---------------------------------------------------------- Pietenpol-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 06/26/03: 17 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 04:20 AM - Re: Wood prop balancing (Craigo) 2. 04:46 AM - Re: FAA's definition of "Electrical System" (John_Duprey@vmed.org) 3. 06:20 AM - Carl Loar getting close (Michael D Cuy) 4. 06:24 AM - Thank you, Walt Evans--- Wood prop balancing (Michael D Cuy) 5. 06:33 AM - Piet electrical system (lshutks@webtv.net (Leon Stefan)) 6. 07:12 AM - Your broken prop, John (Michael D Cuy) 7. 02:18 PM - Re: Web site addendum (david kowell) 8. 03:06 PM - I just gotta share this..... (Jim Markle) 9. 03:29 PM - Re: I just gotta share this..... (Isablcorky@aol.com) 10. 04:19 PM - Re: FAA's definition of "Electrical System" (Christian Bobka) 11. 04:19 PM - Re: Wood prop balancing (Christian Bobka) 12. 04:26 PM - Re: way more on brazing (Christian Bobka) 13. 07:02 PM - A-65 Intake manifold (Isablcorky@aol.com) 14. 07:17 PM - Re: A-65 Intake manifold (Jack Phillips) 15. 07:30 PM - Re: A-65 Intake manifold (Cy Galley) 16. 09:15 PM - Re: A-65 Intake manifold (Christian Bobka) 17. 10:11 PM - Re: A-65 Intake manifold (Isablcorky@aol.com) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:20:48 AM PST US From: "Craigo" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood prop balancing --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Craigo" On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 00:32:44 EDT, Rcaprd@aol.com wrote: I'm now looking for one of > these old tire > balancers. Rick and others - Harbor Freight has a vey good tire balancer for about $40 +/- (bought it some months ago, but don't remember the price). It has a truncated cone with a bubble level in the top, very sensitive. We use it on the race car tires, as well as our prop. Craig Lake Worth, FL Bakeng Duce NX96CW PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart. http://www.peoplepc.com ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:46:29 AM PST US From: John_Duprey@vmed.org Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: FAA's definition of "Electrical System" 06/26/2003 07:46:23 AM --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: John_Duprey@vmed.org DJ: Sounds real good keep us posted on your progress. John Duprey "DJ Vegh" @matronics.com on 06/25/2003 08:02:03 PM Please respond to pietenpol-list@matronics.com Sent by: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com cc: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: FAA's definition of "Electrical System" --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "DJ Vegh" I spoke with a couple DAR's today. The concensus was if I was using a wind driven generator I would in fact be exempt from having to equip my aircraft with a xponder. They said that if you take FAR 91.215 as it is written, you only need a xponder if you have an "engine driven electrical system". I have already done some initial tests on a wind generator. I have an RC engine starter which is essentially a permanent magnet DC motor. It has ball bearings for the commutator shaft and is designed for hi-torque applications. I spun the starter at 2200 RPM (hooked up to my hand drill) and recorded voltage of 6vdc. I hooked the starter up to another small dc motor and applied a load to this small motor. I then spun the "generator" at 2200 rpm and recorded as much as 8 amps. I then spun it at about 4,500 rpm (via pulley and belt of my drill press) and got approx 13 volts. Clearly this DC motor would work great as a DC generator driven by wind if I mount a small propeller to it. I estimate that I would need it to turn about 5,000 RPM under load. It would be able to provide at least 5-7 amps continuous... This is within the duty range of the motor. Next I'm going to mount a 12x5 RC prop on it and do some "wind tunnel" tests as I hang it off the side of my truck at about 75mph. I'll record voltage and amps and see what it does. This should keep my battery topped off as I will only be drawing a couple amps from the battery with the coil ignition and comm radio. This is the best way to get around Mode C xponder requirements if you live within class B! DJ Vegh N74DV Mesa, AZ www.imagedv.com/aircamper - ----- Original Message ----- From: "DJ Vegh" Subject: Pietenpol-List: FAA's definition of "Electrical System" > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "DJ Vegh" > > I live and fly within a 30nm of Phoenix class B airspace so I am required to > have a xponder if I also have an "engine driven electrical system" according > to the FAR's. > > I'll be running a Corvair engine so I must have a battery since the 'Vair > uses coil/points ignition. > > Here's my thought..... what if I used a wind driven generator instead of > alternator driven by the engine. Does this exclude me from having to > operate a xponder?? > > I really don't want to have to buy & install a transponder/altitude encoder. > > DJ Vegh > N74DV > Mesa, AZ > www.imagedv.com/aircamper > > > - > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:20:29 AM PST US From: Michael D Cuy Subject: Pietenpol-List: Carl Loar getting close --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy Thanks for the update, Carl. Looks like you and Jack P. will be next year's new kids on the block at Brodhead !!! Mike C. do not archive ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 06:24:23 AM PST US From: Michael D Cuy Subject: Pietenpol-List: Thank you, Walt Evans--- Wood prop balancing --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy Walt-- great description for what I need to do to balance my prop. If I can get some real work out of the way I'll be using my lunch hour to widdle out some plugs for the prop hub and find a good vice in the shop. Need to have it back in service for Saturday's Waco Fly-In at Mt. Vernon, Ohio. I'll be the only monoplane there:) Mike C. (with air-conditioned cockpits) ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 06:33:31 AM PST US From: lshutks@webtv.net (Leon Stefan) Subject: Pietenpol-List: Piet electrical system --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: lshutks@webtv.net (Leon Stefan) Several years ago here was a small write up in Sp. Av. about a small wind driven gen, It was a bicycle generator, the kind that had a wheel on it which you positioned against the tire, then as you petalled along the tire spun the gen. which powered a couple of small lights. Does any one remember this? How it worked etc? Leon S. ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 07:12:03 AM PST US From: Michael D Cuy Subject: Pietenpol-List: Your broken prop, John --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy John Dilatush-- of course that surveyor's stake breaking your prop was certainly not your fault. In fact, you should sue the airport authority because you feel discriminated against because you fly a homebuilt. Or maybe you feel disenfranchised because nobody put a nice clear waring tag on that stake that said "hitting with moving airplane could cause damage or bodily harm" ? I'm sure somebody somewhere owes you something. What a bunch of @#$#$%&#% &, eh ? PLEASE DO NOT ARCHIVE. Thank you VERY MUCH for some good info in addition to the other posts. I'll have that prop balanced and tracked by Friday night if I have to burn some midnight oil !!! Mike C. ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 02:18:35 PM PST US From: "david kowell" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Web site addendum --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "david kowell" here is agood one 4 u ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken Rickards" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Web site addendum > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Ken Rickards > > Sorry forgot the link. > > http://home.cogeco.ca/~pietbuilder/index.htm > > Ken GN1 2992 > > Canada > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 03:06:49 PM PST US From: "Jim Markle" Subject: Pietenpol-List: I just gotta share this..... --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Jim Markle" I've got to tell you all about my recent "progress"..... Up until a couple weeks ago I had only the center section (90%) done, all ribs, most of the wing hardware, all the tail wood/hardware done and that was it. So basically just the center section, tail and ribs..... Been working on wing design options (I've opted for an I-beam design) and was about to start cutting, scarfing and assembling the spars/ribs...... I now have all the above AND the fuse (well, the fuse needs a little work, it's probably 95% ready at this point), tailwheel, split axle gear (damaged but maybe 50% usable), ALL required turnbuckles and nuts/bolts AND remaining hardware (I probably won't need to weld much more except some (maybe I'll braze instead?....sorry, just kidding) on the landing gear, A65 eye brows and some cowling and many many misc parts. And plenty of Spruce for all the fiddly odds and ends remaining. Basically just need to build the wings and landing gear and start on the 95% they say you have remaining when you get to the 95% point. This thing is starting to be a REAL airplane........and yes, I know, my percentages are probably WAY off but as this thing sits, it's getting a LOT closer! "My" fuse looks incredible even though it's just propped up on a sawhorse gear. But my center section is on the plane and the tail is sitting on a real tail wheel....I always have to turn up the radio so the neighbors wouldn't hear my airplane sounds.... And what I don't need (from what Duane gave me, thank you Duane...) is (so far) going to be used on 3 other Air Campers being built in the area. Is that neat, or what? You're probably the only group in existense that would understand how exciting this is....... And yes, Corky, I'm counting the days too..... (29 to go) Jim in Plano My build log: http://www.mykitplane.com/Planes/buildLogReport.cfm?PlaneID=52 ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 03:29:05 PM PST US From: Isablcorky@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: I just gotta share this..... --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Isablcorky@aol.com Jim, Toot your whistle loud and clear. It is all worthwhile. Isabelle and I send our congrats. YKW in YKW Do not archive ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 04:19:24 PM PST US From: "Christian Bobka" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: FAA's definition of "Electrical System" --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" DJ, I remember when the rule on transponders came out and the "engine driven electrical system" was a hot item. Fortunately, you are correct that with a wind driven generator, you DO NOT need a xpndr. The Ward-Aero generator kit that appeared on many taylorcrafts and cubs, etc, used a Dayton brand Permanent magnet DC motor part number 4Z145 availbale at Grainger's. It is rated 1/20 hp @ 1750 rpm at 12 vdc and 1/9 hp @ 4000 rpm at 24vdc. Full load amps is 5.1 and overall length is 6.44". It sold a year or two ago (my catalog is old) for $80.80 list. It is important that the unit does not over rpm as the prop will self destruct and can kill or injury anyone in its path. Also the bearings may not be able to take the heat of over revving. At hi rpms, the unit may have a vibration problem as well. chris bobka ----- Original Message ----- From: DJ Vegh Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: FAA's definition of "Electrical System" > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "DJ Vegh" > > I spoke with a couple DAR's today. > > The concensus was if I was using a wind driven generator I would in fact be > exempt from having to equip my aircraft with a xponder. > > They said that if you take FAR 91.215 as it is written, you only need a > xponder if you have an "engine driven electrical system". > > I have already done some initial tests on a wind generator. I have an RC > engine starter which is essentially a permanent magnet DC motor. It has > ball bearings for the commutator shaft and is designed for hi-torque > applications. > > I spun the starter at 2200 RPM (hooked up to my hand drill) and recorded > voltage of 6vdc. I hooked the starter up to another small dc motor and > applied a load to this small motor. I then spun the "generator" at 2200 rpm > and recorded as much as 8 amps. > > I then spun it at about 4,500 rpm (via pulley and belt of my drill press) > and got approx 13 volts. > > Clearly this DC motor would work great as a DC generator driven by wind if I > mount a small propeller to it. I estimate that I would need it to turn > about 5,000 RPM under load. It would be able to provide at least 5-7 amps > continuous... This is within the duty range of the motor. > > Next I'm going to mount a 12x5 RC prop on it and do some "wind tunnel" tests > as I hang it off the side of my truck at about 75mph. I'll record voltage > and amps and see what it does. > > This should keep my battery topped off as I will only be drawing a couple > amps from the battery with the coil ignition and comm radio. > > This is the best way to get around Mode C xponder requirements if you live > within class B! > > DJ Vegh > N74DV > Mesa, AZ > www.imagedv.com/aircamper > > > - > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "DJ Vegh" > To: > Subject: Pietenpol-List: FAA's definition of "Electrical System" > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "DJ Vegh" > > > > I live and fly within a 30nm of Phoenix class B airspace so I am required > to > > have a xponder if I also have an "engine driven electrical system" > according > > to the FAR's. > > > > I'll be running a Corvair engine so I must have a battery since the 'Vair > > uses coil/points ignition. > > > > Here's my thought..... what if I used a wind driven generator instead > of > > alternator driven by the engine. Does this exclude me from having to > > operate a xponder?? > > > > I really don't want to have to buy & install a transponder/altitude > encoder. > > > > DJ Vegh > > N74DV > > Mesa, AZ > > www.imagedv.com/aircamper > > > > > > - > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 04:19:32 PM PST US From: "Christian Bobka" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood prop balancing --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" " Face" because it faces the relative wind. The "blade back" is the front of the prop. Go figure. chris bobka ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Wood prop balancing > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Rcaprd@aol.com > > In a message dated 6/25/03 7:54:05 AM Central Daylight Time, > Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov writes: > > << Aside from bugging my local IA for his hanging cable prop > balancing gizmo, HOW ARE you guys balancing your props ? I don't mean > sanding and adding varnish to the light side---I have that figured > out. What I specifically am after is what technique do you use to find the > heavy blade ? >> > > Mike, > In A&P school they taught us that 'Horizontal Balance' is when the tips point > up and down, and 'Vertical Balance' is when the tips are to the right and > left...go figure. The prop is balanced off the center hole, and tracked off the > flange faying surface. > The way I balance the prop is with a mandrill through the center hole, > set on parallel steel strips, which are edge mounted in a wood box that is > shaped like a 'miter box'. Level the box, check the prop this way, that way, flip > it over and check in both directions again, to make sure you locate the heavy > blade. Add varnish to the flat side (called the 'Face', because it 'faces the > pilot) of the light blade, or add varnish to a low area on the airfoil. > Problem is I can't check the horizontal balance - tips going up and down. I like > the method that John Dilatush mentioned, but I don't like the thought of > drilling hole and adding lead. It would also be necessary to check the prop using > the flange faying surface. I'm now looking for one of these old tire > balancers. > I think one of the major sources of vibrations is when the blade is out > of track. Wood props DEFINITELY contort when nicks allow moisture to enter the > wood, or the prop is not stored with the blades in the horizontal position. > When checking track, make sure the end play in the crank is pushed in the same > direction, and that you use a similar location on each tip. Shim with a > piece of paper. According to AC43-13, wood props are tracked so they are within > 1/8" of each other, but I prefer making them track within 1/16". > Another quick check would be to lay the prop on the table, and check the > prop with a straight edge all the way from tip to tip, passing through the > exact center of the center hole, and see if the straight edge lies in the same > part radius of the prop tips. This check would determine if one of the blades > has moved in the plane of rotation. > When building a prop, it is very important to make the shape of the > airfoil at each blade station match exactly on both blades. Hopefully a prop that > is store bought already matches the airfoil shapes. > > Chuck > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 04:26:49 PM PST US From: "Christian Bobka" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: way more on brazing --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" Gene, I am looking for more info on this. Chris Bobka ----- Original Message ----- From: Gene Rambo Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: way more on brazing > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Gene Rambo" > > At the risk of getting even more snyde responses, let me point out that the > numerous statements that have been forwarded merely say that brazing is not > acceptable for structural REPAIRS. That is not the same thing as saying > that 4130 should NEVER be brazed. > > You know, I am not an idiot, nor am I new to aviation maintenance and > aircraft building/rebuilding. I have stepped up on one of our member's > behalf to question what has become a commonly accepted statement without any > proof behind it. > > The only alleged source for a PROHIBITION against brazing 4130 for ANY > application is the guy (whose name I have now forgotten) who contributed to > the revised 43.13. Any others???? > > If it is such a stupid question, why can't I see more sources? > > Gene > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Christian Bobka" > To: "pietenpol" > Subject: Pietenpol-List: way more on brazing > > > > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" > > > > > Gene, > > > > CAM 18 dated 12/15/59 says in 18.30-4 "Brazing may be used for repair to > primary aircraft structures only if brazing was originally approved for the > particular application....." meaning the metals would need to be > compatible..... > > > > Chris bobka > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 07:02:20 PM PST US From: Isablcorky@aol.com Subject: Pietenpol-List: A-65 Intake manifold --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Isablcorky@aol.com Pieters Am in need of an A-65 Intake manifold part #4780. Had the complete engine, sent it to a local shop to have the cyls ground +15 and even paid the guy. After 5 months, no work done, no telephone calls answered, I picked up everything last Monday. Some of the stuff was in another guys shop 30 miles away for no explained reason. He also told me that it was going to cost double the initial price. It was good to get out with what I could. All was recovered except the intake manifold. I really don't care to go back and push for its recovery. A bad thing is over and I don't want to revive it, soooooooooooooooooooooo if anyone can help me find a manifold I will be very grateful. I hope this request is in line with the spirit of this list. Corky in La Do not archive ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 07:17:54 PM PST US From: "Jack Phillips" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: A-65 Intake manifold --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Jack Phillips" Corky, If you watch aircraft parts on ebay motors, they occasionally have those intake spiders and usually for pretty good prices. I'll keep my eyes out for one for you. I do have some parts for an A65, serviceable parts that I decided to replace with new ones, such as the intake tubes (I replaced them with polished stainless steel ones, just for looks). Let me know if you need anything else besides the intake spider. Jack -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Isablcorky@aol.com Subject: Pietenpol-List: A-65 Intake manifold --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Isablcorky@aol.com Pieters Am in need of an A-65 Intake manifold part #4780. Had the complete engine, sent it to a local shop to have the cyls ground +15 and even paid the guy. After 5 months, no work done, no telephone calls answered, I picked up everything last Monday. Some of the stuff was in another guys shop 30 miles away for no explained reason. He also told me that it was going to cost double the initial price. It was good to get out with what I could. All was recovered except the intake manifold. I really don't care to go back and push for its recovery. A bad thing is over and I don't want to revive it, soooooooooooooooooooooo if anyone can help me find a manifold I will be very grateful. I hope this request is in line with the spirit of this list. Corky in La Do not archive ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 07:30:42 PM PST US From: "Cy Galley" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: A-65 Intake manifold --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" Look for a C-series intake. the Throat is larger. Gives better power! ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Pietenpol-List: A-65 Intake manifold > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Isablcorky@aol.com > > > Pieters > > Am in need of an A-65 Intake manifold part #4780. > > Had the complete engine, sent it to a local shop to have the cyls ground +15 > and even paid the guy. After 5 months, no work done, no telephone calls > answered, I picked up everything last Monday. Some of the stuff was in another guys > shop 30 miles away for no explained reason. He also told me that it was going > to cost double the initial price. It was good to get out with what I could. > All was recovered except the intake manifold. I really don't care to go back and > push for its recovery. A bad thing is over and I don't want to revive it, > soooooooooooooooooooooo if anyone can help me find a manifold I will be very > grateful. > I hope this request is in line with the spirit of this list. > > Corky in La > > Do not archive > > ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 09:15:15 PM PST US From: "Christian Bobka" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: A-65 Intake manifold --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Christian Bobka" Corky, Did you take the cylinders to J's in Dallas by chance? Chris bobka ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Pietenpol-List: A-65 Intake manifold > --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Isablcorky@aol.com > > > Pieters > > Am in need of an A-65 Intake manifold part #4780. > > Had the complete engine, sent it to a local shop to have the cyls ground +15 > and even paid the guy. After 5 months, no work done, no telephone calls > answered, I picked up everything last Monday. Some of the stuff was in another guys > shop 30 miles away for no explained reason. He also told me that it was going > to cost double the initial price. It was good to get out with what I could. > All was recovered except the intake manifold. I really don't care to go back and > push for its recovery. A bad thing is over and I don't want to revive it, > soooooooooooooooooooooo if anyone can help me find a manifold I will be very > grateful. > I hope this request is in line with the spirit of this list. > > Corky in La > > Do not archive > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 10:11:10 PM PST US From: Isablcorky@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: A-65 Intake manifold --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Isablcorky@aol.com No Chris, It was a local man here in Shreveport. I've since sent them to Century in Fort Worth after recommendations from several I trust. A bad scene which I'm happy to be rid of. It's tough enough to build these things without these unexpected obstacles. Corky Do not archive