating (cost?) your
plain steel exaust? I have thought about doing that to any future
exausts I may need to build. Another option is to use VHT exaust header
paint and bake it in the oven when the old lady is gone. I did this
with the piet intake and exaust this past spring just to spruce it up a
bit. The exaust is s.s. and the intake is just mild steel tube. It is
holding up well on both, but my guess is mild steel exaust would rust
from the inside out due to corrosive properties of exsaust gasses.
Shad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Darrel Jones <wd6bor(at)vom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: humped center section] |
Jack and the group,
That's the way they weld stainless transfer lines at the wineries. They
have a plug to attach the argon on one end and put foil over the other
and keep a positive pressure going during the welding to ensure the
interior is inert. Of course, the wine never gets as hot as our
exhausts, but after a glass or two the pilots feels much warmer.
Darrel Jones
Sonoma, CA
NX154JP
Jack Phillips wrote:
>
> For those contemplating stainless steel ehaust systems, let me share a
> little pearl of wisdom that I learned just a bit too late:
>
> My original exhaust system on my Pietenpol was TIG welded stainless steel,
> welded by my neighbor (who also welded my aluminum fuel tank). The welds
> looked good, but after about 30 hours of operation, the left stack broke off
> and was only kept from departing the airplane by the SCAT hose on the heat
> muff. I had my neighbor re-weld it, with an additional strut to help
> distribute the load. Then I flew the airplane to Brodhead and OSH (this was
> in 2005). On the way home, the right side stack broke off and was again
> held in place by the SCAT hose. I had to find a local welder make emergency
> repairs so I could make it home.
>
> I decided that stainless was simply not a good choice and made a whole new
> set from plain carbon steel, which I could weld myself. No problem with it,
> except that it has begun to rust. In another 10 years or so I'll have to
> replace it.
>
> Meanwhile, I was talking to a fellow who makes exhaust systems for race cars
> (TIG welded stainless), telling him of my troubles. He asked "What did you
> do to shield the inside of the tubing?"
>
> I just looked at him with a stupid look on my face (fairly easy for me to
> do), and said "Huh?"
>
> He said, "TIG shields the area around the weld with argon gas to prevent the
> weld from burning, but with such thin walled material, the metal on the
> inside of the tube is just as hot as the outside. You've got to shield it
> as well."
>
> He said that when he does a job like this, he plugs one end of the tube,
> then turns on the gas from the TIG torch and uses it to flood the entire
> tube with Argon. He tests to see if he has enough by striking a match and
> inserting it into the tube. If it doesn't go out immediately, he knows he
> doesn't have enough Argon to shield the weld.
>
> So when it comes time to replace my exhaust system again, I may give
> stainless another try, using this technique.
>
> Jack Phillips
> NX899JP
> Raleigh, NC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Split Gear Tubing Size-Fuselage Height |
| From: | "Jack T. Textor" <jtextor(at)thepalmergroup.com> |
All,
The split gear plans (for the V's) call for 1-3/8" 14 gauge 1020, 14
gauge I think equates to .069 walls. Should I go with 1-1/2" .063 wall
or .080? Also for the flat plate used it calls for 14 gauge, .063 or
.080 for this?
Fuselage height- The plans call for 48-1/2" from the ground to the top
of the fuselage top cross piece with 19" tires. Mine are 25", do I need
to lower the gear or is the extra 6" height a plus?
Thanks!
Jack
DSM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Split Gear Tubing Size-Fuselage Height |
| From: | "899PM" <rockriverrifle(at)hotmail.com> |
Jack,
.080 in both cases. Did you try Dillsburg Aero for the 1 3/8"?
Aesthetics aside.....the positives of the higher gear is increased deck angle and
more clearance.....the negative is entry. You may need to position your fuse
in space and see if you can swing a leg over. I cant, so will put in a "horseshoe"
step ala Jenny. It's even worse for the passenger.
Make triple sure you stagger the gear strut attach tabs on the inboard axle ends
as wide as you can. The dims per print are too close and the gear hits where
it crosses unless you go cub style. I would go full forward on one and full back
on the other.
--------
PAPA MIKE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269993#269993
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Split Gear Tubing Size-Fuselage Height |
| From: | "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca> |
Jack,
With regard to the steel tubing, for 14ga, you would be looking for .083 wall thickness.
Metal gauges are confusing, to say the least. Looks like you're referencing
the wrong gauge chart, which is not hard to do. There are numerous different
gauge systems, and which one to use depends on what material you are dealing
with, as well as what part of the world you are in. I've attached a couple
of reference charts. One is specifically for steel tubing (which uses the Birmingham
Wire gauge), and the other chart references 5 different gauge systems,
with the related materials.
Now, with respect to the flat plate, I have no idea what gauge system is used for
4130 sheet. I haven't been able to track down a gauge chart that matches the
thicknesses that 4130 is offered in. The most commonly used gauge table for
sheet steel is the Manufacturers Standard Gauge, for which 14ga = .074. I'd go
with the .080" thickness on that one.
As for the fuselage height, Don Emch or Walt Evans hopefully should be able to
provide some "real world" info regarding split gear with skinny wheels.
Bill C.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269994#269994
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/sheet_metal_gauges_147.pdf
http://forums.matronics.com//files/steel_tube_gauges_150.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "gcardinal" <gcardinal(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Split Gear Tubing Size-Fuselage Height |
For a good gage-to-thickness chart go to:
http://www.westcoastpiet.com/gage_to_thickness_chart.htm
Greg C.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Church" <billspiet(at)sympatico.ca>
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 12:13 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Split Gear Tubing Size-Fuselage Height
>
>
> Jack,
>
> With regard to the steel tubing, for 14ga, you would be looking for .083
> wall thickness. Metal gauges are confusing, to say the least. Looks like
> you're referencing the wrong gauge chart, which is not hard to do. There
> are numerous different gauge systems, and which one to use depends on what
> material you are dealing with, as well as what part of the world you are
> in. I've attached a couple of reference charts. One is specifically for
> steel tubing (which uses the Birmingham Wire gauge), and the other chart
> references 5 different gauge systems, with the related materials.
> Now, with respect to the flat plate, I have no idea what gauge system is
> used for 4130 sheet. I haven't been able to track down a gauge chart that
> matches the thicknesses that 4130 is offered in. The most commonly used
> gauge table for sheet steel is the Manufacturers Standard Gauge, for which
> 14ga = .074. I'd go with the .080" thickness on that one.
>
> As for the fuselage height, Don Emch or Walt Evans hopefully should be
> able to provide some "real world" info regarding split gear with skinny
> wheels.
>
> Bill C.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=269994#269994
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/sheet_metal_gauges_147.pdf
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/steel_tube_gauges_150.pdf
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Lawrence Williams <lnawms(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Welding exhaust systems |
Whoever posted about Titanium bursting into a white-hot inferno is just a t
ad off.
-
Titanium will not burst into flames at any temperature. It will melt at abo
ut 4400 F. degrees and that's way beyond what your torch is capable of. Mag
nesium on the other hand will combust and produce a white-hot flame even un
der water. That's why they use it in some military flares. If Titanium comb
usted at temps around 1000 degrees, the SR-71 would be a pile of cinders!!
Mag wheels on heavy aircraft are prone to overheating because of locked bra
kes and are considered extremely dangerous.
-
My wedding ring is Titanium so it will survive when I depart this existence
in a blinding flash of the purest white light. Moral: don't get a magnesiu
m wedding ring which could be the source of ignition for your departure.
-
Titanium must either be welded in an enclosed chamber or otherwise shielded
on both sides with an inert gas. Some Ti bicycle frames are welded in cabi
nets similar to a bead-blasting cabinet to achieve the atmosphere clear of
oxygen.
-
My exhaust is is just a straight shot-gun style and made from 4130 and I bl
asted it and shot it with VHT annually because of rust. Last year I took it
to our local powder coater and he did-some kind of-jet coating for me
and it seems to be holding up well so far.
-
Larry
-
-
-
-=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "kevinpurtee" <kevin.purtee(at)us.army.mil> |
NX899KP has 20 hours now. I've attached a report. Will submit pics to west coast
piet when I can.
Best regards,
Kevin Purtee
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270063#270063
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/nx899kp_report_108.doc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TOM MICHELLE BRANT <tmbrant(at)msn.com> |
Kevin=2C
Thanks for the report - great to hear the flights are going well. Be sure
to get some photos of the wooden struts and attach points - there's a few o
f us interested in that for sure (IE: me =3B )
Congrats again on the successful flights!
Tom B.
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: 20 hour report
> From: kevin.purtee(at)us.army.mil
> Date: Thu=2C 29 Oct 2009 20:40:07 -0700
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
.mil>
>
> NX899KP has 20 hours now. I've attached a report. Will submit pics to w
est coast piet when I can.
>
> Best regards=2C
> Kevin Purtee
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270063#270063
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/nx899kp_report_108.doc
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 20 hour report |
| From: | Rick Holland <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
Great report Kevin, thanks for the good info (am covering a Corvair/Piet
now), (what made you think to suggest to avoid showering the wifes car with
metal grinding sparks?).
rick
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 11:40 PM, kevinpurtee wrote:
> kevin.purtee(at)us.army.mil>
>
> NX899KP has 20 hours now. I've attached a report. Will submit pics to
> west coast piet when I can.
>
> Best regards,
> Kevin Purtee
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270063#270063
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/nx899kp_report_108.doc
>
>
--
Rick Holland
Castle Rock, Colorado
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 20 hour report |
| From: | "John Recine" <amsafetyc(at)aol.com> |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________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 20 hour report |
| From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
Very inspiring report. Good for you Kevin for finishing. Continued success
.
Dan Helsper
Poplar Grove, IL.
-----Original Message-----
From: kevinpurtee <kevin.purtee(at)us.army.mil>
Sent: Thu, Oct 29, 2009 10:40 pm
Subject: Pietenpol-List: 20 hour report
mil>
NX899KP has 20 hours now. I've attached a report. Will submit pics to we
st
oast piet when I can.
Best regards,
evin Purtee
ead this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270063#270063
ttachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/nx899kp_report_108.doc
-========================
========================
===========
-= - The Pietenpol-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Barry Davis" <bed(at)mindspring.com> |
Great report and congradulations!
Now I know how I got all those funny burnt marks on the side and etched
windows on my pickup truck. I learned very quickly not to park anything of
value near the Big Piet welders while they are working.
Barry Davis
NX973BP
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of kevinpurtee
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 11:40 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: 20 hour report
-->
NX899KP has 20 hours now. I've attached a report. Will submit pics to west
coast piet when I can.
Best regards,
Kevin Purtee
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270063#270063
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/nx899kp_report_108.doc
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Welding exhaust systems |
I think the person said it ignited at about 2200 deg F From the info I hav
e it melts at 3135 F which is about 400 above that of steel. An oxy acetyli
ne toch produces a flame of 5800-6300 F (a henrob is about 900deg hotter)
=2C so it would melt alright=2C but from what I gather it reacts terribly i
n the presence of oxygen and must be TIGed.
I'm a torch guy and have little experience with MIG or TIG. What experienc
e I have is in automated systems which is easy. I welded up torque converte
rs when I was in college. Assemble everything=2C set the torch distance and
push a button-lol. I have no experience with Ti other than drilling an ma
chining. Tool wear is a problem. More difficult than working with nitrided
steel
Doug Dever
In beautiful Stow Ohio
Date: Thu=2C 29 Oct 2009 17:07:11 -0700
From: lnawms(at)yahoo.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Welding exhaust systems
Whoever posted about Titanium bursting into a white-hot inferno is just a t
ad off.
Titanium will not burst into flames at any temperature. It will melt at abo
ut 4400 F. degrees and that's way beyond what your torch is capable of. Mag
nesium on the other hand will combust and produce a white-hot flame even un
der water. That's why they use it in some military flares. If Titanium comb
usted at temps around 1000 degrees=2C the SR-71 would be a pile of cinders!
! Mag wheels on heavy aircraft are prone to overheating because of locked b
rakes and are considered extremely dangerous.
My wedding ring is Titanium so it will survive when I depart this existence
in a blinding flash of the purest white light. Moral: don't get a magnesiu
m wedding ring which could be the source of ignition for your departure.
Titanium must either be welded in an enclosed chamber or otherwise shielded
on both sides with an inert gas. Some Ti bicycle frames are welded in cabi
nets similar to a bead-blasting cabinet to achieve the atmosphere clear of
oxygen.
My exhaust is is just a straight shot-gun style and made from 4130 and I bl
asted it and shot it with VHT annually because of rust. Last year I took it
to our local powder coater and he did some kind of jet coating for me and
it seems to be holding up well so far.
Larry
_________________________________________________________________
Windows 7: It works the way you want. Learn more.
http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/windows-7/default.aspx?ocid=PID24727::T:
WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_evergreen2:102009
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Welding exhaust systems |
| From: | "tkreiner" <tkreiner(at)gmail.com> |
Guys,
'Twas I who mentioned that an oxyacetylene torch SHOULD NEVER BE USED to weld or
attempt to weld Titanium. Like a magnesium fire, a Titanium fire is extremely
difficult to put out, with the added problem, that, when doused with water,
it will strip Oxygen from the water, resulting in a Hydrogen fire/explosion.
>From Wikipedia (citations removed):
In terms of fabrication, all welding of titanium must be done in an inert atmosphere
of argon or helium in order to shield it from contamination with atmospheric
gases such as oxygen, nitrogen, or hydrogen.
And:
As a powder or in the form of metal shavings, titanium metal poses a significant
fire hazard and, when heated in air, an explosion hazard. Water and carbon dioxide-based
methods to extinguish fires are ineffective on burning titanium;
Class D dry powder fire fighting agents must be used instead.
When used in the production or handling of chlorine, care must be taken to use
titanium only in locations where it will not be exposed to dry chlorine gas which
can result in a titanium/chlorine fire. A fire hazard exists even when titanium
is used in wet chlorine due to possible unexpected drying brought about
by extreme weather conditions.
Titanium can catch fire when a fresh, non-oxidized surface comes in contact with
liquid oxygen. Such surfaces can appear when the oxidized surface is struck
with a hard object, or when a mechanical strain causes the emergence of a crack.
This poses the possible limitation for its use in liquid oxygen systems, such
as those found in the aerospace industry.
Additional info may be found here:
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0005/Poulsen-0005.html
Bottom line: don't mess with Titanium at home, unless you're properly equipped.
--------
Tom Kreiner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270139#270139
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | For Sale Acer Tempo DX900 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=94?=-$190 ,Apple |
iPhone 3GS 32GB $2
| From: | "pigpy" <pigpi(at)ymail.com> |
BAUERTRANC LIMITED ,We specializes in the distributions of Mobile phones , Laptops
, Games , Mobile accessories e.t.c. Our objective is to develop long-term
relationships with our customers.
To do so, we continuously provide our existing customers new products, advanced
designs, and patented innovations so that they can stay on the top of their markets.
We offer a 10days return policy , and offer a secure payment method .
We shipout worldwide through Professional and reliable courier company e.g FEDEX
EXPRESS , DHL and UPS within 48hrs of contract sealed . Customers never experience
what is called Breach of contract since our operation. Fidelity guarantee
our service , our product are 100% international waranty and guarantee . Contact
us today for your order at our marketing
We look forward in placing your Order with Us
and giving you the most competent services as we are Using this
Medium to Look For Buyers Of Various Electronics Product we Stock.
ORDER INFORMATION :
Minimum Order : 1-10 units
Shipping Method : FedEx and UPS.
Delivery Time : 2-3days Delivery To Your Door Step.
Our phones are imported from Finland,Hungary and Singapore; they are factory sealed
with original packets with complete accessory, e.g. charger, extra battery
and software c d. The phones are sim free and it's never lock to any network,
specification: (europeans/usa-specifications) general network gsm 900/gsm 1800/gsm
1900 platform - tri band (gsm900 + 1800 + 1900 MHz: country of manufactured
origin: Finland,Hungary and Singapore.
1. Complete accessories(Well packed and sealed in original company box)
2. Unlocked / sim free.
3. Brand new (original manufacturer) box - no copies
4. All phones have English language as default
5. All material (software, manual) - car chargers - home chargers - usb data cables
-holsters/belt clips - wireless headsets(bluetooth) -leather and non-leather
carrying cases - batteries.
If you are interested, forward your questions and inquires to us via email your
order and shipping details. we give 1 year warranty for every product sold out
to our costumers, our product are company class 1 tested and approved by global
standard organization of wireless industries, Brand new merchandise with complete
accessories, extra charger and battery.
Shipping fees : Free shipping for bulk purchase : FedEx, DHL or UPS
Delivery Time : 2 days maximum.
Nokia:
Nokia 6760 slide$220
Nokia Surge -$215
Nokia N98$200
Nokia N85$190
Nokia N96 16GB $175
Nokia E90 $155
Nokia N97 $195
Nokia N79 $175
Nokia E72 $190
Nokia E71 $180
Nokia E75 $185
Nokia 8800 Sapphire Arte $205
Nokia N93i $125
Nokia 8600 Luna $145
Nokia 5530 XpressMusic $190
Nokia 5800 XPress Music-$185
T-Mobile Sidekick:
T-Mobile Sidekick LX 2008$135
T-Mobile Sidekick LX 2009$140
T-Mobile Sidekick LX $105
T-Mobile Shadow $120
T-Mobile G1 $130
T-Mobile Sidekick 3 $100
Juicy Couture Sidekick 2 $80
Apple iPhone:
Apple iPhone 3GS 32GB- $210
Apple iPhone 3GS 16GB- $200
Apple iPhone 4GB $100
Apple iPhone 8GB $120
Apple iPhone 16GB $130
Apple iPhone 3G 8GB $140
Apple iPhone 3G 16GB $150
Palm Pre Sprint $220
BlackBerry:
BlackBerry Tour 9630 $195
Blackberry Curve 8900 $170
Blackberry Storm 9500 $140
Blackberry Storm 9530 $155
Blackberry Pearl Flip 8220 $105
Blackberry Bold 9000 $135
Blackberry Curve 8320 $125
HTC:
HTC Snap $200
HTC Hero -$200
HTC Touch Pro $155
HTC Touch Diamond 2 $200
HTC Touch Diamond $140
HTC Touch Cruise $140
HTC Touch Pro2 $200
HTC Touch Dual $130
HTC Dream $195
HTC Touch Cruise 09 $215
HTC MAX 4G $200
HTC Touch HD $165
HTC Touch 3G $155
HTC Touch Viva $145
HTC S740 $155
Samsung:
Samsung I8000 Omnia II $220
Samsung B7320 OmniaPRO $200
Samsung B7300 Omnia LITE$190
Samsung i8910 Omnia HD -$170
Samsung i900 Omnia 16GB $165
Samsung Omnia 8GB -$160
Samsung S8000 Jet
Samsung T929 Memoir $195
Samsung T919 Behold $185
Samsung Giorgio Armani P520 $135
Samsung U900 Soul $160
Samsung G800 $155
Samsung F490 $145
Eten:
Acer Tempo DX900 -$190
Eten glofiish X610 $135
Eten glofiish V900 $235
Eten glofiish X900 $185
Eten glofiish DX900 $165
Eten glofiish M810 $155
Eten glofiish X650 $145
Eten glofiish M800 $160
Sony Ericsson:
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X2 $200
Sony Ericsson Satio --$200
Sony Ericsson Idou$190
Sony Ericsson C510 $185
Sony Ericsson P1 $125
Sony Ericsson W995 -$190
Sony Ericsson C905 $145
Sony Ericsson W960 $130
Sony Ericsson G900 $150
Sony Ericsson XPERIA X1 $175
Sony Ericsson C902 $130
Sony Ericsson W902 $145
LG Phones
LG GW550 $205
LG Incite$200
LG GD910$195
LG KS500-$190
LG KF900 Prada$195
LG KC780-$200
LG KP500 Cookie$215
LG KC910 Renoir$210
LG KB770$200
LG CB630 Invision$200
LG KS360-$190
Video Games Console:
Playstation:
Sony PSP Slim Giga Bundle $105
Sony PlayStation 3 80GB Motorstorm Pack $155
Sony Playstation 3 60GB $140
Sony PlayStation 3 40GB $125
Microsoft Xbox:
Xbox 360 Arcade Console $115
Xbox 360 Pro 60GB Console $145
Xbox 360 Elite 120GB Console $165
Nintendo:
Nintendo DS Lite $70
Nintendo Wii Console $125
APPLE IPODS:
Apple iPod 60GB (Video) New $150usd
Apple iPod 30GB (Video) New $140usd
Apple ipod 80 GB $140usd
Apple iPod U2 SE 20 GB $120usd
Apple iPod Photo 60 GB $120usd
Apple iPod Mini 6 GB $100usd
Apple iPod 20 GB $100usd
Apple iPod Photo 30 GB $110usd
Apple iPod Nano 4GB New! $90usd
Apple iPod Nano 2GB New! $80usd
Apple iPod Shuffle 1 GB $80usd
Apple iPod Mini 4 GB $70usd
Apple iPod Shuffle 512 MB $60usd
APPLE LAPTOPS
Apple Macbook Air.$600
Apple MacBook (MA700LL/A) Mac Notebook$500usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA611LL/A) Notebook$500usd
Apple MacBook (MA254LL/A) Mac Notebook$450usd
Apple iBook G3 (M7698LL/A) Mac Notebook..$400usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA609LL/A) Notebook$550usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA600LLA) Notebook$500usd
Apple MacBook Pro (MA610LL/A) Notebook$450usd
Apple Macbook Pro (885909119400) Notebook..$445usd
Company Contact Details:
Company Details
BAUERTRANC LIMITED
Registered #.05218652
Email: bauertra(at)upjs.com
Name: Michael Beckwith
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270147#270147
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: For Sale Acer Tempo DX900 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=94?=-$190 |
,Apple iPhone 3GS 32GB $2
| From: | "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net> |
Hey Michael... I say you take all your garbage and test the yield strength.
Report back to us with your findings. Err, on the other hand, nevermind.
--------
Mark - working on wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270150#270150
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Split Gear Tubing Size-Fuselage Height |
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
Jack,
When I ordered my tubing for the V's I somehow ordered .095" tubing. I didn't
bother to send it back and went ahead and made them up. So mine are actually
.095" wall thickness. The correct tubing size would have been the .080". I suppose
I added an extra pound or so, oh well. The other fittings I think I converted
to the .080". When I would see 13 ga. in the plans I used .090" thickness.
Definitely stagger those mounting tabs for the diagonal shock struts as
far as you can. Mine are close but only touch each other when they extend to
the end of their travel. As far as the length, or height of the V's, I made
them just as they are on the plans. Although I got a little nervous about the
position of the axle fore and aft when using brakes. Mr. Pietenpol made one
with the axle 4" inches forward. He said that was maybe too much and to place
it about 2" forward if using brakes. I use brakes and moved the axle 1" forward.
The height is still the same. I didn't want to get too far from the plans
and I didn't plan to use the brakes for more than slow taxi. Anyway, it seems
to have worked out well. I'm sure leaving it back an inch would be about
the same. With my tall wheels I'm definitely kinda high in the 3-point. But
then I have long legs! Mr. Pietenpol built an AirCamper, number 12988, that had
the same configuration as mine. Split axle with the wire wheels. I liked
the look of it, so that's what I was striving for. I have put the gear through
a fair amount of abuse! (Might have even been a ground loop in there, sshhhh...)
It's really a stout little airplane!
For those that aren't very familiar with the tubing style of gear, here are a few
shots;
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_144.JPG
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_147.JPG
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_095.JPG
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270158#270158
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack" <jack(at)textors.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Split Gear Tubing Size-Fuselage Height |
Don,
Thanks for the great pictures and comments! Your comments and others on the
shock struts were a good call. I'm doing spring shocks and wondering if the
springs will touch even though I stagger the mounts as much as possible?
Jack
DSM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Split Gear Tubing Size-Fuselage Height
Jack,
When I ordered my tubing for the V's I somehow ordered .095" tubing. I
didn't bother to send it back and went ahead and made them up. So mine are
actually .095" wall thickness. The correct tubing size would have been the
.080". I suppose I added an extra pound or so, oh well. The other fittings
I think I converted to the .080". When I would see 13 ga. in the plans I
used .090" thickness. Definitely stagger those mounting tabs for the
diagonal shock struts as far as you can. Mine are close but only touch each
other when they extend to the end of their travel. As far as the length, or
height of the V's, I made them just as they are on the plans. Although I
got a little nervous about the position of the axle fore and aft when using
brakes. Mr. Pietenpol made one with the axle 4" inches forward. He said
that was maybe too much and to place it about 2" forward if using brakes. I
use brakes and moved the axle 1" forward. The height is still the same. I
didn't want t!
o get too far from the plans and I didn't plan to use the brakes for more
than slow taxi. Anyway, it seems to have worked out well. I'm sure leaving
it back an inch would be about the same. With my tall wheels I'm definitely
kinda high in the 3-point. But then I have long legs! Mr. Pietenpol built
an AirCamper, number 12988, that had the same configuration as mine. Split
axle with the wire wheels. I liked the look of it, so that's what I was
striving for. I have put the gear through a fair amount of abuse! (Might
have even been a ground loop in there, sshhhh...) It's really a stout
little airplane!
For those that aren't very familiar with the tubing style of gear, here are
a few shots;
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_144.JPG
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_147.JPG
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_095.JPG
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270158#270158
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
19:57:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TOM MICHELLE BRANT <tmbrant(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Split Gear Tubing Size-Fuselage Height |
Thanks Don - I'm strongly considering the tube gear with wheels like yours
(covered). Could you help with how you did the covered wheels? I was orig
inally thinking aluminum covers but had seen someone suggest putting the fa
bric all the way down to where the bead of the tire contacts (inside the ri
m). Is this how you did it?
Thanks=2C
Tom B.
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Split Gear Tubing Size-Fuselage Height
> From: EmchAir(at)aol.com
> Date: Fri=2C 30 Oct 2009 13:47:11 -0700
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Jack=2C
> When I ordered my tubing for the V's I somehow ordered .095" tubing. I d
idn't bother to send it back and went ahead and made them up. So mine are
actually .095" wall thickness. The correct tubing size would have been the
.080". I suppose I added an extra pound or so=2C oh well. The other fitt
ings I think I converted to the .080". When I would see 13 ga. in the plan
s I used .090" thickness. Definitely stagger those mounting tabs for the d
iagonal shock struts as far as you can. Mine are close but only touch each
other when they extend to the end of their travel. As far as the length
=2C or height of the V's=2C I made them just as they are on the plans. Alt
hough I got a little nervous about the position of the axle fore and aft wh
en using brakes. Mr. Pietenpol made one with the axle 4" inches forward.
He said that was maybe too much and to place it about 2" forward if using b
rakes. I use brakes and moved the axle 1" forward. The height is still th
e same. I didn't want t!
> o get too far from the plans and I didn't plan to use the brakes for mor
e than slow taxi. Anyway=2C it seems to have worked out well. I'm sure le
aving it back an inch would be about the same. With my tall wheels I'm def
initely kinda high in the 3-point. But then I have long legs! Mr. Pietenp
ol built an AirCamper=2C number 12988=2C that had the same configuration as
mine. Split axle with the wire wheels. I liked the look of it=2C so that
's what I was striving for. I have put the gear through a fair amount of a
buse! (Might have even been a ground loop in there=2C sshhhh...) It's r
eally a stout little airplane!
>
> For those that aren't very familiar with the tubing style of gear=2C here
are a few shots=3B
>
> http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_144.JPG
>
> http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_147.JPG
>
> http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_095.JPG
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270158#270158
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Dever <chiefpepperhead(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Welding exhaust systems |
Don't forget to clean up your grinder when grinding aluminum and switching
to steel. Aluminum and steel filings alowed to sit together can ignite an
d cause a flash fire of several thousand F
BTW- You also said that Ti ignites a burns at about 2=2C200F. Not true. I
t's melting point is above steel. But you are correct in that it cannot be
torch welded. Reacts severely in the presence of oxygen.
Doug Dever
In beautiful Stow Ohio
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Welding exhaust systems
> From: tkreiner(at)gmail.com
> Date: Fri=2C 30 Oct 2009 11:09:47 -0700
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Guys=2C
>
> 'Twas I who mentioned that an oxyacetylene torch SHOULD NEVER BE USED to
weld or attempt to weld Titanium. Like a magnesium fire=2C a Titanium fire
is extremely difficult to put out=2C with the added problem=2C that=2C when
doused with water=2C it will strip Oxygen from the water=2C resulting in a
Hydrogen fire/explosion.
>
> >From Wikipedia (citations removed):
>
> In terms of fabrication=2C all welding of titanium must be done in an ine
rt atmosphere of argon or helium in order to shield it from contamination w
ith atmospheric gases such as oxygen=2C nitrogen=2C or hydrogen.
>
> And:
>
> As a powder or in the form of metal shavings=2C titanium metal poses a si
gnificant fire hazard and=2C when heated in air=2C an explosion hazard. Wat
er and carbon dioxide-based methods to extinguish fires are ineffective on
burning titanium=3B Class D dry powder fire fighting agents must be used in
stead.
>
> When used in the production or handling of chlorine=2C care must be taken
to use titanium only in locations where it will not be exposed to dry chlo
rine gas which can result in a titanium/chlorine fire. A fire hazard exists
even when titanium is used in wet chlorine due to possible unexpected dryi
ng brought about by extreme weather conditions.
>
> Titanium can catch fire when a fresh=2C non-oxidized surface comes in con
tact with liquid oxygen. Such surfaces can appear when the oxidized surface
is struck with a hard object=2C or when a mechanical strain causes the eme
rgence of a crack. This poses the possible limitation for its use in liquid
oxygen systems=2C such as those found in the aerospace industry.
>
> Additional info may be found here:
>
> http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0005/Poulsen-0005.html
>
> Bottom line: don't mess with Titanium at home=2C unless you're properly e
quipped.
>
> --------
> Tom Kreiner
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270139#270139
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Windows 7: I wanted more reliable=2C now it's more reliable. Wow!
http://microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/default-ga.aspx?h=myidea?ocid=PI
D24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_myidea:102009
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Welding exhaust systems |
| From: | "John Recine" <amsafetyc(at)aol.com> |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________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
| From: | Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Well, since the job lay off, I am getting pretty stingy with my George
Washington's, but I want to start gluing rib sticks together and get my ribs
started.
So, I went to the local dealer in town which that sells T-88 here in Fresno,
and I just couldn't justify to my wife spending the $21.95 for the 4 ounce
sized bottles. I know there are other acceptable glues out there that have
the test of time behind them, and I read about them in Tony B's book, but I
am looking for what advice you all might have regard alternative glues I
might try at least for a few ribs.
I know building an airplane is a luxury, and probably not for the
un-employed. BUT, building a few ribs now that I have the wood cut up is not
that expensive. So, I thought I might ask ya'll about epoxy alternatives
that you might have used that would be acceptable for ribs. I want epoxy in
the really stessful places, and the fuse, etc,... but the rib sticks with
the gussets should be OK with older, tried and proven glues.
Reading Tony's books gives me a start. I just thought I'd pick a few Piet
Brains for some more advice. I saw a bucket of Plastic Resin glue there for
about $9 bucks and thought I might go with it to start....
Thoughts?
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
Resorcinol
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Roberts
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 9:53 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
Well, since the job lay off, I am getting pretty stingy with my George
Washington's, but I want to start gluing rib sticks together and get my ribs
started.
So, I went to the local dealer in town which that sells T-88 here in Fresno,
and I just couldn't justify to my wife spending the $21.95 for the 4 ounce
sized bottles. I know there are other acceptable glues out there that have
the test of time behind them, and I read about them in Tony B's book, but I
am looking for what advice you all might have regard alternative glues I
might try at least for a few ribs.
I know building an airplane is a luxury, and probably not for the
un-employed. BUT, building a few ribs now that I have the wood cut up is not
that expensive. So, I thought I might ask ya'll about epoxy alternatives
that you might have used that would be acceptable for ribs. I want epoxy in
the really stessful places, and the fuse, etc,... but the rib sticks with
the gussets should be OK with older, tried and proven glues.
Reading Tony's books gives me a start. I just thought I'd pick a few Piet
Brains for some more advice. I saw a bucket of Plastic Resin glue there for
about $9 bucks and thought I might go with it to start....
Thoughts?
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
Mark,
Corky started this project with T-88, but I have been finishing it with West Marine
epoxy. Look it up on Wicks or Aircraft Spruce. The local West Marine outlet
(in Austin, TX) sold me my second set of stuff for about $40. It was a pint
of epoxy and 1/5 that much of hardener (catalyst). The ratio is 5:1. Local
sales tax will be similar to freight, I guess, but the advantage of local purchase
is its immediacy. One set will easily finish your ribs.
I haven't been following your posts, so I am likely telling what you already know,
but here goes: Don't take shortcuts and measure carefully. I have used medical
syringes for precise mixes and all has gone very well. Be sure to rough
up your gussets before you start gluing them, and don't clamp anything so tightly
you squeeze out most of the glue. As discussed otherwise on this site,
weights, clamps, nails or staples will hold the assembly together while it sets
up. Plan on setting up one rib tomorrow, then gluint and clamping the gussets
on the back side of it the next day, while you set up the next rib in your
jig. In a month you are done.
Tim in central TX
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Roberts
Sent: Oct 30, 2009 8:52 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
Well, since the job lay off, I am getting pretty stingy with my George Washington's,
but I want to start gluing rib sticks together and get my ribs started.
So, I went to the local dealer in town which that sells T-88 here in Fresno, and
I just couldn't justify to my wife spending the $21.95 for the 4 ounce sized
bottles. I know there are other acceptable glues out there that have the test
of time behind them, and I read about them in Tony B's book, but I am looking
for what advice you all might have regard alternative glues I might try at least
for a few ribs.
I know building an airplane is a luxury, and probably not for the un-employed.
BUT, building a few ribs now that I have the wood cut up is not that expensive.
So, I thought I might ask ya'll about epoxy alternatives that you might have
used that would be acceptable for ribs. I want epoxy in the really stessful places,
and the fuse, etc,... but the rib sticks with the gussets should be OK
with older, tried and proven glues.
Reading Tony's books gives me a start. I just thought I'd pick a few Piet Brains
for some more advice. I saw a bucket of Plastic Resin glue there for about $9
bucks and thought I might go with it to start....
Thoughts?
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
Buying in a larger quantity will of course cost less per oz. I think I
paid around $16 for that size at my local Woodcraft - the largest size
they carry in the store. That'll get through about half the ribs.
Talking to John Racine when he was out here, he's using West Systems
epoxy and is happy with it. John, what's West System cost compared to
T-88? Either of those should be available at local woodworking shops
or marine shops. Beyond those I'd carefully consider what Tony B. has
to say on the subject.
I'm very happy with T-88. Around $20 gives me a couple months of
building on my ribs. How many movie rentals or cups of latte would
that be?
My thoughts.
--Ken
On Oct 30, 2009, at 6:52 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
> Well, since the job lay off, I am getting pretty stingy with my
> George Washington's, but I want to start gluing rib sticks together
> and get my ribs started.
>
> So, I went to the local dealer in town which that sells T-88 here in
> Fresno, and I just couldn't justify to my wife spending the $21.95
> for the 4 ounce sized bottles. I know there are other acceptable
> glues out there that have the test of time behind them, and I read
> about them in Tony B's book, but I am looking for what advice you
> all might have regard alternative glues I might try at least for a
> few ribs.
>
> I know building an airplane is a luxury, and probably not for the un-
> employed. BUT, building a few ribs now that I have the wood cut up
> is not that expensive. So, I thought I might ask ya'll about epoxy
> alternatives that you might have used that would be acceptable for
> ribs. I want epoxy in the really stessful places, and the fuse,
> etc,... but the rib sticks with the gussets should be OK with older,
> tried and proven glues.
>
> Reading Tony's books gives me a start. I just thought I'd pick a few
> Piet Brains for some more advice. I saw a bucket of Plastic Resin
> glue there for about $9 bucks and thought I might go with it to
> start....
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Mark
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
| From: | Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
West marine epoxy.... Hummmm... We have a west marine here and I have
used their 105 and 205 for fiberglass work, and even have some of that
in the shop already. However, I am not sure if it that is the dame as
you are refering to. It's the slow cure stuff, but rather thin. I have
the mixing ratio pimp that meters it out of the cans...
Is this the west marine epoxy you mention? I am fearful of using 'the
wrong glues' and wasting wood and effort...
Thank you!
Mark
On Friday, October 30, 2009, Tim Willis wrote:
>
>
> Mark,
>
> Corky started this project with T-88, but I have been finishing it with West
Marine epoxy. Look it up on Wicks or Aircraft Spruce. The local West Marine outlet
(in Austin, TX) sold me my second set of stuff for about $40. It was a pint
of epoxy and 1/5 that much of hardener (catalyst). The ratio is 5:1. Local
sales tax will be similar to freight, I guess, but the advantage of local purchase
is its immediacy. One set will easily finish your ribs.
>
> I haven't been following your posts, so I am likely telling what you already
know, but here goes: Don't take shortcuts and measure carefully. I have used medical
syringes for precise mixes and all has gone very well. Be sure to rough
up your gussets before you start gluing them, and don't clamp anything so tightly
you squeeze out most of the glue. As discussed otherwise on this site, weights,
clamps, nails or staples will hold the assembly together while it sets
up. Plan on setting up one rib tomorrow, then gluint and clamping the gussets
on the back side of it the next day, while you set up the next rib in your jig.
In a month you are done.
>
> Tim in central TX
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Roberts
> Sent: Oct 30, 2009 8:52 PM
> To: pietenpol-list
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
>
> Well, since the job lay off, I am getting pretty stingy with my George Washington's,
but I want to start gluing rib sticks together and get my ribs started.
>
> So, I went to the local dealer in town which that sells T-88 here in Fresno,
and I just couldn't justify to my wife spending the $21.95 for the 4 ounce sized
bottles. I know there are other acceptable glues out there that have the test
of time behind them, and I read about them in Tony B's book, but I am looking
for what advice you all might have regard alternative glues I might try at
least for a few ribs.
>
> I know building an airplane is a luxury, and probably not for the un-employed.
BUT, building a few ribs now that I have the wood cut up is not that expensive.
So, I thought I might ask ya'll about epoxy alternatives that you might have
used that would be acceptable for ribs. I want epoxy in the really stessful
places, and the fuse, etc,... but the rib sticks with the gussets should be OK
with older, tried and proven glues.
>
> Reading Tony's books gives me a start. I just thought I'd pick a few Piet Brains
for some more advice. I saw a bucket of Plastic Resin glue there for about
$9 bucks and thought I might go with it to start....
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Mark
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
I have used both West epoxy and T-88 for gluing wood. Both seem
adequate.
T-88 is slightly thicker, so be careful just how much you apply. It's
easy to make the film too thick. I measure it out by squeezing equal
amounts into a shallow plastic dish, actually a microwave dinner plate.
I'll measure out, for example, seven passes of each part. Oh, a hint -
buy the T-88 in the quart size. It's cheaper that way and lasts well.
West's handy pumps fail after some time, and in any case deliver a
rather large measure with each press of the pump handle. Skip them
unless you are making something out of fiberglass or composite. I have
found that a digital kitchen scale that reads in grams, a plastic
cottage cheese container, a calculator and a tongue depressor or
popsicle stick work better. Measure the epoxy using the gram scale, it's
easier - it's just a number, after all, then calculate how much hardener
you need and add that. Mix and apply with the sticks. Buy a box of the
sticks. If you use a cheap brush for the application, the brush will
absorb a lot of epoxy, wasting it and you'll have to throw it away when
it cures. Sometimes it's handy to cut the round end of the sticks off.
If there's any epoxy left in the tub. let it cure. You can mix the next
batch right on top of it, it's inert.
If you need to thicken either of these, mix in some Cab-O-Sil. That
stuff is a nasty light powder; wear a dust mask. I don't know of a
reliable thinning agent.
Personally, I prefer the West epoxy for laminating and coating, and the
T-88 for bonding.
The hand cleaner of choice is the cheapest generic vinegar you can get.
Sounds weird, but that stuff cuts wet epoxy immediately. Doesn't seem to
touch cured epoxy. I keep a bottle by the sink, and follow it with soap
and water.
Incidentally, get a box of plastic disposable gloves. Epoxy allergies
can be serious, and can be very difficult to get rid of, persisting even
after the epoxy is long gone. Usually the gloves can be reused half a
dozen times. I have heard that 1:1 epoxies are less allergenic than the
others, but personally have had no problem with either of these. In the
past I did have a reaction to certain other epoxies, but those are now
long off the market.
Clear plastic packaging tape, kitchen plastic wrap, plastic drop cloths,
wax paper, things like that, don't stick to the epoxies. I have used the
tape to hold parts together while curing; it's best to fold a bit of
tape under itself to make a place to grab it. Otherwise the epoxy might
physically prevent you being able to find a corner to start pulling it
off. I routinely use a piece of wax paper to protect the kitchen scale.
Plastic Resin was once considered a good glue for wooden aircraft. It
was subsequently learned that repeated moisture cycles weakened it, and
it is no longer recommended for that reason.
Sorry to suggest all those expensive tools, the scale, etc. You can work
around them, but it's worth having them. Seriously. You can usually save
a few cents by cutting the tongue depressors in half lengthwise, anyway.
David Paule
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Roberts
To: pietenpol-list
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 7:52 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
Well, since the job lay off, I am getting pretty stingy with my George
Washington's, but I want to start gluing rib sticks together and get my
ribs started.
So, I went to the local dealer in town which that sells T-88 here in
Fresno, and I just couldn't justify to my wife spending the $21.95 for
the 4 ounce sized bottles. I know there are other acceptable glues out
there that have the test of time behind them, and I read about them in
Tony B's book, but I am looking for what advice you all might have
regard alternative glues I might try at least for a few ribs.
I know building an airplane is a luxury, and probably not for the
un-employed. BUT, building a few ribs now that I have the wood cut up is
not that expensive. So, I thought I might ask ya'll about epoxy
alternatives that you might have used that would be acceptable for ribs.
I want epoxy in the really stessful places, and the fuse, etc,... but
the rib sticks with the gussets should be OK with older, tried and
proven glues.
Reading Tony's books gives me a start. I just thought I'd pick a few
Piet Brains for some more advice. I saw a bucket of Plastic Resin glue
there for about $9 bucks and thought I might go with it to start....
Thoughts?
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
Yep, that's the stuff.
David Paule
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Roberts" <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com>
West marine epoxy.... Hummmm... We have a west marine here and I have
used their 105 and 205 for fiberglass work, and even have some of that
in the shop already. However, I am not sure if it that is the dame as
you are refering to. It's the slow cure stuff, but rather thin. I have
the mixing ratio pimp that meters it out of the cans...
Is this the west marine epoxy you mention? I am fearful of using 'the
wrong glues' and wasting wood and effort...
Thank you!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
| From: | Matt Redmond <mdredmond(at)gmail.com> |
As a side note... For all things boating, including West System products,
boatfix.com is usually way cheaper than West Marine.
You might also find that Rockler or WoodCraft are good sources for T-88 or
West Products (I haven't checked). I'm on Rockler's spam list (to be fair,
I signed up so it's not really spam) and occasionally get %-off coupons in
my inbox.
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:52 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
> Well, since the job lay off, I am getting pretty stingy with my George
> Washington's, but I want to start gluing rib sticks together and get my ribs
> started.
>
> So, I went to the local dealer in town which that sells T-88 here in
> Fresno, and I just couldn't justify to my wife spending the $21.95 for the 4
> ounce sized bottles. I know there are other acceptable glues out there that
> have the test of time behind them, and I read about them in Tony B's book,
> but I am looking for what advice you all might have regard alternative glues
> I might try at least for a few ribs.
>
> I know building an airplane is a luxury, and probably not for the
> un-employed. BUT, building a few ribs now that I have the wood cut up is not
> that expensive. So, I thought I might ask ya'll about epoxy alternatives
> that you might have used that would be acceptable for ribs. I want epoxy in
> the really stessful places, and the fuse, etc,... but the rib sticks with
> the gussets should be OK with older, tried and proven glues.
>
> Reading Tony's books gives me a start. I just thought I'd pick a few Piet
> Brains for some more advice. I saw a bucket of Plastic Resin glue there for
> about $9 bucks and thought I might go with it to start....
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Mark
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
| From: | Ryan Mueller <rmueller23(at)gmail.com> |
Mark,
Really? $12? T-88 is good stuff, and is the go-to epoxy alternative to
resorcinol for wood aircraft building. You would try to substitute some
other kind of epoxy over $12? (the price difference between it and the
plastic resin glue you were looking at).
As Ken said, skip the movie rental, skip the Starbucks, skip McD's for a few
visits.....if you really want to build an airplane, and do it right, then
find the savings in other discretionary expenditures. I seem to recall a
post in August about you viewing Brodhead pics over your IPhone connection:
for what that costs you could have more T-88 than you know what to do with.
I understand building on a budget....we are too. You have my sympathies
regarding being laid off; I hope the situation improves for you and your
family. And I can sympathize with wanting so bad to build that darned
Pietenpol, but having so many obstacles in your way. Just don't skimp....you
want to fly your wife, your kids, and yourself for many happy hours in this
airplane. After having spent thousands of dollars to complete your Piet,
what are you going to think of looking back at not using the best materials
because you didn't want to spend the extra $12?
Good luck, and I hope you can start soon (the right way). Enjoy your
weekend,
Ryan
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:52 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
> Well, since the job lay off, I am getting pretty stingy with my George
> Washington's, but I want to start gluing rib sticks together and get my ribs
> started.
>
> So, I went to the local dealer in town which that sells T-88 here in
> Fresno, and I just couldn't justify to my wife spending the $21.95 for the 4
> ounce sized bottles. I know there are other acceptable glues out there that
> have the test of time behind them, and I read about them in Tony B's book,
> but I am looking for what advice you all might have regard alternative glues
> I might try at least for a few ribs.
>
> I know building an airplane is a luxury, and probably not for the
> un-employed. BUT, building a few ribs now that I have the wood cut up is not
> that expensive. So, I thought I might ask ya'll about epoxy alternatives
> that you might have used that would be acceptable for ribs. I want epoxy in
> the really stessful places, and the fuse, etc,... but the rib sticks with
> the gussets should be OK with older, tried and proven glues.
>
> Reading Tony's books gives me a start. I just thought I'd pick a few Piet
> Brains for some more advice. I saw a bucket of Plastic Resin glue there for
> about $9 bucks and thought I might go with it to start....
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Mark
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
The cats are stowed in the house and garage, and the alarm is on. I will check
in the AM and reply.
I think I am using 105, and it does set slowly, giving you time to work it. I
leave it clamped up for at least 12 hours, usually overnight, and give it not
even a light stress test for 24 hours. It has a pot life of 30-45 minutes usually,
depending on temperatures. You can thicken it with microballoons to make
it less runny and/or better fill cavities. the pot life is less with the balloons,
IMO.
It is the same stuff you use on fiberglass layups. My batches are small, but when
I get to the big stuff I may use the pumps.... certainly for fiberglass apps.
More tomorrow.
BTW, Resorcinol, which Jack Phillips uses, is the very best, and the only one that
will hold up when not just soaked in water, but BOILED. It is the one you
HAVE to use for composite wooden propellers, because of heat buildup-- friction
with air, and maybe other energy transfers.
Tim in central TX
-----Original Message-----
>From: Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 30, 2009 9:31 PM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
>
>
>West marine epoxy.... Hummmm... We have a west marine here and I have
>used their 105 and 205 for fiberglass work, and even have some of that
>in the shop already. However, I am not sure if it that is the dame as
>you are refering to. It's the slow cure stuff, but rather thin. I have
>the mixing ratio pimp that meters it out of the cans...
>
>Is this the west marine epoxy you mention? I am fearful of using 'the
>wrong glues' and wasting wood and effort...
>
>Thank you!
>
>Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
| From: | Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Good info All.
I do agree that the difference of $12 is a very small price to pay in terms
of longevity. I was thinking that the size of the bottles made the $21.95
seem very high compared to the stiff when bought from ACS (minus the tax and
shipping).
Anyway, I have ONLY thought about the T-88 so far, and not really considered
alternatives, so that was really where the question was coming from.
As it is, if West Systems Epoxy will work, and if I am not losing any real
strength if I mix in a little Cab-O-Sil to thicken it up a tad, then that is
already in my garage and waiting to be used. I have both the Quick set and
the Slow set hardeners, and PLENTY of resin (used to use all of this for
molding Model Airplanes and sailplane molds). West Systems was the only
stuff I'd use for them, and I know it to be good stuff.
I also have a buddy of mine with some resorcinol unopened that I could use.
He hasn't for many years!
Thanks for all the advice. I do appreciate it.
The journey of a thousand rib sticks begins with one batch of epoxy...
Mark
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Tim Willis wrote:
> timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
>
> The cats are stowed in the house and garage, and the alarm is on. I will
> check in the AM and reply.
>
> I think I am using 105, and it does set slowly, giving you time to work it.
> I leave it clamped up for at least 12 hours, usually overnight, and give it
> not even a light stress test for 24 hours. It has a pot life of 30-45
> minutes usually, depending on temperatures. You can thicken it with
> microballoons to make it less runny and/or better fill cavities. the pot
> life is less with the balloons, IMO.
>
> It is the same stuff you use on fiberglass layups. My batches are small,
> but when I get to the big stuff I may use the pumps.... certainly for
> fiberglass apps.
>
> More tomorrow.
>
> BTW, Resorcinol, which Jack Phillips uses, is the very best, and the only
> one that will hold up when not just soaked in water, but BOILED. It is the
> one you HAVE to use for composite wooden propellers, because of heat
> buildup-- friction with air, and maybe other energy transfers.
>
> Tim in central TX
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com>
> >Sent: Oct 30, 2009 9:31 PM
> >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
> >
> >
> >
> >West marine epoxy.... Hummmm... We have a west marine here and I have
> >used their 105 and 205 for fiberglass work, and even have some of that
> >in the shop already. However, I am not sure if it that is the dame as
> >you are refering to. It's the slow cure stuff, but rather thin. I have
> >the mixing ratio pimp that meters it out of the cans...
> >
> >Is this the west marine epoxy you mention? I am fearful of using 'the
> >wrong glues' and wasting wood and effort...
> >
> >Thank you!
> >
> >Mark
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
| From: | Matt Redmond <mdredmond(at)gmail.com> |
If you call the folks at West they can counsel you on the use of thickeners
- they are terrific and really know their stuff. They walked me through a
pretty substantial structural sailboat repair that's performed flawlessly
for almost 10 years.
I imagine the West resin is as good as any and better than most. We all
know it'll form a bond stronger than the wood itself, so the big questions
are how it holds up to moisture and UV exposure. It's use in boats answers
the first question and inside a covered wing the second is moot.
As an aside, I asked a West tech rep why they weren't as visible in the
aircraft space as they are in marine. He said it was marketing: the folks
at System Three (T-88) marketed their stuff to builders while West was busy
doing the same thing in the marine market. He said that in some ways (I
don't remember how - it was technical - it might have had something to do
with vibration) he considers the West product superior to T-88. Of course
he's paid to say that but seriously, as straightforward as they've always
been with me I'd be floored if they gave bad advice in a life-or-death
scenario.
Unless someone informed me of something I don't know, I wouldn't hesitate to
use West products instead of T-88.
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
> Good info All.
>
> I do agree that the difference of $12 is a very small price to pay in terms
> of longevity. I was thinking that the size of the bottles made the $21.95
> seem very high compared to the stiff when bought from ACS (minus the tax and
> shipping).
>
> Anyway, I have ONLY thought about the T-88 so far, and not really
> considered alternatives, so that was really where the question was coming
> from.
>
> As it is, if West Systems Epoxy will work, and if I am not losing any real
> strength if I mix in a little Cab-O-Sil to thicken it up a tad, then that is
> already in my garage and waiting to be used. I have both the Quick set and
> the Slow set hardeners, and PLENTY of resin (used to use all of this for
> molding Model Airplanes and sailplane molds). West Systems was the only
> stuff I'd use for them, and I know it to be good stuff.
>
> I also have a buddy of mine with some resorcinol unopened that I could use.
> He hasn't for many years!
>
> Thanks for all the advice. I do appreciate it.
>
> The journey of a thousand rib sticks begins with one batch of epoxy...
>
> Mark
>
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Tim Willis wrote:
>
>> timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
>>
>> The cats are stowed in the house and garage, and the alarm is on. I will
>> check in the AM and reply.
>>
>> I think I am using 105, and it does set slowly, giving you time to work
>> it. I leave it clamped up for at least 12 hours, usually overnight, and
>> give it not even a light stress test for 24 hours. It has a pot life of
>> 30-45 minutes usually, depending on temperatures. You can thicken it with
>> microballoons to make it less runny and/or better fill cavities. the pot
>> life is less with the balloons, IMO.
>>
>> It is the same stuff you use on fiberglass layups. My batches are small,
>> but when I get to the big stuff I may use the pumps.... certainly for
>> fiberglass apps.
>>
>> More tomorrow.
>>
>> BTW, Resorcinol, which Jack Phillips uses, is the very best, and the only
>> one that will hold up when not just soaked in water, but BOILED. It is the
>> one you HAVE to use for composite wooden propellers, because of heat
>> buildup-- friction with air, and maybe other energy transfers.
>>
>> Tim in central TX
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> >From: Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com>
>> >Sent: Oct 30, 2009 9:31 PM
>> >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>> >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
>> >
>> mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com>
>> >
>> >West marine epoxy.... Hummmm... We have a west marine here and I have
>> >used their 105 and 205 for fiberglass work, and even have some of that
>> >in the shop already. However, I am not sure if it that is the dame as
>> >you are refering to. It's the slow cure stuff, but rather thin. I have
>> >the mixing ratio pimp that meters it out of the cans...
>> >
>> >Is this the west marine epoxy you mention? I am fearful of using 'the
>> >wrong glues' and wasting wood and effort...
>> >
>> >Thank you!
>> >
>> >Mark
>>
>> ==========
>> enpol-List Email Forum -
>> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
>> ==========
>> http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> le, List Admin.
>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jorge lizarraga <flightwood(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...hello |
Im jorge from hanford and trate to con firm if you resive- my mail I sed
if not these is my piet pictured I like now were you build too and what par
t of fresno you live my friend live in siera sky park in herdon in eaa chap
ter 376 ronofs seyou nex
--- On Fri, 10/30/09, Mark Roberts wrote:
From: Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 6:52 PM
Well, since the job lay off, I am getting pretty stingy with my George Wash
ington's, but I want to start gluing rib sticks together and get my ribs st
arted.
So, I went to the local dealer in town which that sells T-88 here in Fresno
, and I just couldn't justify to my wife spending the $21.95 for the 4 ounc
e sized bottles. I know there are other acceptable glues out there that hav
e the test of time behind them, and I read about them in Tony B's book, but
I am looking for what advice you all might have regard alternative glues I
might try at least for a few ribs.
=0A
I know building an airplane is a luxury, and probably not for the un-employ
ed. BUT, building a few ribs now that I have the wood cut up is not that ex
pensive. So, I thought I might ask ya'll about epoxy alternatives that you
might have used that would be acceptable for ribs. I want epoxy in the real
ly stessful places, and the fuse, etc,... but the rib sticks with the gusse
ts should be OK with older, tried and proven glues.
=0A
Reading Tony's books gives me a start. I just thought I'd pick a few Piet B
rains for some more advice. I saw a bucket of Plastic Resin glue there for
about $9 bucks and thought I might go with it to start....
=0A
Thoughts?
Mark
=0A=0A
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Wire wheel covering |
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
Tom B.,
Covering the wire wheels really is pretty simple. I made an aluminum disc out
of some scrap that I had laying around. Probably about 3 1/2" to 4" in diameter
and around .100" thick. I cut a hole in the center that would fit over the
hub and actually just rest up against the spokes. I cut a piece of fabric that
was a few inches larger diameter than my rim and cut a hole in the center.
I glued the aluminum ring to the fabric and placed it over the hub against the
spokes then just wrapped and glued the fabric around the inside of the rim where
the bead of the tire contacts the rim. Really pretty simple. The only bad
thing is trying to muscle that tire over the fabric without messing it up.
After a failed attempt I decided to leave the tire on the rim and clamp it tight
and squezze it to itself so I could get to the inside of the rim. I haven't
changed tires yet. When I do I was thinking I would just change the covering
too. However someone at Brodhead told me a lot of custom motorcycle shops
have a tire mounting machine that actually doesn't touch the rim. Needed for
all of the custom rims on choppers out there. Might give that a try. Nice thing
about motorcycle tires is they usually have more natural rubber in them so
they don't rot out as fast as maybe a car tire might. Those tires are 15 years
old. They show no signs of checking or cracking yet, probably because they
stay so dry.
Again a couple of shots to see that disc I'm talking;
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_095.JPG
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_094.JPG
Big Thanks to Chris Tracy for that fantastic site!!!!!!
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270222#270222
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
Don't use microballoons for structure!
That stuff is inherently weak. It's useful for working adjacent to foam, and
for places where you want to be able to shape or work the thickened epoxy.
But it's absolutely not safe for structure.
Use Cab-O-Sil instead.
David Paule
>
> I think I am using 105, and it does set slowly, giving you time to work
> it. I leave it clamped up for at least 12 hours, usually overnight, and
> give it not even a light stress test for 24 hours. It has a pot life of
> 30-45 minutes usually, depending on temperatures. You can thicken it with
> microballoons to make it less runny and/or better fill cavities. the pot
> life is less with the balloons, IMO.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack" <jack(at)textors.com> |
| Subject: | Gear strut clearance |
I plan to stagger the gear strut attach points to allow clearance where they
cross. Also think I will mount the strut springs down low like the attached
picture. Does it seem like this will work?
Thanks,
Jack
DSM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | West System epoxy |
I've been using the West System epoxy with the pumps...works well. I've ma
de test joints and even before 24 hours of cure time I gave one test joint
-- similar to a fuselage longeron and upright joint with 1" by 1" spruce
and the gussets -- to one of my sons who was into power lifting at the ti
me (500 lbs dead lift, etc -- i.e. "Al, hand me that piano!") and as hard
as he tried he could not break the joint...good enough for me! I use pla
stic 3-lb. coffee container lids for mixing...when the unused epoxy harden
s it snaps right out of the lid and you can reuse the lid. I use the 90 pe
rcent rubbing alcohol to clean my applicator brushes...I 'll grab a handfu
l of cheap 99-cent 1/2 or 1-inch brushes from the local Menards -- which
is like Home Depot, etc...
Yes, use gloves, latex, nitride or whatever, when working with epoxy. Also
, don't breath the dust if sanding excess epoxy from areas adjacent to a
joint, etc....Also if your cans of epoxy get too thick from being a littl
e too cold in your shop you can simply warm it in a pan of warm/hot water.
...all this info is in the West Sytem instructions, I believe...
Fred B.
La Crosse, WI
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: West System epoxy |
| From: | Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Good info! Thanks Fred. I have the West systems already and am glad to have
found out it is usable for this... saves a bit of time and money for me
right now....
Mark
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 10:10 AM, wrote:
> I've been using the West System epoxy with the pumps...works well. I've
> made test joints and even before 24 hours of cure time I gave one test joint
> -- similar to a fuselage longeron and upright joint with 1" by 1" spruce and
> the gussets -- to one of my sons who was into power lifting at the time (500
> lbs dead lift, etc -- i.e. "Al, hand me that piano!") and as hard as he
> tried he could not break the joint...good enough for me! I use plastic
> 3-lb. coffee container lids for mixing...when the unused epoxy hardens it
> snaps right out of the lid and you can reuse the lid. I use the 90 percent
> rubbing alcohol to clean my applicator brushes...I 'll grab a handful of
> cheap 99-cent 1/2 or 1-inch brushes from the local Menards -- which is like
> Home Depot, etc...
>
> Yes, use gloves, latex, nitride or whatever, when working with epoxy. Also,
> don't breath the dust if sanding excess epoxy from areas adjacent to a
> joint, etc....Also if your cans of epoxy get too thick from being a little
> too cold in your shop you can simply warm it in a pan of warm/hot
> water....all this info is in the West Sytem instructions, I believe...
>
> Fred B.
> La Crosse, WI
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
| From: | Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Agreed on the Mocroballoons! Cab-O-Sil is the stuff for strength in
thickening epoxy. Microballoons is a nice, easier to sand filler for
shaping, just as you say!
Mark
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 7:26 AM, David Paule wrote:
>
> Don't use microballoons for structure!
>
> That stuff is inherently weak. It's useful for working adjacent to foam,
> and for places where you want to be able to shape or work the thickened
> epoxy. But it's absolutely not safe for structure.
>
> Use Cab-O-Sil instead.
>
> David Paule
>
>
>> I think I am using 105, and it does set slowly, giving you time to work
>> it. I leave it clamped up for at least 12 hours, usually overnight, and
>> give it not even a light stress test for 24 hours. It has a pot life of
>> 30-45 minutes usually, depending on temperatures. You can thicken it with
>> microballoons to make it less runny and/or better fill cavities. the pot
>> life is less with the balloons, IMO.
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TOM MICHELLE BRANT <tmbrant(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Wire wheel covering |
Don=2C
I replied once but I don't know if it made it through... Anyway - thank yo
u - this is exactly the info I was looking for. I love the look of your co
vered wheels - can't believe the tires are that old.. Just to clarify=2C t
he aluminum disc just rests on the hubs / spokes (as in=2C is not attached
in any way - other than the pull of fabric of course).
Thanks again!
Tom B.
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wire wheel covering
> From: EmchAir(at)aol.com
> Date: Sat=2C 31 Oct 2009 07:48:26 -0700
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Tom B.=2C
>
> Covering the wire wheels really is pretty simple. I made an aluminum dis
c out of some scrap that I had laying around. Probably about 3 1/2" to 4"
in diameter and around .100" thick. I cut a hole in the center that would
fit over the hub and actually just rest up against the spokes. I cut a pie
ce of fabric that was a few inches larger diameter than my rim and cut a ho
le in the center. I glued the aluminum ring to the fabric and placed it ov
er the hub against the spokes then just wrapped and glued the fabric around
the inside of the rim where the bead of the tire contacts the rim. Really
pretty simple. The only bad thing is trying to muscle that tire over the
fabric without messing it up. After a failed attempt I decided to leave th
e tire on the rim and clamp it tight and squezze it to itself so I could ge
t to the inside of the rim. I haven't changed tires yet. When I do I was
thinking I would just change the covering too. However someone at Brodhead
told me a lot o!
> f custom motorcycle shops have a tire mounting machine that actually doe
sn't touch the rim. Needed for all of the custom rims on choppers out ther
e. Might give that a try. Nice thing about motorcycle tires is they usual
ly have more natural rubber in them so they don't rot out as fast as maybe
a car tire might. Those tires are 15 years old. They show no signs of che
cking or cracking yet=2C probably because they stay so dry.
>
> Again a couple of shots to see that disc I'm talking=3B
>
> http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_095.JPG
>
> http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_094.JPG
>
> Big Thanks to Chris Tracy for that fantastic site!!!!!!
> Don Emch
> NX899DE
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270222#270222
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "bryan green" <lgreen1(at)sc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wire wheel covering |
Don what size wheels and tires you got on that puppy and what size axle
do they fit on?
Bryan Green
Elgin SC
----- Original Message -----
From: TOM MICHELLE BRANT
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2009 2:01 PM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Wire wheel covering
Don,
I replied once but I don't know if it made it through... Anyway -
thank you - this is exactly the info I was looking for. I love the look
of your covered wheels - can't believe the tires are that old.. Just to
clarify, the aluminum disc just rests on the hubs / spokes (as in, is
not attached in any way - other than the pull of fabric of course).
Thanks again!
Tom B.
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Wire wheel covering
> From: EmchAir(at)aol.com
> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 07:48:26 -0700
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> Tom B.,
>
> Covering the wire wheels really is pretty simple. I made an aluminum
disc out of some scrap that I had laying around. Probably about 3 1/2"
to 4" in diameter and around .100" thick. I cut a hole in the center
that would fit over the hub and actually just rest up against the
spokes. I cut a piece of fabric that was a few inches larger diameter
than my rim and cut a hole in the center. I glued the aluminum ring to
the fabric and placed it over the hub against the spokes then just
wrapped and glued the fabric around the inside of the rim where the bead
of the tire contacts the rim. Really pretty simple. The only bad thing
is trying to muscle that tire over the fabric without messing it up.
After a failed attempt I decided to leave the tire on the rim and clamp
it tight and squezze it to itself so I could get to the inside of the
rim. I haven't changed tires yet. When I do I was thinking I would just
change the covering too. However someone at Brodhead told me a lot o!
> f custom motorcycle shops have a tire mounting machine that actually
doesn't touch the rim. Needed for all of the custom rims on choppers out
there. Might give that a try. Nice thing about motorcycle tires is they
usually have more natural rubber in them so they don't rot out as fast
as maybe a car tire might. Those tires are 15 years old. They show no
signs of checking or cracking yet, probably because they stay so dry.
>
> Again a couple of shots to see that disc I'm talking;
>
>
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_095.JPG
>
>
http://westcoastpiet.com/images/Don%20Emch/Brodhead__20070720_094.JPG
>
> Big Thanks to Chris Tracy for that fantastic site!!!!!!
> Don Emch
> NX899DE
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270222#270222
>
>
>
Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
>========================
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wire wheel covering |
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
Tom,
Yup, just the pull of the fabric when it is tight holds that disc up against the
spokes. The fabric kinda gets a shape that is a little unique. I think it
would be a lot easier than making aluminum covers. By the way, I have a grease
fitting on the hub that greases the axle. I made sure when the rims were laced
to the hub that that fitting was located radially in the same place as the
valve stem. That way when I covered them I could place an inspection ring on
the inside covering so I could get air to the tire and grease to the hub. Just
a thought. I had bad visions of an inspection cover for that ring flying off
hitting the pilot, passenger or part of the plane when the wheel was spinning,
so I never did put one there, just left it open.
Don E.
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270257#270257
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Willis <timothywillis(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
Thanks for the info on the balloons. No foul yet here; thank God.
-----Original Message-----
>From: David Paule <dpaule(at)frii.com>
>Sent: Oct 31, 2009 9:26 AM
>To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
>
>
>Don't use microballoons for structure!
>
>That stuff is inherently weak. It's useful for working adjacent to foam, and
>for places where you want to be able to shape or work the thickened epoxy.
>But it's absolutely not safe for structure.
>
>Use Cab-O-Sil instead.
>
>David Paule
>
>>
>> I think I am using 105, and it does set slowly, giving you time to work
>> it. I leave it clamped up for at least 12 hours, usually overnight, and
>> give it not even a light stress test for 24 hours. It has a pot life of
>> 30-45 minutes usually, depending on temperatures. You can thicken it with
>> microballoons to make it less runny and/or better fill cavities. the pot
>> life is less with the balloons, IMO.
Tim in central TX
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
| From: | Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com> |
I'm using Raka epoxy, don't know wether it's cheaper or not, I usually order
a gal and a half,
I've used it on other wood working projects, I like the slow cure better it
gives you a lot of time
to work, when it's first mixed it thins out and you can wet out your wood
it's about like olive oil
in vicosity, then after the wood has been wet out for maxium pennetration of
fibers mix silica
into the remaining batch and pack in as much as you can and still leave it
in a peaunut butter
consistincey, doesn't take much clamping as most all epoxy.
I also take a piece of wood such as a gusset and mix the epoxy in a large
tray large
enough to disperse heat build up and to completey submerge the gusset into
the epoxy
while it is of low vicosity, this has two benifits one it pre-wets for
gluing and also it
will completey make that piece of wood impervious to moisture.
Go to raka.com
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Tim Willis wrote:
> timothywillis(at)earthlink.net>
>
> Thanks for the info on the balloons. No foul yet here; thank God.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: David Paule <dpaule(at)frii.com>
> >Sent: Oct 31, 2009 9:26 AM
> >To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
> >
> >
> >Don't use microballoons for structure!
> >
> >That stuff is inherently weak. It's useful for working adjacent to foam,
> and
> >for places where you want to be able to shape or work the thickened epoxy.
> >But it's absolutely not safe for structure.
> >
> >Use Cab-O-Sil instead.
> >
> >David Paule
> >
> >>
> >> I think I am using 105, and it does set slowly, giving you time to work
> >> it. I leave it clamped up for at least 12 hours, usually overnight, and
> >> give it not even a light stress test for 24 hours. It has a pot life of
> >> 30-45 minutes usually, depending on temperatures. You can thicken it
> with
> >> microballoons to make it less runny and/or better fill cavities. the
> pot
> >> life is less with the balloons, IMO.
> Tim in central TX
> >>
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...hello |
| From: | Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com> |
How cool is that!
Russell
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 12:24 AM, jorge lizarraga wrote:
> Im jorge from hanford and trate to con firm if you resive my mail I sed
> if not these is my piet pictured I like now were you build too and what part
> of fresno you live my friend live in siera sky park in herdon in eaa chapter
> 376 ronofs seyou nex
>
> --- On *Fri, 10/30/09, Mark Roberts * wrote:
>
>
> From: Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com>
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
> To: "pietenpol-list"
> Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 6:52 PM
>
> Well, since the job lay off, I am getting pretty stingy with my George
> Washington's, but I want to start gluing rib sticks together and get my ribs
> started.
>
> So, I went to the local dealer in town which that sells T-88 here in
> Fresno, and I just couldn't justify to my wife spending the $21.95 for the 4
> ounce sized bottles. I know there are other acceptable glues out there that
> have the test of time behind them, and I read about them in Tony B's book,
> but I am looking for what advice you all might have regard alternative glues
> I might try at least for a few ribs.
>
> I know building an airplane is a luxury, and probably not for the
> un-employed. BUT, building a few ribs now that I have the wood cut up is not
> that expensive. So, I thought I might ask ya'll about epoxy alternatives
> that you might have used that would be acceptable for ribs. I want epoxy in
> the really stessful places, and the fuse, etc,... but the rib sticks with
> the gussets should be OK with older, tried and proven glues.
>
> Reading Tony's books gives me a start. I just thought I'd pick a few Piet
> Brains for some more advice. I saw a bucket of Plastic Resin glue there for
> about $9 bucks and thought I might go with it to start....
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Mark
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pget="_blank" href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics=========
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...hello |
| From: | Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Hi Jorge!
Yes, I have followed some of your posts along the way. I was hoping to meet
you one day as my project progresses. I have been to see Mike Groah's piet
project, and yours looks like it needs me to come see it too :o)
I am a member of the EAA chapter 376 as well. I used to live right across
the street from Sierra Skypark and was directly under the downwind leg of
the pattern.
I now live in Clovis, and have just started the wood and glue part of the
project...
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 9:24 PM, jorge lizarraga wrote:
> Im jorge from hanford and trate to con firm if you resive my mail I sed if
> not these is my piet pictured I like now were you build too and what part of
> fresno you live my friend live in siera sky park in herdon in eaa chapter
> 376 ronofs seyou nex
>
>
> --- On *Fri, 10/30/09, Mark Roberts * wrote:
>
>
> From: Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com>
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
> To: "pietenpol-list"
> Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 6:52 PM
>
> Well, since the job lay off, I am getting pretty stingy with my George
> Washington's, but I want to start gluing rib sticks together and get my ribs
> started.
>
> So, I went to the local dealer in town which that sells T-88 here in
> Fresno, and I just couldn't justify to my wife spending the $21.95 for the 4
> ounce sized bottles. I know there are other acceptable glues out there that
> have the test of time behind them, and I read about them in Tony B's book,
> but I am looking for what advice you all might have regard alternative glues
> I might try at least for a few ribs.
>
> I know building an airplane is a luxury, and probably not for the
> un-employed. BUT, building a few ribs now that I have the wood cut up is not
> that expensive. So, I thought I might ask ya'll about epoxy alternatives
> that you might have used that would be acceptable for ribs. I want epoxy in
> the really stessful places, and the fuse, etc,... but the rib sticks with
> the gussets should be OK with older, tried and proven glues.
>
> Reading Tony's books gives me a start. I just thought I'd pick a few Piet
> Brains for some more advice. I saw a bucket of Plastic Resin glue there for
> about $9 bucks and thought I might go with it to start....
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Mark
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pget="_blank" href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics=========
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ben Charvet <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net> |
Today I finally got everything ready for the first taxi. I ended up
moving my wing back 4 inches to meet weight and balance, and that
required replacing one of the cross cables between the aft cabanes
because to many threads were showing on the turnbuckle. By the time I
had it ready to taxi it was 1:30 and the airport was pretty much
deserted. I've installed a new Vertex hand-held, and since I have
non-sheilded harnesses on my mags I was worried about radio
interference. Well, I chained down the tail, chocked the wheels and
cranked it up. The radio seems to work perfectly with no engine noise
unless you turn the squelch way down. This was only a slow speed taxi,
but I went up and down the grass strip (1800 ft) at a brisk walking
pace, then ran it up and down the paved taxiway. The tailwheel cables
were a little loose, but thats an easy fix.
I sent my airworthiness application in on Monday, so I'm anxious to get
it ready for the inspection. I've been flying a 54 year old Baby Ace
that is showing its age, so to taxi around in a new airplane I built
myself was quite a thrill. Hang in there builders.. ITS WORTH IT
Ben Charvet
Mims, Fl
NX866BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jack <jack(at)textors.com> |
Great Ben, thanks!
Jack
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 31, 2009, at 8:54 PM, Ben Charvet wrote:
> >
>
> Today I finally got everything ready for the first taxi. I ended up
> moving my wing back 4 inches to meet weight and balance, and that
> required replacing one of the cross cables between the aft cabanes
> because to many threads were showing on the turnbuckle. By the time
> I had it ready to taxi it was 1:30 and the airport was pretty much
> deserted. I've installed a new Vertex hand-held, and since I have
> non-sheilded harnesses on my mags I was worried about radio
> interference. Well, I chained down the tail, chocked the wheels and
> cranked it up. The radio seems to work perfectly with no engine
> noise unless you turn the squelch way down. This was only a slow
> speed taxi, but I went up and down the grass strip (1800 ft) at a
> brisk walking pace, then ran it up and down the paved taxiway. The
> tailwheel cables were a little loose, but thats an easy fix.
>
> I sent my airworthiness application in on Monday, so I'm anxious to
> get it ready for the inspection. I've been flying a 54 year old
> Baby Ace that is showing its age, so to taxi around in a new
> airplane I built myself was quite a thrill. Hang in there
> builders.. ITS WORTH IT
>
> Ben Charvet
> Mims, Fl
> NX866BC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
Mark,
Your post prompted me to remove the inspection covers under the wing of
my Pietenpol this afternoon and take a look at some of the ribs that
were glued together in 1959 (50 years ago!), using Weldwood plastic
resin. I couldn't find a problem with any of the ribs I was able to
check, whether they were glued with Weldwood plastic resin or Aerolite
(urea formaldehide glue which, I think, was developed for the DH
Mosquito). The wing spars are laminated Douglas Fir I-beams using
Aerolite, and still looked good. Polyurethane varnish (three coats) has
provided good protection for 40 years, but the cadmium plating on nuts,
bolts and turnbuckle ends seems to have disappeared, allowing these
parts to show signs of rust. Curiously, the drag/anti-drag 1/8" carbon
steel cables show no sign of rust and the painted steel fittings are
still in good shape.
The airplane has been flying since 1970 and has been hangared 99% of the
time. The hangars have always been of the open tee-type with no doors,
so air movement is almost always present.Our climate here in central
Alberta, Canada is reasonably dry, as I expect it is in Fresno.
In 1959 the choice of adhesives wasn't as extensive as it is today, but
the best one overall was Weldwood resorcinal. It required controlled
working temperatures which I could not maintain, so I settled on
Aerolite which was less critical in this respect, and used Weldwood
plastic resin in some places. Even then, casein glue, which had been for
many years the standard for wooden aircraft construction, was no longer
in favour and I refused to use it. Like you, I was operating on a tight
budget and didn't have a lot of money to throw around. But I had been
taught in aircraft maintenance school that proper joint fitting,
adequate protection from moisture, provision for drainage and
ventilation are essential. Even casein glue did well when these
requirements were met, so I didn't worry too much about using Weldwood
plastic resin.
Today, there many good adhesives available. If I were to build another
Pietenpol, or any wooden airplane, I would choose T-88. I have used T-88
for re-gluing joints after other glues had failed and find it works well
for this. And I use it for violin repairs and construction in places
where there will never be a need to separate parts. Hide glue
(definitely not recommended for aircraft work) is used in such places.
I'm not sure I would use plastic resin for aircraft anymore because I
have heard it is no longer as good as the stuff Weldwood used to make
and there are better adhesives around, anyway.
Having said all this, perhaps the most important thing is to protect the
wooden parts and glued joints from water, dirt, etc. by using a good
coating (preferably an epoxy type) and provide drainage and ventilation.
Hangaring your airplane is essential---even if it is in a basic tee-type
shelter. If you can afford it, use T-88. With rib construction, a little
will go a long way---provided you don't waste it by mixing too much at a
time. Good luck with your project and I hope you have as much fun with
your Pietenpol as I have had with mine.
Cheers,
Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | TOM MICHELLE BRANT <tmbrant(at)msn.com> |
Ben=2C
Congrats on a successful taxi! That's one step closer to the big day - act
ually today was a big day too. Keep us posted. Looking forward to the fir
st flight notification.
Tom B.
> Date: Sat=2C 31 Oct 2009 21:54:38 -0400
> From: bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net
> To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: First Taxi!
>
>
>
> Today I finally got everything ready for the first taxi. I ended up
> moving my wing back 4 inches to meet weight and balance=2C and that
> required replacing one of the cross cables between the aft cabanes
> because to many threads were showing on the turnbuckle. By the time I
> had it ready to taxi it was 1:30 and the airport was pretty much
> deserted. I've installed a new Vertex hand-held=2C and since I have
> non-sheilded harnesses on my mags I was worried about radio
> interference. Well=2C I chained down the tail=2C chocked the wheels and
> cranked it up. The radio seems to work perfectly with no engine noise
> unless you turn the squelch way down. This was only a slow speed taxi=2C
> but I went up and down the grass strip (1800 ft) at a brisk walking
> pace=2C then ran it up and down the paved taxiway. The tailwheel cables
> were a little loose=2C but thats an easy fix.
>
> I sent my airworthiness application in on Monday=2C so I'm anxious to get
> it ready for the inspection. I've been flying a 54 year old Baby Ace
> that is showing its age=2C so to taxi around in a new airplane I built
> myself was quite a thrill. Hang in there builders.. ITS WORTH IT
>
> Ben Charvet
> Mims=2C Fl
> NX866BC
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jorge lizarraga <flightwood(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...hello part 2 |
haaa, you now my fater wes- nelson and my mader jeany they have a sesna 1
72 whit american flag in his tail i thin is bery hapy now you again my proy
ect not is a museum pise is far from dad but I want yust a plane for fly sa
fei sen you later more pictured im in hanford 1012 n irwin st, your are rea
ly welcom to my plase look the proyect is best in these time saturdays or s
undays best for you like ,all most all sundays and saturdays travel to sier
ra sky park to wes hause ok seyou nex jorge.
--- On Sat, 10/31/09, Mark Roberts wrote:
From: Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...hello
Date: Saturday, October 31, 2009, 4:35 PM
Hi Jorge!
Yes, I have followed some of your posts along the way. I was hoping to meet
you one day as my project progresses. I have been to see Mike Groah's piet
project, and yours looks like it needs me to come see it too :o)
=0A
I am a member of the EAA chapter 376 as well. I used to live right across t
he street from Sierra Skypark and was directly under the downwind leg of th
e pattern.
I now live in Clovis, and have just started the wood and glue part of the p
roject...
=0A
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 9:24 PM, jorge lizarraga wro
te:
=0A=0AIm jorge from hanford and trate to con firm if you resive- my mail
I sed if not these is my piet pictured I like now were you build too and wh
at part of fresno you live my friend live in siera sky park in herdon in ea
a chapter 376 ronofs seyou nex=0A
--- On Fri, 10/30/09, Mark Roberts wrote:
=0A
From: Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Acceptable Glue for Ribs...
=0ADate: Friday, October 30, 2009, 6:52 PM
Well, since the job lay off, I am getting pretty stingy with my George Wash
ington's, but I want to start gluing rib sticks together and get my ribs st
arted.
=0A
So, I went to the=0A local dealer in town which that sells T-88 here in Fre
sno, and I just couldn't justify to my wife spending the $21.95 for the 4 o
unce sized bottles. I know there are other acceptable glues out there that
have the test of time behind them, and I read about them in Tony B's book,
but I am looking for what advice you all might have regard alternative glue
s I might try at least for a few ribs.
=0A=0A
I know building an airplane is a luxury, and probably not for the un-employ
ed. BUT, building a few ribs now that I have the wood cut up is not that ex
pensive. So, I thought I might ask ya'll about epoxy alternatives that you
might have used that would be acceptable for ribs. I want epoxy in the real
ly stessful places, and the fuse, etc,... but the rib sticks with the gusse
ts should be OK with older, tried and proven glues.
=0A=0A
Reading Tony's books gives me a start. I just thought I'd pick a few Piet B
rains for some more advice. I saw a bucket of Plastic Resin glue there for
about $9 bucks and thought I might go with it to start....
=0A=0A
Thoughts?
Mark
=0A=0Ahttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pget="_blank" href="http://for
ums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics=========
=0A=0A=0A=0A
=0A=0A
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | NX7229R is on her feet again. |
| From: | Andrew M Eldredge <andrew.eldredge(at)gmail.com> |
Finally got beyond the split axle gear fittings. Major mental victory. The
damage is gone, now it's mainly the list of things to fix/tweak while I
still have it apart..
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=7270&id=1745329744&l=e8fda70973
--
Andrew M. Eldredge
Sahuarita, AZ
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | PLEASE READ - Matronics Email List Fund Raiser During |
November!
Dear Listers,
Each November I hold a PBS-like fund raiser to support the continued operation and upgrade of the List services at Matronics. It's solely through the Contributions of List members that these Matronics Lists are possible. There is NO advertising to support the Lists. You might have noticed the conspicuous lack of flashing banners and annoying pop-ups on the Matronics Email List email messages and web site pages such as the Matronics List Forums ( http://forums.matronics.com ), the List Wiki ( http://wiki.matronics.com), or other related pages such as the List Search Engine ( http://www.matronics.com/search ), the List Browser ( http://www.matronics.com/listbrowse ), etc. This is because I believe in a List experience that is completely about the sport we all enjoy - namely Airplanes and not about annoying advertisements.
During the month of November I will be sending out List messages every couple of
days reminding everyone that the Fund Raiser is underway. I ask for your patience
and understanding during the Fund Raiser and throughout these regular messages.
The Fund Raiser is only financial support mechanism I have to pay all
of the bills associated with running these lists. Your personal Contribution
counts!
Once again, this year I've got a terrific line up of free gifts to go along with
the various Contribution levels. Most all of these gifts have been provided
by some of the vary members and vendors that you'll find on Matronics Lists and
have been either donated or provided at substantially discounted rates.
This year, these generous people include Bob Nuckolls of the AeroElectric Connection (http://www.aeroelectric.com/), Andy Gold of the Builder's Bookstore (http://www.buildersbooks.com/), and Jon Croke of HomebuiltHELP (http://www.homebuilthelp.com/).
These are extremely generous guys and I encourage you to visit their respective
web sites. Each one offers a unique and very useful aviation-related product
line. I would like publicly to thank Bob, Andy, and Jon for their generous support
of the Lists again this year!!
You can make your List Contribution using any one of three secure methods this
year including using a credit card, PayPal, or by personal check. All three methods
afford you the opportunity to select one of this year's free gifts with
a qualifying Contribution amount!!
To make your Contribution, please visit the secure site below:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
I would like to thank everyone in advance for their generous financial AND moral
support over the years!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bentoncountycable.net> |
Way to go Ben!
Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Charvet" <bcharvet(at)bellsouth.net>
Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2009 7:54 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: First Taxi!
>
> Today I finally got everything ready for the first taxi. I ended up
> moving my wing back 4 inches to meet weight and balance, and that
> required replacing one of the cross cables between the aft cabanes
> because to many threads were showing on the turnbuckle. By the time I
> had it ready to taxi it was 1:30 and the airport was pretty much
> deserted. I've installed a new Vertex hand-held, and since I have
> non-sheilded harnesses on my mags I was worried about radio
> interference. Well, I chained down the tail, chocked the wheels and
> cranked it up. The radio seems to work perfectly with no engine noise
> unless you turn the squelch way down. This was only a slow speed taxi,
> but I went up and down the grass strip (1800 ft) at a brisk walking
> pace, then ran it up and down the paved taxiway. The tailwheel cables
> were a little loose, but thats an easy fix.
>
> I sent my airworthiness application in on Monday, so I'm anxious to get
> it ready for the inspection. I've been flying a 54 year old Baby Ace
> that is showing its age, so to taxi around in a new airplane I built
> myself was quite a thrill. Hang in there builders.. ITS WORTH IT
>
> Ben Charvet
> Mims, Fl
> NX866BC
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
07:53:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
Way to go, Ben! Keep sending progress reports. It's great to see a new
Pietenpol come to life.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ben Charvet
Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2009 9:55 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: First Taxi!
Today I finally got everything ready for the first taxi. I ended up
moving my wing back 4 inches to meet weight and balance, and that
required replacing one of the cross cables between the aft cabanes
because to many threads were showing on the turnbuckle. By the time I
had it ready to taxi it was 1:30 and the airport was pretty much
deserted. I've installed a new Vertex hand-held, and since I have
non-sheilded harnesses on my mags I was worried about radio
interference. Well, I chained down the tail, chocked the wheels and
cranked it up. The radio seems to work perfectly with no engine noise
unless you turn the squelch way down. This was only a slow speed taxi,
but I went up and down the grass strip (1800 ft) at a brisk walking
pace, then ran it up and down the paved taxiway. The tailwheel cables
were a little loose, but thats an easy fix.
I sent my airworthiness application in on Monday, so I'm anxious to get
it ready for the inspection. I've been flying a 54 year old Baby Ace
that is showing its age, so to taxi around in a new airplane I built
myself was quite a thrill. Hang in there builders.. ITS WORTH IT
Ben Charvet
Mims, Fl
NX866BC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Gear strut clearance |
| From: | steven sadler <steven244sadler(at)gmail.com> |
Jack,
I had the same concerns as you. Here is how I mounted my springs. Seems to
work, but I am not flying yet. I couldn't think of any reason why a high
mount would be any advantage other than slightly less drag down low.
Compared to the air resistance of the wheels it should be insignificant.
Steve
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Jack wrote:
> I plan to stagger the gear strut attach points to allow clearance where
> they cross. Also think I will mount the strut springs down low like the
> attached picture. Does it seem like this will work?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jack
>
> DSM
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack" <jack(at)textors.com> |
| Subject: | Strut tubing sizes |
Still working on the particulars of my struts. Tying to determine the
correct size and thickness of the tubing to order. Of the 3 diagrams I've
looked at, the sizes differ. For the inside tube to slide freely within the
outside tube how much clearance (difference) should I have? The HV Design
has .06 clearance. Bingelis clearance is .009. The Debolt drawing is also
.009 which seems tight. Wish I hade the tubing on-hand so I could try.
Then I just need to figure the springs!
Thanks!
Jack
DSM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Paule" <dpaule(at)frii.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strut tubing sizes |
Don't forget to allow for paint.
David Paule
From: Jack
Still working on the particulars of my struts. Tying to determine the
correct size and thickness of the tubing to order. Of the 3 diagrams
I've looked at, the sizes differ. For the inside tube to slide freely
within the outside tube how much clearance (difference) should I have?
The HV Design has .06 clearance. Bingelis clearance is .009. The
Debolt drawing is also .009 which seems tight. Wish I hade the tubing
on-hand so I could try. Then I just need to figure the springs!
Thanks!
Jack
DSM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Strut tubing sizes |
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
Hey Jack,
I guess I'm not familiar with the "HV Design" and the "Debolt Drawing", and I don't
remember what the plans call for. I can check my plans and see what it calls
for and translate to decimal wall thickness. Off the top of my head though,
.060" would be a huge amount of clearance fit. The .009" dimension sounds
much better.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270442#270442
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack" <jack(at)textors.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strut tubing sizes |
Don, David and Steven,
Thanks a bunch for the good thoughts! Never even thought about paint.
Steven do you remember the tubing sizes and thickness for your gear?
Jack
DSM
Hey Jack,
I guess I'm not familiar with the "HV Design" and the "Debolt Drawing", and
I don't remember what the plans call for. I can check my plans and see what
it calls for and translate to decimal wall thickness. Off the top of my
head though, .060" would be a huge amount of clearance fit. The .009"
dimension sounds much better.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270442#270442
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
07:38:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack" <jack(at)textors.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strut tubing sizes |
Here are the drawings...
Jack
DSM
Hey Jack,
I guess I'm not familiar with the "HV Design" and the "Debolt Drawing", and
I don't remember what the plans call for. I can check my plans and see what
it calls for and translate to decimal wall thickness. Off the top of my
head though, .060" would be a huge amount of clearance fit. The .009"
dimension sounds much better.
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270442#270442
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
07:38:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bentoncountycable.net> |
| Subject: | A cool monring flight |
Tennessee has had more than it's fair share of wind and rain this year,
making it iffy for having a good day for flying when I had the day off.
Got some time in last night, but it was windy and landing was with a 90
degree cross wind. Forcast for today was clear with wind 5 to 10.
Showed up at the airport shortly after sunrise. Sky was severe clear,
no wind and the temp was 32 degrees.
N502R seemed as eager as I, and started on the first flip of the prop.
Spent more time than normal warming up the engine, then taxied to runway
4. As I taxied out I noticed that the WWF's ("warm weather flyers")
were all setting inside the FBO, probably bitching about the cold
weather.
The Ol' Piet and I spent a little over an hour in the air. Me, just
enjoying flying and the beautiful fall colors and the Ol' Piet obviously
pretending that she was a Super Cub, climbing like a home sick angel in
the cool air.
Made my landing (not the best I've ever made but not the worst either)
and taxied to my hanger (the WWF's were still sitting in the FBO). I
wouldn't have missed that flight for anything. What a day!
I really encourage Piet owners not to put their planes away during cool
weather, but to get out and enjoy the great flying that cool weather
brings. Your Piet will love you for it. If you have questions about
what to wear for warmth and what to do to preheat the engine, there are
plenty of cool weather flyers here on this list that will be glad to
offer suggestions.
Gene in Beautiful Tennessee
N502R (just don't tell her she's not a Super Cub)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | A cool monring flight |
Gene, I know all about the rain you've had. My RV-4 has been sitting in a
hangar at MKL since October 8th. I flew it there to visit my Mom, and had
to leave it and come home commercial because of the constant IFR conditions
in west Tennessee, or over the mountains between there and Raleigh. I'm
hoping to come get it this week.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene & Tammy
Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 11:52 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: A cool monring flight
Tennessee has had more than it's fair share of wind and rain this year,
making it iffy for having a good day for flying when I had the day off. Got
some time in last night, but it was windy and landing was with a 90 degree
cross wind. Forcast for today was clear with wind 5 to 10.
Showed up at the airport shortly after sunrise. Sky was severe clear, no
wind and the temp was 32 degrees.
N502R seemed as eager as I, and started on the first flip of the prop.
Spent more time than normal warming up the engine, then taxied to runway 4.
As I taxied out I noticed that the WWF's ("warm weather flyers") were all
setting inside the FBO, probably bitching about the cold weather.
The Ol' Piet and I spent a little over an hour in the air. Me, just
enjoying flying and the beautiful fall colors and the Ol' Piet obviously
pretending that she was a Super Cub, climbing like a home sick angel in the
cool air.
Made my landing (not the best I've ever made but not the worst either) and
taxied to my hanger (the WWF's were still sitting in the FBO). I wouldn't
have missed that flight for anything. What a day!
I really encourage Piet owners not to put their planes away during cool
weather, but to get out and enjoy the great flying that cool weather brings.
Your Piet will love you for it. If you have questions about what to wear
for warmth and what to do to preheat the engine, there are plenty of cool
weather flyers here on this list that will be glad to offer suggestions.
Gene in Beautiful Tennessee
N502R (just don't tell her she's not a Super Cub)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gene & Tammy" <zharvey(at)bentoncountycable.net> |
| Subject: | Re: A cool monring flight |
Any chance you can make it to OM4? We have the cheapest fuel around
(100LL $3.60 a gal.).
Gene
731-336-6893
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack Phillips
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 11:13 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: A cool monring flight
Gene, I know all about the rain you've had. My RV-4 has been sitting
in a hangar at MKL since October 8th. I flew it there to visit my Mom,
and had to leave it and come home commercial because of the constant IFR
conditions in west Tennessee, or over the mountains between there and
Raleigh. I'm hoping to come get it this week.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene &
Tammy
Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 11:52 AM
To: pietenpol-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Pietenpol-List: A cool monring flight
Tennessee has had more than it's fair share of wind and rain this
year, making it iffy for having a good day for flying when I had the day
off. Got some time in last night, but it was windy and landing was with
a 90 degree cross wind. Forcast for today was clear with wind 5 to 10.
Showed up at the airport shortly after sunrise. Sky was severe clear,
no wind and the temp was 32 degrees.
N502R seemed as eager as I, and started on the first flip of the prop.
Spent more time than normal warming up the engine, then taxied to
runway 4. As I taxied out I noticed that the WWF's ("warm weather
flyers") were all setting inside the FBO, probably bitching about the
cold weather.
The Ol' Piet and I spent a little over an hour in the air. Me, just
enjoying flying and the beautiful fall colors and the Ol' Piet obviously
pretending that she was a Super Cub, climbing like a home sick angel in
the cool air.
Made my landing (not the best I've ever made but not the worst either)
and taxied to my hanger (the WWF's were still sitting in the FBO). I
wouldn't have missed that flight for anything. What a day!
I really encourage Piet owners not to put their planes away during
cool weather, but to get out and enjoy the great flying that cool
weather brings. Your Piet will love you for it. If you have questions
about what to wear for warmth and what to do to preheat the engine,
there are plenty of cool weather flyers here on this list that will be
glad to offer suggestions.
Gene in Beautiful Tennessee
N502R (just don't tell her she's not a Super Cub)
www.aeroelectric.comwww.homebuilthelp.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contrib
ution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
11/01/09 07:38:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | A cool monring flight |
Doubtful. I'll refuel it with the FBO in Jackson, since they've kept it in
their hangar for the last 3 weeks. Possible I might go on Tuesday and wait
until Thursday to leave, so if I do that I might be able to stop in for a
visit. I'd like to see your Pietenpol. Do you ever fly into MKL?
Jack
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene & Tammy
Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: A cool monring flight
Any chance you can make it to OM4? We have the cheapest fuel around (100LL
$3.60 a gal.).
Gene
731-336-6893
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack <mailto:pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> Phillips
Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 11:13 AM
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: A cool monring flight
Gene, I know all about the rain you've had. My RV-4 has been sitting in a
hangar at MKL since October 8th. I flew it there to visit my Mom, and had
to leave it and come home commercial because of the constant IFR conditions
in west Tennessee, or over the mountains between there and Raleigh. I'm
hoping to come get it this week.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
_____
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gene & Tammy
Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 11:52 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: A cool monring flight
Tennessee has had more than it's fair share of wind and rain this year,
making it iffy for having a good day for flying when I had the day off. Got
some time in last night, but it was windy and landing was with a 90 degree
cross wind. Forcast for today was clear with wind 5 to 10.
Showed up at the airport shortly after sunrise. Sky was severe clear, no
wind and the temp was 32 degrees.
N502R seemed as eager as I, and started on the first flip of the prop.
Spent more time than normal warming up the engine, then taxied to runway 4.
As I taxied out I noticed that the WWF's ("warm weather flyers") were all
setting inside the FBO, probably bitching about the cold weather.
The Ol' Piet and I spent a little over an hour in the air. Me, just
enjoying flying and the beautiful fall colors and the Ol' Piet obviously
pretending that she was a Super Cub, climbing like a home sick angel in the
cool air.
Made my landing (not the best I've ever made but not the worst either) and
taxied to my hanger (the WWF's were still sitting in the FBO). I wouldn't
have missed that flight for anything. What a day!
I really encourage Piet owners not to put their planes away during cool
weather, but to get out and enjoy the great flying that cool weather brings.
Your Piet will love you for it. If you have questions about what to wear
for warmth and what to do to preheat the engine, there are plenty of cool
weather flyers here on this list that will be glad to offer suggestions.
Gene in Beautiful Tennessee
N502R (just don't tell her she's not a Super Cub)
www.aeroelectric.com
www.homebuilthelp.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com
/Navigator?Pietenpol-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
_____
- Release Date: 11/01/09 07:38:00
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Strut tubing sizes |
| From: | "Don Emch" <EmchAir(at)aol.com> |
Jack,
I like the Debolt drawing. I actually recognize that from a past Frank Pavliga
Sr. newsletter. If I was doing springs that is how I would do it. .009" clearance
fit is plenty, even with paint. That will soon wear off though. I'd just
keep it greased up in there. Every now and then I think of making a spring
gear for mine. Those bungees can be a real pain to wrap. I just like the "Pietenpol-ish"
look to them though.
Good luck!
Don Emch
NX899DE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270475#270475
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Strut tubing sizes |
| From: | steven sadler <steven244sadler(at)gmail.com> |
Jack,
I used the drawing (and the exact tubing sizes) shown in the drawing "strut
2" that you posted. The main difference is that I made the long pieces from
5/8" tubing and the shorter ones from 3/4". Basically I reversed the
drawing. I also used "U" shape ends as per the pietenpol drawings instead of
the closed cylinder as shown on the right side end of the drawing "strut 2"
so that the end would fit over the fittings from the piet drawings. The U
shaped ends are fairly easy to make with a small hydraulic press and could
probably be made with a vise as well. I can give you details of that if you
want.
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Jack wrote:
> Here are the drawings...
> Jack
> DSM
>
> Hey Jack,
>
> I guess I'm not familiar with the "HV Design" and the "Debolt Drawing", and
> I don't remember what the plans call for. I can check my plans and see
> what
> it calls for and translate to decimal wall thickness. Off the top of my
> head though, .060" would be a huge amount of clearance fit. The .009"
> dimension sounds much better.
>
> Don Emch
> NX899DE
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270442#270442
>
>
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> 07:38:00
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Skip Gadd" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Strut tubing sizes |
Jack,
Just use .058 tube for the outside tube and the next smaller size for the inside
and it will work. I used .058 for both, but have not flown my Piet yet.
Skip
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack
Sent: 11/1/2009 10:15:25 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Strut tubing sizes
Still working on the particulars of my struts. Tying to determine the correct
size and thickness of the tubing to order. Of the 3 diagrams Ive looked at, the
sizes differ. For the inside tube to slide freely within the outside tube
how much clearance (difference) should I have? The HV Design has .06 clearance.
Bingelis clearance is .009. The Debolt drawing is also .009 which seems tight.
Wish I hade the tubing on-hand so I could try. Then I just need to figure
the springs!
Thanks!
Jack
DSM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Skip Gadd" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
Flew Ed deLancy's Piet N6926J today. Ed bought the plane, a one piece wing
A65 Piet from northern MN. He brought it back to WV on a trailer just after
Brodhead this past summer. The plane was reported to have one hour. He
worked on the thing several hours a day from then till now to get it
trimmed and in good flying shape. Ed is an A&P, IA, CFII and airline pilot
but not much taildragger time so I did the honers. Did some tail up fast
taxi work 2 days ago and told Ed it was ready to fly. We put the cowl on
and waited for the wind to calm down, it never did. Today was clear as a
bell and at about 4:30 PM about 50 degrees and winds almost nill. It was my
plan to get the tail up and do a few more fast taxi's. The tail came up,
pulled the throttle back a little to keep it on the runway and next thing I
knew it was flying. I moved the stick very gently one side of center to the
other to varify ailerons worked, they did so added back in some throttle.
The plane flys great! The only problem was the little flapper thing on the
pitot did not move so no airspeed. The Piet flys so much like my GN-1 that
wasn't a problem. We will get that fixed and put some more time on it
tomorrow.
Hales Landing now has 2 flying Piets!
Skip
skipgadd(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Holland <at7000ft(at)gmail.com> |
Congrats Skip, nice work.
Rick
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Skip Gadd wrote:
>
> Flew Ed deLancy's Piet N6926J today. Ed bought the plane, a one piece wing
> A65 Piet from northern MN. He brought it back to WV on a trailer just after
> Brodhead this past summer. The plane was reported to have one hour. He
> worked on the thing several hours a day from then till now to get it
> trimmed and in good flying shape. Ed is an A&P, IA, CFII and airline pilot
> but not much taildragger time so I did the honers. Did some tail up fast
> taxi work 2 days ago and told Ed it was ready to fly. We put the cowl on
> and waited for the wind to calm down, it never did. Today was clear as a
> bell and at about 4:30 PM about 50 degrees and winds almost nill. It was my
> plan to get the tail up and do a few more fast taxi's. The tail came up,
> pulled the throttle back a little to keep it on the runway and next thing I
> knew it was flying. I moved the stick very gently one side of center to the
> other to varify ailerons worked, they did so added back in some throttle.
> The plane flys great! The only problem was the little flapper thing on the
> pitot did not move so no airspeed. The Piet flys so much like my GN-1 that
> wasn't a problem. We will get that fixed and put some more time on it
> tomorrow.
> Hales Landing now has 2 flying Piets!
> Skip
>
>
> skipgadd(at)earthlink.net
>
>
--
Rick Holland
Castle Rock, Colorado
"Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers, that smell bad"
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: West System epoxy |
| From: | "chase143" <chase143(at)aol.com> |
Hello Fred,
West System is good stuff (I use it often on my wooden boat). Just fyi, one issue
which was brought to my attention and well worth understanding is Amine Blush,
which is a waxy by product which occurs on the surface as the epoxy cures.
West System is one of these epoxies, and in wooden boat circles, a common phenomenon
we live with, but take precautions. Whenever attaching epoxy to epoxy,
it should be cleaned off and then rough sanded first, otherwise adhesion may
be compromised. A quick search on the internet will provide all the info anyone
needs (if you are not already familiar). Nothing to get excited about, just
something to be aware of. Its one reason I went with System 3, it does not produce
Amine Blush by-product upon curing. Both good epoxies (IMHO), just fyi.
Keep up the building!
Steve
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270574#270574
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Czaplicki <fishin3(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | no longer needed |
Medical problems has curtailed my flying activities so it=99s time to
part with a few items that have served me well. Thought I=99d offer
them to the Pietenpol community first before they went on eBay.=0AI have a
Magellan 315 GPS with aviation database, has windshield suction and cig lig
hter power cord.=0AAlso have Icom ICA3 transciever with belt clip, extra ba
ttery pak, cig lighter power cord, wall battery charger and headset adaptor
. Both has owner user manuals. Both for $225 plus shipping
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | 106 years ago today- Prelude to flight |
| From: | helspersew(at)aol.com |
>From the diary of Orville Wright:
Saturday, October 31st, 1903
Kitty Hawk, N.C.
Trussed skids under machine and began work on frame for tail. Wind light
Sunday, November 1st, 1903
Will and Spratt made trip to woods. Birds have mostly left. Mr. Daniels of
Life Savers Service visited us and brought letters from O. Chanute and Ka
te. Mr. Chanute is to leave today for Washington, where he expects to meet
Mr. Alexander. Wind light.
(Note: The Wrights never "worked" on Sundays. This includes working on the
ir machine or flight testing.)
Monday, November 2nd, 1903
Began work of placing engine on machine, also uprights for screws. Telegra
phed Mr. Chanute telling him that he and Mr. Alexander would be welcome to
visit us after 5th of month. Wind still light. Probably 4 meters.
Wilbur Wright to Octave Chanute (Telegram)
Yourself and Mr. Alexander welcome after November 5th. Bring abundant bedd
ing.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: West System epoxy |
| From: | Robert Ray <rray032003(at)gmail.com> |
Raka is also a very low Amine if any, however the epoxy to epoxy
joint should be sanded for adhesion, also I would not glue wood to aluminum
with out fasteners like bolts screws or nails, the aluminum will corrode
over the years under the epoxy and result in a weak joint.
my 02 cents worth
Russell
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:53 AM, chase143 wrote:
>
> Hello Fred,
> West System is good stuff (I use it often on my wooden boat). Just fyi, o
ne
> issue which was brought to my attention and well worth understanding is
> =93Amine Blush=94, which is a waxy by product which occurs on the surface
as the
> epoxy cures. West System is one of these epoxies, and in wooden boat
> circles, a common phenomenon we live with, but take precautions. Wheneve
r
> attaching epoxy to epoxy, it should be cleaned off and then rough sanded
> first, otherwise adhesion may be compromised. A quick search on the inter
net
> will provide all the info anyone needs (if you are not already familiar).
> Nothing to get excited about, just something to be aware of. It=92s one r
eason
> I went with System 3, it does not produce Amine Blush by-product upon
> curing. Both good epoxies (IMHO), just fyi.
> Keep up the building!
> Steve
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270574#270574
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Oscar Zuniga <taildrags(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Strut tubing sizes |
The gearlegs and spring struts on 41CC had paint on them but it goes pretty fast
on the spring struts where one tube moves inside the other so don't worry about
paint... just keep the clearances tight and grease up the fittings when you
assemble them.
As far as position of the springs or bungees on the struts, I prefer to keep things
up and out of the way because I like flying off of grass and if the springs
or anything else are down low on the gear legs, they pick up grass and dust.
Just my preference, and apparently Corky's too.
PS to Skip- I hope you gave a loud "YEEEHAAAAWWW!" as you flew that new Piet around
the patch! It's great to see that new ones are taking to the air every day
now.
Oscar Zuniga
Air Camper NX41CC
San Antonio, TX
mailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.com
website at http://www.flysquirrel.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: West System epoxy |
| From: | "John Recine" <amsafetyc(at)aol.com> |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________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | November List Fund Raiser |
A couple of years ago I implemented an automatic "squelch button" of sorts for
the Fund Raiser messages. Here's how it works... As soon as a List member makes
a Contribution through the Matronics Fund Raiser web site, he or she will
instantly cease to receive these Fund Raiser messages for the rest of the month!
Its just that simple. Don't you wish PBS worked that way! :-)
I really do appreciate each and every one of your individual Contributions to support
the Lists. It is your support that enables me to upgrade the hardware
and software that are required to run a List Site such as this one. It also goes
to pay for the commercial-grade Internet connection and to pay the huge electric
bill to keep the computer gear running and the air conditioner powered
on. I run all of the Matronics Email List and Forums sites here locally which
allows me to control and monitor every aspect of the system for the utmost in
reliably and performance.
Your personal Contribution matters because, when combined with other Listers such
as yourself, it pays the bills to keep this site up and running. I accept
exactly ZERO advertising dollars for the Matronics Lists sites. I can't stand
the pop-up ads and all other commercials that are so prevalent on the Internet
these days and I particularly don't want to have it on my Email List sites.
If you appreciate the ad-free, grass-roots, down-home feel of the Matronics Email
Lists, please make a Contribution to keep it that way!!
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
[Note that there are certain circumstances where you might still see a Contribution
related message. For example, if someone replies to one of the messages,
when using the List Browse feature, or when accessing List message via the Forum.
The system keys on the given email address and since most of these are anonymous
public access methods, there is no simple way to filter them.]
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Skip Gadd" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
Thanks for the comments guys, Oscar, I did fly over the field on the third
flight pulled the throttle back and yelled down, the engine going quiet got
their attention and they said they could hear me just like I was standing
next to them.
Attached a picture of the Piet flying yesterday.
The Piet has a screen door spring attached to the elevator bell crank. The
forward end of the spring was attached with wire to the turtle deck
bulkhead, no adjustment in flight. The spring held the elevator about level
with the horizontal stab. In flight you had to hold forward elevator to fly
level. We disconnected the forward end of the spring and tied it up out of
the way so it would put no pressure on the bell crank. Now you have to hold
up elevator. We are thinking of ether taking the spring out and installing
a trim tab on the elevator, or trying to adjust the spring so the Piet flys
hands off with 5 to 7 gallons of fuel in the cowl tank.
Skip
skipgadd(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: West System epoxy |
| From: | Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Thanks for this bit of info!
I always sand epoxy to get better adhesion, but I didn't know the real
"why"... Now I do!
Mark
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:53 AM, chase143 wrote:
>
> Hello Fred,
> West System is good stuff (I use it often on my wooden boat). Just fyi, o
ne
> issue which was brought to my attention and well worth understanding is
> =93Amine Blush=94, which is a waxy by product which occurs on the surface
as the
> epoxy cures. West System is one of these epoxies, and in wooden boat
> circles, a common phenomenon we live with, but take precautions. Wheneve
r
> attaching epoxy to epoxy, it should be cleaned off and then rough sanded
> first, otherwise adhesion may be compromised. A quick search on the inter
net
> will provide all the info anyone needs (if you are not already familiar).
> Nothing to get excited about, just something to be aware of. It=92s one r
eason
> I went with System 3, it does not produce Amine Blush by-product upon
> curing. Both good epoxies (IMHO), just fyi.
> Keep up the building!
> Steve
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270574#270574
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Acceptable Glue for Ribs... |
| From: | Mark Roberts <mark.rbrts1(at)gmail.com> |
Hey Graham!
Thanks for the feedback. At times, I wonder if my thinking and questions are
too mundane and stupid (I know: no such thing as stupid questions, but there
are some pretty bad ones :o) but now that I am actually beginning the build,
I run into things that I had not thought about, even when building in my
mind at night when trying to sleep.
I had planned to use T-88, and probably will when I get more involved with
the project as my income changes. I am one of the vast unemployed now having
been laid off 5 weeks ago, so I have time on my hands (looking for a career
job after 3 lay offs in 5 years equating to 4 jobs in 5 years looks
suspicious and "what's wrong with him" on the resume is making for no phone
calls off the job boards). So, I'd like to pass some of the time gluing
sticks together and started cutting the wood.
Now that I have the wood cut, I am starting the gluing and found that the
West Systems epoxy is being used to build. I think I will try that as I have
it already in the shop. I used to make fiberglass molds for R/C sailplanes
and still have it around.
Thanks for the feedback again. I am glad to know the longevity of the wooden
projects, even when not housed in a fully enclosed hanger. I worried about
that as there is simply no hanger room at the airport where I plan to have
the plane. However, there are some shelters there and that is where I will
try to store it (I have a ways to go for that problem!).
Thanks again!
Mark
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Graham Hansen <ghans@cable-lynx.net> wrote:
> Mark,
>
> Your post prompted me to remove the inspection covers under the wing of my
> Pietenpol this afternoon and take a look at some of the ribs that were glued
> together in 1959 (50 years ago!), using Weldwood plastic resin. I couldn't
> find a problem with any of the ribs I was able to check, whether they were
> glued with Weldwood plastic resin or Aerolite (urea formaldehide glue which,
> I think, was developed for the DH Mosquito). The wing spars are laminated
> Douglas Fir I-beams using Aerolite, and still looked good. Polyurethane
> varnish (three coats) has provided good protection for 40 years, but the
> cadmium plating on nuts, bolts and turnbuckle ends seems to have
> disappeared, allowing these parts to show signs of rust. Curiously, the
> drag/anti-drag 1/8" carbon steel cables show no sign of rust and the painted
> steel fittings are still in good shape.
>
> The airplane has been flying since 1970 and has been hangared 99% of the
> time. The hangars have always been of the open tee-type with no doors, so
> air movement is almost always present.Our climate here in central Alberta,
> Canada is reasonably dry, as I expect it is in Fresno.
>
> In 1959 the choice of adhesives wasn't as extensive as it is today, but the
> best one overall was Weldwood resorcinal. It required controlled working
> temperatures which I could not maintain, so I settled on Aerolite which was
> less critical in this respect, and used Weldwood plastic resin in some
> places. Even then, casein glue, which had been for many years the standard
> for wooden aircraft construction, was no longer in favour and I refused to
> use it. Like you, I was operating on a tight budget and didn't have a lot of
> money to throw around. But I had been taught in aircraft maintenance school
> that proper joint fitting, adequate protection from moisture, provision
> for drainage and ventilation are essential. Even casein glue did well when
> these requirements were met, so I didn't worry too much about using Weldwood
> plastic resin.
>
> Today, there many good adhesives available. If I were to build another
> Pietenpol, or any wooden airplane, I would choose T-88. I have used T-88 for
> re-gluing joints after other glues had failed and find it works well for
> this. And I use it for violin repairs and construction in places where there
> will never be a need to separate parts. Hide glue (definitely not
> recommended for aircraft work) is used in such places.
> I'm not sure I would use plastic resin for aircraft anymore because I have
> heard it is no longer as good as the stuff Weldwood used to make and there
> are better adhesives around, anyway.
>
> Having said all this, perhaps the most important thing is to protect the
> wooden parts and glued joints from water, dirt, etc. by using a good coating
> (preferably an epoxy type) and provide drainage and ventilation. Hangaring
> your airplane is essential---even if it is in a basic tee-type shelter. If
> you can afford it, use T-88. With rib construction, a little will go a long
> way---provided you don't waste it by mixing too much at a time. Good luck
> with your project and I hope you have as much fun with your Pietenpol as I
> have had with mine.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Graham Hansen (Pietenpol CF-AUN)
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Boothe" <gboothe5(at)comcast.net> |
Skip,
Certainly not my sphere of expertise, but Dick N. talked of adjusting the
'wash' of the horizontal stabilizers with the wires to help with such
problems.
Gary Boothe
Cool, Ca.
Pietenpol
WW Corvair Conversion, mounted
Tail done, Fuselage on gear
(15 ribs down.)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Skip Gadd
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 5:14 AM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Ed's Piet
Thanks for the comments guys, Oscar, I did fly over the field on the third
flight pulled the throttle back and yelled down, the engine going quiet got
their attention and they said they could hear me just like I was standing
next to them.
Attached a picture of the Piet flying yesterday.
The Piet has a screen door spring attached to the elevator bell crank. The
forward end of the spring was attached with wire to the turtle deck
bulkhead, no adjustment in flight. The spring held the elevator about level
with the horizontal stab. In flight you had to hold forward elevator to fly
level. We disconnected the forward end of the spring and tied it up out of
the way so it would put no pressure on the bell crank. Now you have to hold
up elevator. We are thinking of ether taking the spring out and installing
a trim tab on the elevator, or trying to adjust the spring so the Piet flys
hands off with 5 to 7 gallons of fuel in the cowl tank.
Skip
skipgadd(at)earthlink.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Pinging Ted Davis |
| From: | "Tim" <twilliams(at)mailmt.com> |
Talked with a mutual friend yesterday. Did you get her e-mail?
Tim
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270858#270858
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Non Pietenpol Related |
| From: | "K5YAC" <hangar10(at)cox.net> |
I just wanted to share some of my good fortune (ok, rub it in) about my weekend
adventure. I got to ride on a B-17G (Aluminum Overcast) on Sunday AND Monday.
I was working the event on Sunday afternoon when they were trying to fill the
seats for the last flight of the day (at $400 a seat). They had seven takers,
but three seats were needing filled. I wasn't even aware what was going on
when the event coordinator shouted, "Hey Mark, come sign a waiver... you are
going up!" I was honestly a bit dumbfounded. WOW! It was a great ride.
After I got back, the same fellow said to me, "I've got you on the jump flight
to Enid tomorrow, can you make it back over here?" I though for about 2 nanoseconds
and said, "I'll be here early. I'm calling the boss right now to let him
know I won't be in." What a deal... it was a 50 minute flight from Tulsa to
Enid, Ok... I shot a bunch of photos and even got to take the controls for several
minutes. For those of you who have had the pleasure, those controls are
a bit heavy, right? I attempted to maintain altitude and perform a couple of
shallow turns. I didn't do too bad. Our event coordinator called ahead to Enid
and had the back room of their restaurant reserved for us, where we all ate
lunch together (a small group of passengers and crew). It was awesome? The
pilot signed my logbook with 0.1 hour of co-pilot time... IN A B-17!! A day
that I'll remember forever.
My grandpa flew B-25s in the Pacific. I've been looking forward to a ride in Martha
Jean (a B-25 based here in Tulsa), but this was a real treat. I just know
that Grandpa was looking down with a big smile on his face.
Here is a link to the video I put together. Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpkIUMSCJ2w
--------
Mark - working on wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270871#270871
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Skip Gadd" <skipgadd(at)earthlink.net> |
Thanks Gary,
Now I remember Dick talking about that, I will see what I can find out.
I was working on other things today and Ed adjusted the spring to hold the
elevator exactly half way between the two positions I have flown. Will fly
it next good weather and let you know how it works.
Skip
> [Original Message]
> From: Gary Boothe <gboothe5(at)comcast.net>
> To:
> Date: 11/3/2009 5:09:48 PM
> Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Ed's Piet
>
>
> Skip,
>
> Certainly not my sphere of expertise, but Dick N. talked of adjusting the
> 'wash' of the horizontal stabilizers with the wires to help with such
> problems.
>
> Gary Boothe
> Cool, Ca.
> Pietenpol
> WW Corvair Conversion, mounted
> Tail done, Fuselage on gear
> (15 ribs down.)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Skip Gadd
> Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 5:14 AM
> To: pietenpol-list
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Ed's Piet
>
> Thanks for the comments guys, Oscar, I did fly over the field on the third
> flight pulled the throttle back and yelled down, the engine going quiet
got
> their attention and they said they could hear me just like I was standing
> next to them.
> Attached a picture of the Piet flying yesterday.
> The Piet has a screen door spring attached to the elevator bell crank. The
> forward end of the spring was attached with wire to the turtle deck
> bulkhead, no adjustment in flight. The spring held the elevator about
level
> with the horizontal stab. In flight you had to hold forward elevator to
fly
> level. We disconnected the forward end of the spring and tied it up out of
> the way so it would put no pressure on the bell crank. Now you have to
hold
> up elevator. We are thinking of ether taking the spring out and installing
> a trim tab on the elevator, or trying to adjust the spring so the Piet
flys
> hands off with 5 to 7 gallons of fuel in the cowl tank.
> Skip
>
>
> skipgadd(at)earthlink.net
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Phillips" <pietflyr(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Non Pietenpol Related |
You da Man, Mark!
You are one lucky SOB. My suggestion is that you should go right out and
buy a lottery ticket.
Jack Phillips
NX899JP
Raleigh, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of K5YAC
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 8:57 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Non Pietenpol Related
I just wanted to share some of my good fortune (ok, rub it in) about my
weekend adventure. I got to ride on a B-17G (Aluminum Overcast) on Sunday
AND Monday. I was working the event on Sunday afternoon when they were
trying to fill the seats for the last flight of the day (at $400 a seat).
They had seven takers, but three seats were needing filled. I wasn't even
aware what was going on when the event coordinator shouted, "Hey Mark, come
sign a waiver... you are going up!" I was honestly a bit dumbfounded. WOW!
It was a great ride.
After I got back, the same fellow said to me, "I've got you on the jump
flight to Enid tomorrow, can you make it back over here?" I though for
about 2 nanoseconds and said, "I'll be here early. I'm calling the boss
right now to let him know I won't be in." What a deal... it was a 50 minute
flight from Tulsa to Enid, Ok... I shot a bunch of photos and even got to
take the controls for several minutes. For those of you who have had the
pleasure, those controls are a bit heavy, right? I attempted to maintain
altitude and perform a couple of shallow turns. I didn't do too bad. Our
event coordinator called ahead to Enid and had the back room of their
restaurant reserved for us, where we all ate lunch together (a small group
of passengers and crew). It was awesome? The pilot signed my logbook with
0.1 hour of co-pilot time... IN A B-17!! A day that I'll remember forever.
My grandpa flew B-25s in the Pacific. I've been looking forward to a ride
in Martha Jean (a B-25 based here in Tulsa), but this was a real treat. I
just know that Grandpa was looking down with a big smile on his face.
Here is a link to the video I put together. Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpkIUMSCJ2w
--------
Mark - working on wings
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=270871#270871
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Yocum <yocum(at)fnal.gov> |
Hey Skip,
Glad to hear that Piet finally took flight - I almost drove up to
Northern MN to take a look at it last spring but after talking
(emailing) with Greg C., decided against it. Sounds like there was a
lot of work done to get it in a stable flying state, and I just don't
have the time to tinker...
There are lots of people who use bungee cords around the stick as trim
adjustments - just slip the bungee up or down the stick as you see fit.
N8031 uses a screendoor spring with one end attached to a big washer
that slips over the stick and the other attached to a bracket under the
front seat. It works OK, except that the washer has a tendency to
vibrate down the stick after a while. And then 2 weekends ago while
slipping the washer up the stick, the grip popped off in my hand on
downwind and I was left with no trim at all during landing. That was
kind of exciting.
Cheers!
Dan
Skip Gadd wrote:
> Thanks for the comments guys, Oscar, I did fly over the field on the third
> flight pulled the throttle back and yelled down, the engine going quiet got
> their attention and they said they could hear me just like I was standing
> next to them.
> Attached a picture of the Piet flying yesterday.
> The Piet has a screen door spring attached to the elevator bell crank. The
> forward end of the spring was attached with wire to the turtle deck
> bulkhead, no adjustment in flight. The spring held the elevator about level
> with the horizontal stab. In flight you had to hold forward elevator to fly
> level. We disconnected the forward end of the spring and tied it up out of
> the way so it would put no pressure on the bell crank. Now you have to hold
> up elevator. We are thinking of ether taking the spring out and installing
> a trim tab on the elevator, or trying to adjust the spring so the Piet flys
> hands off with 5 to 7 gallons of fuel in the cowl tank.
> Skip
>
>
> skipgadd(at)earthlink.net
>
>
>
>
October 24, 2009 - November 03, 2009
Pietenpol-Archive.digest.vol-im