Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:06 AM - Re: Pitch Torque Tube (Duncan McFadyean)
2. 02:06 AM - Re: Pitch Torque Tube (Duncan McFadyean)
3. 02:06 AM - Re: Pitch Torque Tube (Duncan McFadyean)
4. 07:20 AM - Re: IFR redundancy, was 2nd battery (Fred Fillinger)
5. 08:33 AM - Re: IFR redundancy, was 2nd battery (Jos Okhuijsen)
6. 12:05 PM - Re: IFR redundancy, was 2nd battery (Tony Krzyzewski)
7. 02:16 PM - Flap drive and GE12E bearing (Steven Pitt)
8. 03:26 PM - Re: Flap drive and GE12E bearing (N55XS)
9. 03:30 PM - Re: Flap drive and GE12E bearing (R.C.Harrison)
10. 03:58 PM - Re: Flap drive and GE12E bearing (Kingsley Hurst)
11. 05:37 PM - Re: Flap drive and GE12E bearing (Paul McAllister)
12. 07:30 PM - Re: Flap drive and GE12E bearing ()
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Pitch Torque Tube |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Duncan McFadyean" <ami@mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk>
<<> Don't remove so much as to leave less metal at the side than there is
around
> the hole - i.e. leave as much metal at the side as there is at the top of
> the lug (hard to describe, but I guess you'll understand).>>
I understand what you mean, but to quote the original promoter of this idea
(Neville) this should be a "NO NO"!
The lug acts in bending, not tension. So, modifying in the manner proposed
might not reduce tensile strength but could reduce bending strength. A chain
is as strong as its weakest link and I suspect that these lugs come second
to being the weakest part of the
elevator system (first prize goes to the TP pins, although the usual mode of
failure these pins is not catastrophic).
There is a geometry of modification that would not compromise bending
strength, but I'll not describe that because this would make me complicit to
illegal modification to the control system!
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
From: "M@nsfield" <nsfield@screaming.net>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Pitch Torque Tube
> --> Europa-List message posted by: "M@nsfield" <nsfield@screaming.net>
>
> Hi David,
>
> A handy tip from Neville is to file a profile in the outer pairs of welded
> lugs (where the pitch push rods attach) so there is more rotational
movement
> before the lugs touch the edge of the CS05 aileron torque tube (where it
> sits flush with the CS08 crank).
>
> Don't remove so much as to leave less metal at the side than there is
around
> the hole - i.e. leave as much metal at the side as there is at the top of
> the lug (hard to describe, but I guess you'll understand).
>
> I'll see if I can get a picture of this, but my CM is installed so it
might
> be a bit cluttered in there...
>
> HTH
>
> PaulM
> XS 383
> CM in, TP in, off to the front for LG frame.
>
>
> --> Europa-List message posted by: "David Simenauer"
>
> I am about to mount the pitch torque tube to the cockpit module. I have
> the CS09 brackets clamped in position now. My question is about the amount
> of movement I should have. With it in the position I have it now, the
pitch
> push rods move about 2.25 inches, 55 mm, forward and back. Is this enough?
> I have looked, but can't find mention of this in the manual.
>
> Thanks,
> Dave Simenauer
>
>
> Book yourself something to look forward to in 2005.
> Cheap flights - http://www.tiscali.co.uk/travel/flights/
> Bargain holidays - http://www.tiscali.co.uk/travel/holidays/
>
>
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Pitch Torque Tube |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Duncan McFadyean" <ami@mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk>
<<> Don't remove so much as to leave less metal at the side than there is
around
> the hole - i.e. leave as much metal at the side as there is at the top of
> the lug (hard to describe, but I guess you'll understand).>>
I understand what you mean, but to quote the original promoter of this idea
(Neville) this should be a "NO NO"!
The lug acts in bending, not tension. So, modifying in the manner proposed
might not reduce tensile strength but could reduce bending strength. A chain
is as strong as its weakest link and I suspect that these lugs come second
to being the weakest part of the
elevator system (first prize goes to the TP pins, although the usual mode of
failure these pins is not catastrophic).
There is a geometry of modification that would not compromise bending
strength, but I'll not describe that because this would make me complicit to
illegal modification to the control system!
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
From: "M@nsfield" <nsfield@screaming.net>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Pitch Torque Tube
> --> Europa-List message posted by: "M@nsfield" <nsfield@screaming.net>
>
> Hi David,
>
> A handy tip from Neville is to file a profile in the outer pairs of welded
> lugs (where the pitch push rods attach) so there is more rotational
movement
> before the lugs touch the edge of the CS05 aileron torque tube (where it
> sits flush with the CS08 crank).
>
> Don't remove so much as to leave less metal at the side than there is
around
> the hole - i.e. leave as much metal at the side as there is at the top of
> the lug (hard to describe, but I guess you'll understand).
>
> I'll see if I can get a picture of this, but my CM is installed so it
might
> be a bit cluttered in there...
>
> HTH
>
> PaulM
> XS 383
> CM in, TP in, off to the front for LG frame.
>
>
> --> Europa-List message posted by: "David Simenauer"
>
> I am about to mount the pitch torque tube to the cockpit module. I have
> the CS09 brackets clamped in position now. My question is about the amount
> of movement I should have. With it in the position I have it now, the
pitch
> push rods move about 2.25 inches, 55 mm, forward and back. Is this enough?
> I have looked, but can't find mention of this in the manual.
>
> Thanks,
> Dave Simenauer
>
>
> Book yourself something to look forward to in 2005.
> Cheap flights - http://www.tiscali.co.uk/travel/flights/
> Bargain holidays - http://www.tiscali.co.uk/travel/holidays/
>
>
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Pitch Torque Tube |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Duncan McFadyean" <ami@mcfadyean.freeserve.co.uk>
<<> Don't remove so much as to leave less metal at the side than there is
around
> the hole - i.e. leave as much metal at the side as there is at the top of
> the lug (hard to describe, but I guess you'll understand).>>
I understand what you mean, but to quote the original promoter of this idea
(Neville) this should be a "NO NO"!
The lug acts in bending, not tension. So, modifying in the manner proposed
could reduce bending strength. A chain is as strong as its weakest link and
I suspect that these lugs come second to being the weakest part of the
elevator system (first prize goes to the TP pins)..
There is a geometry of modification that would not compromise bending
strength, but I'll not describe that because this would make me complicit to
illegal modification to the control system!
Duncan McF.
----- Original Message -----
From: "M@nsfield" <nsfield@screaming.net>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Pitch Torque Tube
> --> Europa-List message posted by: "M@nsfield" <nsfield@screaming.net>
>
> Hi David,
>
> A handy tip from Neville is to file a profile in the outer pairs of welded
> lugs (where the pitch push rods attach) so there is more rotational
movement
> before the lugs touch the edge of the CS05 aileron torque tube (where it
> sits flush with the CS08 crank).
>
> Don't remove so much as to leave less metal at the side than there is
around
> the hole - i.e. leave as much metal at the side as there is at the top of
> the lug (hard to describe, but I guess you'll understand).
>
> I'll see if I can get a picture of this, but my CM is installed so it
might
> be a bit cluttered in there...
>
> HTH
>
> PaulM
> XS 383
> CM in, TP in, off to the front for LG frame.
>
>
> --> Europa-List message posted by: "David Simenauer"
>
> I am about to mount the pitch torque tube to the cockpit module. I have
> the CS09 brackets clamped in position now. My question is about the amount
> of movement I should have. With it in the position I have it now, the
pitch
> push rods move about 2.25 inches, 55 mm, forward and back. Is this enough?
> I have looked, but can't find mention of this in the manual.
>
> Thanks,
> Dave Simenauer
>
>
> Book yourself something to look forward to in 2005.
> Cheap flights - http://www.tiscali.co.uk/travel/flights/
> Bargain holidays - http://www.tiscali.co.uk/travel/holidays/
>
>
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: IFR redundancy, was 2nd battery |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Fred Fillinger" <n3eu@comcast.net>
>> For IFR, and an EFIS w/o mechanical redundancy, I have an
>> opinion some may not want to hear!
>
> Ok, I'll take the bait. I would have the Truetracks pictorial pilot
addon
> on the autopilot or a 2nd efis and we were allready agreeing on the
2nd
> battery generator eh?
>
> Regards,
> Jos Okhuijsen
Ducking the opinion part, interestingly for a production aircraft in
the U.S., it ain't that easy, even if FAA-approved electronic boxes.
There's an Advisory Circular which says you prove the failure
probability, with specified statistical math to use, of a fatality in
IFR caused by dual/complete failure. Or...slap a mechanical horizon
gyro somewhere on that pretty panel, and refer to the section on the
much simpler math. When I read something like that, I envision that
error MsgBox... "Windows...is shutting down." :-)
I don't even think the airframe mfrs mind this at all, because in a
product liability suit, having a mechanical, redundant backup is the
clearest way to explain total failure odds to a jury who knows that
all electronic things go blooey sometimes even on second use, but
their KitchenAid mixer of 20 years still works just fine.
Reg,
Fred F.
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: IFR redundancy, was 2nd battery |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Jos Okhuijsen" <josok-e@ukolo.fi>
> Ducking the opinion part, interestingly for a production aircraft in
> the U.S., it ain't that easy, even if FAA-approved electronic boxes.
> There's an Advisory Circular which says you prove the failure
> probability, with specified statistical math to use, of a fatality in
> IFR caused by dual/complete failure. Or...slap a mechanical horizon
> gyro somewhere on that pretty panel, and refer to the section on the
> much simpler math. When I read something like that, I envision that
> error MsgBox... "Windows...is shutting down." :-)
For us, experimental builders this does not apply, and as a matter of
fact, here an experimental will never be approved for IFR. Solves the
problem for the authorities. But in real life VFR conditions change into
IFR despite law, regulations, approvals and forecasts. There our
non-approved but reasonably reliably EFIS comes into play.
And before Jeremy starts to complain about windows bashing: It is only
because windows in the most used operating system that it has the most
crashes. But it is true, that although modern electronics hardware is a
factor 10.000 more reliable then mechanical parts, systems seem unreliable
in the eyes of the public, because their computers keep crashing and
having virusses. Thinking about it: in cars almost everything is
controlled by computers, from your safety-bags to brakes, gearbox and
engine. But car manufacturers don't even advertise that. Is that also a
windows syndrome?
Back to the habit of building a reliably experimental: I guess that having
2 generators with 2 regulators and 2 batteries, and an essential bus
switcheable between them is not a bad idea. It is not really redundant
either, because the Rotax standard generator is a bit on the small side to
feed all the whistles and bells.
Regards,
Jos Okhuijsen
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | IFR redundancy, was 2nd battery |
Received-SPF: none
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Tony Krzyzewski" <tonyk@kaon.co.nz>
>> Back to the habit of building a reliably experimental: I guess that
having
2 generators with 2 regulators and 2 batteries, and an essential bus
switcheable between them is not a bad idea. It is not really redundant
either, because the Rotax standard generator is a bit on the small side
to feed all the whistles and bells.
That's how I've built mine to support a 914 installation. Other than the
boost pump the secondary system only runs 'luxury' items like the
strobe and nav lights and a few electronic incidental items.
Tony
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Flap drive and GE12E bearing |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Steven Pitt" <steven.pitt2@ntlworld.com>
Dear All
Has anyone had a problem with rigging their aircraft and the GE12E bearing?
I have been getting ready for final assembly and found that 1) my bearings have
seized and 2) without the flaps the wings plug in easily, with the flaps it is
a pig.
Have I done something wrong or is there a fix that others have come up with.
Thanks in anticipation.
Steve Pitt #403 Tri gear XS
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Flap drive and GE12E bearing |
--> Europa-List message posted by: N55XS <topglock@cox.net>
Steven Pitt wrote:
>--> Europa-List message posted by: "Steven Pitt" <steven.pitt2@ntlworld.com>
>
>Dear All
>Has anyone had a problem with rigging their aircraft and the GE12E bearing?
>I have been getting ready for final assembly and found that 1) my bearings have
seized and 2) without the flaps the wings plug in easily, with the flaps it
is a pig.
>Have I done something wrong or is there a fix that others have come up with.
>Thanks in anticipation.
>Steve Pitt #403 Tri gear XS
>
>
>
Steve,
Your bearings are probably just stuck. Mine were the same way. I
sprayed a little oil on them and inserted a bar and wiggled them around,
until they loosened up. Just don't get to agressive with the "wiggling"...
--
Jeff - A055
Finishing the panel and waiting on the painter...
Builders Log: http://www.N55XS.com
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Flap drive and GE12E bearing |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "R.C.Harrison" <ptag.dev@tiscali.co.uk>
Hi! Steve.
Make sure the Rose Bearings in the flap drive tube ends are well oiled
and that the centre bearings are free and central to receive the drive
pin on the flaps every time prior to pushing the wing home. (Also make
sure the drive pins are well greased.) When the wing is removed at the
point of departure from the bearing they will be slightly out of line
making the bearing stick in to the stressed position and you are trying
to drive the two together whilst this out of alignment is present.
I have made some tapered guide tubes within the flap inboard closeouts
which facilitate self rigging but I still have to ensure the bearings
are central and loose.
Regards
Bob Harrison.G-PTAG
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steven Pitt
Subject: Europa-List: Flap drive and GE12E bearing
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Steven Pitt"
<steven.pitt2@ntlworld.com>
Dear All
Has anyone had a problem with rigging their aircraft and the GE12E
bearing?
I have been getting ready for final assembly and found that 1) my
bearings have seized and 2) without the flaps the wings plug in easily,
with the flaps it is a pig.
Have I done something wrong or is there a fix that others have come up
with.
Thanks in anticipation.
Steve Pitt #403 Tri gear XS
Message 10
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Flap drive and GE12E bearing |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Kingsley Hurst" <hurstkr@growzone.com.au>
> I have been getting ready for final assembly and found that 1) my
bearings have seized and 2) without the flaps the wings plug in easily,
with the flaps it is a pig.
Steve,
Further to what Bob and Jeff have already said and assuming you have
heeded those directions, if you definitely have correct alignment, you
have described the same problem as one I experience on a particular
sailplane almost every time it is rigged.
At the point when the flap pin has just caught causing your problem, try
giving the flap a firm and fast jiggle of small amplitude while someone
is still applying pressure at the end of the wing to push it home.
Hope it helps.
Regards
Kingsley
Message 11
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Flap drive and GE12E bearing |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister@qia.net>
Steve,
I have exactly this problem when I rig my aircraft. I find that when I go
to put the flap pin in that the ball can easily be knocked to one side and
it jams in place.
What I am thinking of doing is to make some flap drive pins that are much
longer with a long tapered lead in. I'd be interested in anyone's opinion
on this idea.
Paul
Message 12
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Flap drive and GE12E bearing |
--> Europa-List message posted by: <kbcarpenter@comcast.net>
I had a machinist turn new flap pins with a tapered lead-in. They work fine
without the usual mentioned problems. The taper is about 3/4 inches beyond
the standard length. They are in the flap tube and cause on problem.
Ken Carpenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister@qia.net>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Flap drive and GE12E bearing
> --> Europa-List message posted by: "Paul McAllister"
> <paul.mcallister@qia.net>
>
> Steve,
>
> I have exactly this problem when I rig my aircraft. I find that when I go
> to put the flap pin in that the ball can easily be knocked to one side and
> it jams in place.
>
> What I am thinking of doing is to make some flap drive pins that are much
> longer with a long tapered lead in. I'd be interested in anyone's opinion
> on this idea.
>
> Paul
>
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|