---------------------------------------------------------- Pietenpol-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 09/29/09: 56 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:53 AM - Re: these West Coast guys seem like they have a good sense of humor (Clif Dawson) 2. 02:43 AM - Re: Re: No RPM drop on mag check?? (Robert Ray) 3. 04:22 AM - Russell Ray's rib test/ Wood Options (Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]) 4. 04:53 AM - Re: Spar splice (helspersew@aol.com) 5. 04:54 AM - Re: Re: Wood Options (helspersew@aol.com) 6. 05:07 AM - Re: electric engine (H RULE) 7. 05:48 AM - Fuel valve control (Jim Markle) 8. 06:05 AM - Control set-ups (KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP) 9. 06:35 AM - spar splicing (Oscar Zuniga) 10. 07:10 AM - Re: Re: Wood Options (Bill Church) 11. 07:19 AM - Re: Re: Wood Options (Ryan Mueller) 12. 07:39 AM - Re: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS (Tim Willis) 13. 08:58 AM - Re: Re: Wood Options (Ken Howe) 14. 09:11 AM - fuel tanks (Oscar Zuniga) 15. 09:11 AM - Re: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS (gliderx5@comcast.net) 16. 09:50 AM - Re: Wood Options (899PM) 17. 10:09 AM - Re: Re: Wood Options (Bill Church) 18. 10:41 AM - perplexed at wood testing ? (Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]) 19. 10:51 AM - Re: Re: Wood Options (AMsafetyC@aol.com) 20. 11:20 AM - Re: perplexed at wood testing ? (Wayne Bressler) 21. 11:22 AM - Re: perplexed at wood testing =?UTF-8?Q?=3F? (Ken Howe) 22. 11:43 AM - Re: perplexed at wood testing ? (Jeff Boatright) 23. 11:52 AM - Air Camper load rating (Oscar Zuniga) 24. 11:54 AM - Re: perplexed at wood testing ? (John Hofmann) 25. 11:58 AM - Re: perplexed at wood testing ? (899PM) 26. 12:18 PM - Re: Air Camper load rating (Dave Abramson) 27. 12:18 PM - Re: perplexed at wood testing ? (Bill Church) 28. 12:26 PM - Re: Air Camper load rating (Rados Svagelj) 29. 12:43 PM - Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner (gwread@aol.com) 30. 01:05 PM - Re: Air Camper load rating (Ryan Mueller) 31. 01:22 PM - Re: Air Camper load rating (Jim Markle) 32. 01:33 PM - Re: perplexed at wood testing =?UTF-8?Q?=3F? (Ken Howe) 33. 02:31 PM - Re: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS (Doug Dever) 34. 02:43 PM - Re: perplexed at wood testing ? (Bill Church) 35. 03:22 PM - Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner (Thomas Bernie) 36. 03:49 PM - Re: perplexed at wood testing ? (Kip and Beth Gardner) 37. 04:04 PM - Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner (gwread@aol.com) 38. 05:51 PM - Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner (Ross Alexander) 39. 05:53 PM - Re: perplexed at wood testing ? (Doug Dever) 40. 06:51 PM - Re: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner (gwread@aol.com) 41. 07:08 PM - Re: electric engine (mike) 42. 07:09 PM - Re: Russell Ray's rib test/ Wood Options (Robert Ray) 43. 07:29 PM - Does anybody know this plane? (gcardinal) 44. 07:54 PM - The Book according to the Fisherman (Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]) 45. 08:08 PM - Re: Fuel valve control (Clif Dawson) 46. 08:10 PM - Re: Air Camper load rating (Robert Ray) 47. 08:19 PM - Re: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS (Robert Ray) 48. 08:19 PM - Re: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS (Clif Dawson) 49. 08:24 PM - Re: Vortex Generators (Dan Yocum) 50. 08:54 PM - Re: Does anybody know this plane? (Bill Church) 51. 09:12 PM - Re: Re: Does anybody know this plane? (Robert Ray) 52. 09:14 PM - Re: Re: Does anybody know this plane? (Robert Ray) 53. 09:21 PM - Re: Air Camper load rating (Bill Church) 54. 10:55 PM - Re: Re: Air Camper load rating (Robert Ray) 55. 11:04 PM - Re: Re: Does anybody know this plane? (Robert Ray) 56. 11:15 PM - Re: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS (Robert Ray) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:53:06 AM PST US From: "Clif Dawson" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys seem like they have a good sense of humor Ribs! forget the ribs. I'm all tanked up! Well, almost. Clif > > Still with the ribs! What's with you guys and the ribs! I did get 3/4 of > my > center section built last weekend! (sure wish I had built those ribs > first!) > > Gary Boothe ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 02:43:18 AM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: No RPM drop on mag check?? From: Robert Ray Oh so the tach was bad not the mags well lucky you. On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Dan Yocum wrote: > > Just a quick note on this subject - during our flight on Thursday we > stopped in at friend's airfield and he lent me his digital rpm reader - I > don't recall the official name of it at the moment. > > I have to do some more methodical tests, but what I did see suggests that > the tachometer is low by about 11.4%. That is, at 1000RPM indicated on the > tachometer, the prop was actually spinning at 1140RPM. So, at 2050RPM > (which I do achieve when I lean it out) it's actually spinning at around > 2280. That's close enough to redline for my tastes. > > When Tres delivered the plane he mentioned that at one point in the past > the tach pegged itself at the high end. Turns out that some oil got up > inside the tachometer from the cable. He cleaned the tachometer up, but > apparently didn't recalibrate it. So, mystery solved on that one. > > Cheers, > Dan > > > Robert Ray wrote: > >> Why don't you disconnect both mags all input and out put wiring taps, >> take an olmmeter and measure resistance across the coils, measure >> the resistance to ground hopfully infinity, if they don't match there it >> is. >> Or if they don't match with in say < or > 15% >> Russell >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Dan Yocum > yocum@fnal.gov>> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> tkreiner wrote: >> >> > >> >> Dan, >> >> Without fully understanding what's going on, and without an >> extensive knowledge of your engine, it's somewhat difficult to >> figure out what's going on. A few questions might inform the >> audience. >> >> Are the mags and ignition harnesses, & spark plugs - new, used, >> worn out? Explain their condition, as it might help. >> >> >> One mag is new in the last year. One plug is new 'cause the A&P >> broke the old one during the last Annual. The harness is probably >> the original from 1979 and probably before. >> >> >> >> How about the mechanical condition of the engine? Rebuilt? >> Describe. >> >> >> 400 SMOH, ~800 hour since new (estimated). Logs are incomplete from >> before 1965, hence the reason for the overhaul. One cylinder was >> cracked and replaced in '65 with "the same oversize." Compressions >> are all in the mid to high 70's. >> >> I sent out a sample of the oil for analysis and no red flags were >> found. >> >> This plane and engine has flown over 150 tach hours in the last 18 >> months and 50 hours in the 2 weeks leading up to Oshkosh! >> >> >> >> What fuel are you using? >> >> >> 100LL with one shot of Marvel Mystery Oil per 15 gallons. >> >> >> >> Perhaps there's no problem at all. Even though our expectation >> is that the engine SHOULD show an rpm drop, that is not always >> the case... On a plane I fly regularly, the entire ignition >> system was recently replaced, i.e., new mags, harnesses, plugs, >> and correctly timed. When the plane was put back into service, >> there was an imperceptible rpm drop. >> >> It turned out, with a near perfect ignition system, clean fuel, >> etc., the engine was burning so clean and completely that there >> was no discernible drop in rpm during mag check. >> >> That's what I'm leaning toward, too. When Tres flew it from >> California they flew it flat out as fast and lean as it would go for >> as long as possible. >> >> >> >> >> Hope this adds some insight. >> >> >> It does! I'm a glass half-full kind of guy but I like to make sure >> there aren't any holes in the glass, too. >> >> The fact that at least one other engine out there in the world >> exhibits the same sort of behaviour suggests that mine isn't >> completely alone. 2 data points are always better than 1 (but still >> not great...). >> >> Thanks, >> Dan >> >> >> -- Dan Yocum >> Fermilab 630.840.6509 >> yocum@fnal.gov , http://fermigrid.fnal.gov >> >> Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. >> s List Un/Subscription, >> www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List" >> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List >> ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com >> Matt Dralle, List Admin. >> ==== >> >> >> >> >> * >> >> >> * >> > > -- > Dan Yocum > Fermilab 630.840.6509 > yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov > Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:22:39 AM PST US From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Russell Ray's rib test/ Wood Options Russell, Have you been watching one too many episodes of The Red Green Show ? No wonder I couldn't find you at Lee Bottom either last weekend. I should have been looking for the guy with the Jim Beam hat on AND the G-suit. My bad---I wish I'd have known ! Mike C. do not archive ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 04:53:46 AM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice From: helspersew@aol.com Shad, AC43-13 was revised a few years ago, and before the revision the spar splice angle was always 12:1. I can't figure out why after many years it had to be increased. When I made?the spar splices on my one-piece wing I referenced my old copy and made it 12:1. Oh well, I guess it will hold together. Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. -----Original Message----- From: shad bell Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:19 pm Subject: Pietenpol-List: Spar splice Acording to 43-13? spar splice needs to be at a 15:1 angle of the spar thickness.? The length of the scarf would be 15 times 3/4(or 1 inch if you use 1inch spars)?of an inch or 11 1/4 inches long on each side (spar half) of the joint.? then a reinforcement plate should be placed over the splice.? really you should look up ac43-13 online or buy a copy, there is a diagram in there that shows it better than I can explain it.? There are a few other particulars in there.? My advise is buy spar matrial the full length, scarf joints add weight, and lots of tedious precision work.? If it were a repair to an exsisting airplane I would say ok splice it but this is a new airplane, so it would be worth the extra couple hundred bucks to not fuss with the splice. ? Just my 2 cents worth, Shad ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 04:54:09 AM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options From: helspersew@aol.com Ryan.......Are we going down this road again??? Please, no cartoon elephants this time!!! Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL.????? do not archive -----Original Message----- From: Ryan Mueller Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 8:47 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options I still wonder, how exactly did you keep 1000 lbs of tractor weights balanced on the 1/2" wide capstrip of a single rib? Ryan On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Robert Ray wrote: Yeah I tested?a rib, I loaded the rib with tractor weights and left it over night, the fake spars started to crush I don't remember the exact weight I think 1000 lbs, this wasn't certified wood. with 30 ribs that's 30,000 lbs' so yes I can do aerobatic maneuvers with my pianos, girlfriend and dog on board as long as my shoulder harness doesn't break while I'm pulling 12 negative g's, I also bought an old G-suit from an ex military fighter pilot to keep the blood out of my feet I'm wearing it right now. ? No kidding I did test a rib to that weight and was amazed. ? Russell ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 05:07:52 AM PST US From: H RULE Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine What do you think of putting this engine in a Piet?I peronally think it wou ld be awsome!=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AWOW........=0A-=0A-=0A-=0A-=0ACheck this out.----=0Awww.opb.org/programs/ofg/videos/view/56-Electric-Dr ag-Racing=0A=0A=0A>-=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>href="http://www.matronics.com/ Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List =0A>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com=0A>hre f="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c=0A> =================== ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 05:48:14 AM PST US From: Jim Markle Subject: Pietenpol-List: Fuel valve control Hey Clif, How did you attach the bar (or tube) to the U shaped piece on the valve? Just drill a round hole and tighten down with those bolts? Or some kind of opening with flat sides and matching flat sides on the bar stock? What keeps it from turning when you move the handle up or down? I'm working on that very issue right now and have been wondering how to do it and still keep it simple. I'm thinking maybe just a round hole and tighten down the nuts nice and snug...but I would not want to need to turn it off in a forced landing and not be able to.... jm -----Original Message----- >From: Clif Dawson >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 2:42 AM >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys seem like they have a good sense of humor > >Ribs! forget the ribs. I'm all tanked up! Well, almost. > >Clif >> >> Still with the ribs! What's with you guys and the ribs! I did get 3/4 of >> my >> center section built last weekend! (sure wish I had built those ribs >> first!) >> >> Gary Boothe ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 06:05:48 AM PST US From: "KMHeide, BA, CPO, FAAOP" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Control set-ups Members: - It appears several of my posts have been kicked back to me and not making t o this forum. I guess Yahoo has been undergoing some changes and- fieldin g many complaints of emails not getting to their destination. - My question is for the stick and control set-ups. I have seen just turnbuck les and thimbles at each end in many areas of control cables. Can anyone se nd me photos of the rigging so I can gather up some ideas as to what I need to order to make sure I have adjustability and proper connections at each end? - My confusion is when to use just a thimble at one end and a turnbuckle at t he other. I guess I have seen so many different set-ups I am second guessin g my next move! Pictures speak nothing but explain everything! - KMHeide - =0A=0A=0A ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 06:35:23 AM PST US From: Oscar Zuniga Subject: Pietenpol-List: spar splicing Ryan wrote- >If you are building a one-piece wing then you would have to >splice the spars, per the plans. Let's clarify the statement... a splice will be required but do NOT splice the spars per the plans, with bolts down through it from top to bottom. The manual and notes from the Pietenpol family, and other sources, make a point of correcting this. It is most definitely NOT the right way to make a spar splice! Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 07:10:14 AM PST US Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options From: "Bill Church" ________________________________ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of helspersew@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 7:38 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options Ryan.......Are we going down this road again??? Please, no cartoon elephants this time!!! Dan Helsper Poplar Grove, IL. do not archive -----Original Message----- From: Ryan Mueller Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 8:47 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options I still wonder, how exactly did you keep 1000 lbs of tractor weights balanced on the 1/2" wide capstrip of a single rib? Ryan On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Robert Ray wrote: Yeah I tested a rib, I loaded the rib with tractor weights and left it over night, the fake spars started to crush I don't remember the exact weight I think 1000 lbs, this wasn't certified wood. with 30 ribs that's 30,000 lbs' so yes I can do aerobatic maneuvers with my pianos, girlfriend and dog on board as long as my shoulder harness doesn't break while I'm pulling 12 negative g's, I also bought an old G-suit from an ex military fighter pilot to keep the blood out of my feet I'm wearing it right now. No kidding I did test a rib to that weight and was amazed. Russell ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 07:19:55 AM PST US From: Ryan Mueller Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options It's really unfortunate that you can't have a song autoplay when you open an email, because all I can hear right now is the Benny Hill theme song. Ryan Do not archive Sent from my mobile device On Sep 29, 2009, at 9:09 AM, "Bill Church" wrote: > > > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner- > pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of helspersew@aol.com > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 7:38 AM > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options > > Ryan.......Are we going down this road again??? Please, no cartoon > elephants this time!!! > > Dan Helsper > Poplar Grove, IL. do not archive > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ryan Mueller > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 8:47 pm > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options > > I still wonder, how exactly did you keep 1000 lbs of tractor weights > balanced on the 1/2" wide capstrip of a single rib? > > Ryan > > > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Robert Ray > wrote: > Yeah I tested a rib, I loaded the rib with tractor weights > and left it over night, the fake spars started to crush I don't > remember > the exact weight I think 1000 lbs, this wasn't certified wood. > with 30 ribs that's 30,000 lbs' so yes I can do aerobatic maneuvers > with my pianos, girlfriend and dog on board as long as my shoulder > harness doesn't break while I'm pulling 12 negative g's, > I also bought an old G-suit from an ex military fighter pilot > to keep the blood out of my feet I'm wearing it right now. > > No kidding I did test a rib to that weight and was amazed. > > Russell > > > href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com > href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http:// > www.matronics.com/c ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 07:39:10 AM PST US From: Tim Willis Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS Clif, I am not asking for my own info, but for others who might be considering a fiberglass tank. Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only accommodate avgas and mogas, but mogas with ethanol (something we should avoid for other reasons, too) just in case we get some, either by necessity or ignorance? [I recall the problems some boaters had with ethanol in their glass tanks.] Thanks, Tim in central TX -----Original Message----- >From: Clif Dawson >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 2:42 AM >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys seem like they have a good sense of humor > >Ribs! forget the ribs. I'm all tanked up! Well, almost. > >Clif >> >> Still with the ribs! What's with you guys and the ribs! I did get 3/4 of >> my >> center section built last weekend! (sure wish I had built those ribs >> first!) >> >> Gary Boothe ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 08:58:55 AM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options From: Ken Howe Any chance you could post a couple pictures of your test rig? I was ran a test on one of my ribs, and it broke at 175 lbs. Of course it revealed that I had a glue-starved joint, so I'm taking another look at my glue-up process and I expect to repeat my test. --Ken On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:12:32 -0400, Robert Ray wrote: I cut a piece of construction grade lumber down to spar size, the fake spar's were about three feet long, I then hand selected my worse rib that had questionable grain, I glued it to the spars and placed both spars across saw horses, I had a box of three conductor inside telephone wire, I suspended the barbells from the rib which was upside down to simulate positive g forces. I had a full box of wire and I just used it to tie the weights under the rib attached to the rib. I ran out out weight at 533 lbs' I then moved all the weight to the front then to the back, then I asked Jan (German) if he had any tractor weights at work the next day so then I went over and borrowed 500 lbs' of tractor weights, I added those evenly distributing weight along the rib and left it over night. The next day the edges of the fake spars were starting to crush slightly, the rib was OK, and it only had gussets on one side. I also took pictures and have witnesses. NUF said Russell On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Ryan Mueller wrote: I still wonder, how exactly did you keep 1000 lbs of tractor weights balanced on the 1/2" wide capstrip of a single rib? Ryan On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Robert Ray wrote: Yeah I tested a rib, I loaded the rib with tractor weights and left it over night, the fake spars started to crush I don't remember the exact weight I think 1000 lbs, this wasn't certified wood. with 30 ribs that's 30,000 lbs' so yes I can do aerobatic maneuvers with my pianos, girlfriend and dog on board as long as my shoulder harness doesn't break while I'm pulling 12 negative g's, I also bought an old G-suit from an ex military fighter pilot to keep the blood out of my feet I'm wearing it right now. No kidding I did test a rib to that weight and was amazed. Russell " target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List ttp://forums.matronics.com _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution Links: ------ [1] mailto:rmueller23@gmail.com [2] mailto:rray032003@gmail.com ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 09:11:26 AM PST US From: Oscar Zuniga Subject: Pietenpol-List: fuel tanks Tim asked- >Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only >accommodate avgas and mogas, but mogas with ethanol >(something we should avoid for other reasons, too) >just in case we get some, either by necessity or ignorance? The glass is completely non-reactive with any of the fuels and is not the issue; it's the epoxy resin used in the layups. Of all the laminating resins available, the only one that I know of that fills the bill is vinylester resin and even that *could* have problems if you used straight ethanol. At low percentages such as are used in the wintertime in some states as autogas blend, it should not be a problem. I think all of the other epoxy resins will have problems with fuels of one blend or the other and that's where the problems have come up in the past, particularly when autogas has been used. The resin can turn gooey and plug up the fuel system, with obvious consequences, or it can break down and the glass can delaminate. Vinylester is just about the best for fuel tanks but it has a short shelf life, terrible odor, and is a bit fussy to use. Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 09:11:32 AM PST US From: gliderx5@comcast.net Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS As I understand it the only resin that will stand up to ethanol in the long run is vinylester. Polyester and epoxy are both effected. I am just finishing my tank now using vinylester, and I hate that crap! It really stinks! I hope to have some pictures and description of the tank and the process on my web site in a couple of weeks, assuming that it actually holds fuel. Malcolm Morrison ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Willis" Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:36:29 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS Clif, I am not asking for my own info, but for others who might be considering a fiberglass tank. Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only accommodate avgas and mogas, but mogas with ethanol (something we should avoid for other reasons, too) just in case we get some, either by necessity or ignorance? [I recall the problems some boaters had with ethanol in their glass tanks.] Thanks, Tim in central TX -----Original Message----- >From: Clif Dawson >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 2:42 AM >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys seem like they have a good sense of humor > >Ribs! forget the ribs. I'm all tanked up! Well, almost. > >Clif >> >> Still with the ribs! What's with you guys and the ribs! I did get 3/4 of >> my >> center section built last weekend! (sure wish I had built those ribs >> first!) >> >> Gary Boothe ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 09:50:44 AM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options From: "899PM" With the rib inverted and held on fake spars, I pulled at 12-15 locations on the rib capstrip with load spacing approximating the pressure curve of the airfoil in flight(i.e. concentrated on the front section of the rib). My "load" on the rib fixture was via engineering grade springs and wingnuts to make it easy to count turns and track compression/spring rate. If memory serves, I heard a crack at #358 of loading. This roughly translates to 10G's. If anyone is interested, I can post a pic. -------- PAPA MIKE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265574#265574 ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 10:09:47 AM PST US Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options From: "Bill Church" Now THAT sounds like a well thought out, sound, engineering-based approach. I think everybody would appreciate a photo of that. Well, I would, anyway (even though it doesn't involve 1000 pounds of tractor weights or a small elephant balanced precariously atop the capstrip). Bill C. -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of 899PM Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 12:51 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options --> With the rib inverted and held on fake spars, I pulled at 12-15 locations on the rib capstrip with load spacing approximating the pressure curve of the airfoil in flight(i.e. concentrated on the front section of the rib). My "load" on the rib fixture was via engineering grade springs and wingnuts to make it easy to count turns and track compression/spring rate. If memory serves, I heard a crack at #358 of loading. This roughly translates to 10G's. If anyone is interested, I can post a pic. -------- PAPA MIKE ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 10:41:37 AM PST US From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" Subject: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? I have to wonder why anyone would need to test an 80 year old airfoil design that has never (to my knowledge) had a failure ? I'm sure there is some satisfaction with finding out if you're ribs are built safely but who of us has enough knowledge to even setup a proper scenario that would represent a realistic load on the rib ? Instead of doing all this fiddle-farting around I would rather just build my plane with a/c grade materials and accepted practices and enjoy flying it. Just my opinion but unless you're building with knotty pine lumber and Elmer's glue you shouldn't really even be concerned with the strength of a Pietenpol wing rib. Mike C. ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 10:51:02 AM PST US From: AMsafetyC@aol.com Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options Not that I have a desire to do loops or other aerobatic maneuvers in a Piet but you're saying the piet wing is good for 10Gs. In the overall is would be nice to kown what the aircraft as built to plans is capable of just as a matter of general information purposes and not something I would be willing to test through actual empirical methodology. Do we have a realistic stress value for the Piet, For discussion purposes and with no mathematical or engineering proof I have told people when asked it is estimated at 3.5 Gs positive and negative. If I have under or over estimated I would like to know what the real number is, again for no practical purpose other than discussion regarding the safety of the structure is all. John In a message dated 9/29/2009 1:10:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, eng@canadianrogers.com writes: Now THAT sounds like a well thought out, sound, engineering-based approach. I think everybody would appreciate a photo of that. Well, I would, anyway (even though it doesn't involve 1000 pounds of tractor weights or a small elephant balanced precariously atop the capstrip). Bill C. -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [_mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com_ (mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com) ] On Behalf Of 899PM Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 12:51 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Wood Options --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "899PM" --> With the rib inverted and held on fake spars, I pulled at 12-15 locations on the rib capstrip with load spacing approximating the pressure curve of the airfoil in flight(i.e. concentrated on the front section of the rib). My "load" on the rib fixture was via engineering grade springs and wingnuts to make it easy to count turns and track compression/spring rate. If memory serves, I heard a crack at #358 of loading. This roughly translates to 10G's. If anyone is interested, I can post a pic. -------- PAPA MIKE (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 11:20:55 AM PST US From: Wayne Bressler Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? I'm with Mike. Perhaps I don't have as much of the "experimenter" nature in me, but I just don't see the benefit in straying from the proven materials and procedures. I'm not building a Piet now, but someday I will. When I do, you can be sure that it will be of aircraft quality materials. I understand the desire and/or need to build on a budget, but I fail to see the value. As if this hobby didn't have enough risks already, why would I want to add to them? Some substitutions are proven and simple, but why try to re-engineer an 80-year old proven design? Wayne Bressler Jr. Taildraggers, Inc. taildraggersinc.com Sent from the phone that made the Blackberry obsolete. On Sep 29, 2009, at 1:36 PM, "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" wrote: > [ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" > > I have to wonder why anyone would need to test an 80 year old > airfoil design that has never (to my knowledge) had a failure ? > > I'm sure there is some satisfaction with finding out if you're ribs > are built safely but who of us has enough knowledge to even setup a > proper scenario that would represent a realistic load on the rib ? > Instead of doing all this fiddle-farting around I would rather just > build my plane with a/c grade materials and accepted practices and > enjoy flying it. Just my opinion but unless you're building with > knotty pine lumber and Elmer's glue you shouldn't really even be > concerned with the strength of a Pietenpol wing rib. > > Mike C. > > ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 11:22:13 AM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing =?UTF-8?Q?=3F? From: Ken Howe My reason for testing is to see if my building is up to snuff. This is the first aircraft project I've attempted. While I'm comfortable working with wood, I've never tried to put together a structure anything like this, and with such negative consequences for getting it wrong. So, if I can see how others are testing their ribs and can test mine with a comparable load, then I'll have a lot more confidence in my own abilities. My test last week did show that my gluing techniques were sub-par. I'm also not sure if my test rig was a reasonable approximation of actual high-g loads on a rib - is my rib as weak as I think it is or is my test rig applying the loads poorly? I'm glad I made a test. It showed that I was being way to stingy with that expensive T-88. I've since reasoned that T-88 isn't so expensive that I can't use enough :) I also decided that I was not using enough clamping pressure (I'm going nail-less on my ribs.) I was using steel weights set on the gussets to provide pressure, and I now don't think I used enough weight. I've modified my jig so that I can use the ABS pipe section clamps. The first new rib came out of the jig this morning. It looks like good squeeze out, but not excessive, around all of the gussets Just my thoughts. --Ken On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:36:06 -0500, "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" wrote: > Aerospace Corporation]" > > I have to wonder why anyone would need to test an 80 year old airfoil > design that has never (to my knowledge) had a failure ? > > I'm sure there is some satisfaction with finding out if you're ribs are > built safely but who of us has enough knowledge to even setup a proper > scenario that would represent a realistic load on the rib ? Instead of > doing all this fiddle-farting around I would rather just build my plane > with a/c grade materials and accepted practices and enjoy flying it. Just > my opinion but unless you're building with knotty pine lumber and Elmer's > glue you shouldn't really even be concerned with the strength of a > Pietenpol wing rib. > > Mike C. > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 11:43:45 AM PST US From: Jeff Boatright Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? Rib stress analysis is not my cup of tea, either, but I do have in interest in actual known failure points or modes. First, do they exist for the Pietenpol Air Camper? That is, is there some combination of design/build/activity that has produced a failure more than once? For instance, the early V-tailed Bonanzas seemed to have such a failure nexus with the tail attachment. There are now similar questions being asked about Airbus vertical tail members. Does a failure nexus exist on the Piet? If so, what is it? >(GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" >...Instead of doing all this fiddle-farting around I would rather >just build my plane with a/c grade materials and accepted practices >and enjoy flying it.... >Mike C. -- Jeff Boatright "Now let's think about this..." ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 11:52:44 AM PST US From: Oscar Zuniga Subject: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating I would be concerned about a -3.5G load on the lift struts on my airplane. Let's use very quick, rough, and conservative numbers and say that the airplane is at gross, using a rough 1100 lb. max gross. Under 3.5G loading, that's 3850 lbs. and if we get really rough and say each of the four lift struts is sharing that load equally (not even close to the actual condition, but let's just say)- that's nearly 1000 lbs. that each of the lift struts sees in compression loading. The jury struts provide resistance against buckling failure in one mode, but even at that- I would feel very iffy about that kind of loading, particularly if there was any buffetting going on. The attach bolts would be fine, even the ones at the wing- if I recall, those are AN4 and in double shear, so with a shear strength of 76000 psi, they should be good for something like 7000 lbs. each. I believe I've heard it said that there has never been a catastrophic structural failure of a Piet. Knowing how many of them have flown and are flying, and how many zillions of people have piloted them through all sorts of conditions, I think it's safe to say that you really have to mistreat one to break something structural on them. And that's probably about as close as you're going to get to an engineering analysis of the ultimate load rating on the airframe unless someone wants to model it with a finite element analysis or something sharper than a hardware-store yardstick. Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 11:54:33 AM PST US From: John Hofmann Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? Failure to follow the plans.... "Smile Son. Never Disconcert the Masses." Sorry Jeff, that was too easy :) Do not archive John Hofmann Vice-President, Information Technology The Rees Group, Inc. 2810 Crossroads Drive, Ste 3800 Madison, WI 53718 Phone: 608.443.2468 ext 150 Fax: 608.443.2474 Email: jhofmann@reesgroupinc.com On Sep 29, 2009, at 1:40 PM, Jeff Boatright wrote: > > > > Rib stress analysis is not my cup of tea, either, but I do have in > interest in actual known failure points or modes. First, do they > exist for the Pietenpol Air Camper? That is, is there some > combination of design/build/activity that has produced a failure > more than once? For instance, the early V-tailed Bonanzas seemed to > have such a failure nexus with the tail attachment. There are now > similar questions being asked about Airbus vertical tail members. > > Does a failure nexus exist on the Piet? If so, what is it? > >> [ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" >> ...Instead of doing all this fiddle-farting around I would rather >> just build my plane with a/c grade materials and accepted practices >> and enjoy flying it.... >> Mike C. > > > -- > > Jeff Boatright > "Now let's think about this..." > > ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 11:58:18 AM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: perplexed at wood testing ? From: "899PM" Mike, All good points. I originally tested a wing rib to 1) Like Ken, give me a warm and fuzzy that my t-88 gluing was up to snuff and 2) to prove to others(on this list 11 years ago) that the Piet rib per plans is built like the proverbial brick crap-house. You may remember that healthy debate. Few of the "old timers'" with the bulk of the knowledge were(or are) on the web to defend the design and LOTS of good intentioned folks were probably scared off from the remarks of some non-building know-it-alls. I have a fairly healthy wooden wing rib collection. None are built as heavily as the Piet...not even the Ford built Waco GC-4A glider ribs. An example of lightness on the other end is the Porterfield CP-50 rib. Slightly less than 1/4" square. -------- PAPA MIKE Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265594#265594 ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 12:18:32 PM PST US From: "Dave Abramson" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating Greetings all! There has been at least 1 catastrophic wing failier on a Pietenpol.... In Chet Peeks book..... There is a story of someone doing aerobatics, and his Pietenpol fell apart in the air. (back in the 20's or 30's) Just wanted to throw that out there! Dave -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Oscar Zuniga Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:52 AM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating I would be concerned about a -3.5G load on the lift struts on my airplane. Let's use very quick, rough, and conservative numbers and say that the airplane is at gross, using a rough 1100 lb. max gross. Under 3.5G loading, that's 3850 lbs. and if we get really rough and say each of the four lift struts is sharing that load equally (not even close to the actual condition, but let's just say)- that's nearly 1000 lbs. that each of the lift struts sees in compression loading. The jury struts provide resistance against buckling failure in one mode, but even at that- I would feel very iffy about that kind of loading, particularly if there was any buffetting going on. The attach bolts would be fine, even the ones at the wing- if I recall, those are AN4 and in double shear, so with a shear strength of 76000 psi, they should be good for something like 7000 lbs. each. I believe I've heard it said that there has never been a catastrophic structural failure of a Piet. Knowing how many of them have flown and are flying, and how many zillions of people have piloted them through all sorts of conditions, I think it's safe to say that you really have to mistreat one to break something structural on them. And that's probably about as close as you're going to get to an engineering analysis of the ultimate load rating on the airframe unless someone wants to model it with a finite element analysis or something sharper than a hardware-store yardstick. Oscar Zuniga Air Camper NX41CC San Antonio, TX mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com website at http://www.flysquirrel.net ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 12:18:53 PM PST US Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? From: "Bill Church" Ken, If you build to the plans, using standard building practices, there should be no need to test your construction. The only testing of structures that makes any sense to me is with an unproven design. It sounds like you were not using standard building practices. See the attached Technical Data Sheet for "expensive" T-88. It clearly says that "glue line thickness is not critical, and clamping is not necessary if the joint is undisturbed during the setting of the adhesive." Your conclusion that you were not using enough pressure is unfounded, since T-88 (unlike Resorcinol) does NOT need to be clamped. You are correct when you say you were being "too stingy" with the T-88. Wet both mating surfaces with a liberal amount of adhesive before assembling the joints. "Liberal" means that there is sufficient glue to fill any gaps that might exist between the wood pieces. When you put the pieces together, there should be a little squeeze-out. If you have a lot of squeeze-out, use less glue on the next joint, until you get a feel for the correct amount. Go to the EAA website, and check out the hints for homebuilders videos in the multimedia section. There is one specifically dealing with gluing gussets with T-88. By the way, you might spend $100 on T-88 to build the entire airplane. That isn't a significant amount when you consider the total cost of the project or the importance of what the epoxy does. Bill C. -----Original Message----- From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken Howe Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 2:18 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? My reason for testing is to see if my building is up to snuff. This is the first aircraft project I've attempted. While I'm comfortable working with wood, I've never tried to put together a structure anything like this, and with such negative consequences for getting it wrong. So, if I can see how others are testing their ribs and can test mine with a comparable load, then I'll have a lot more confidence in my own abilities. My test last week did show that my gluing techniques were sub-par. I'm also not sure if my test rig was a reasonable approximation of actual high-g loads on a rib - is my rib as weak as I think it is or is my test rig applying the loads poorly? I'm glad I made a test. It showed that I was being way to stingy with that expensive T-88. I've since reasoned that T-88 isn't so expensive that I can't use enough :) I also decided that I was not using enough clamping pressure (I'm going nail-less on my ribs.) I was using steel weights set on the gussets to provide pressure, and I now don't think I used enough weight. I've modified my jig so that I can use the ABS pipe section clamps. The first new rib came out of the jig this morning. It looks like good squeeze out, but not excessive, around all of the gussets Just my thoughts. --Ken ________________________________ Message 28 ____________________________________ Time: 12:26:54 PM PST US From: Rados Svagelj Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating KmlFile normal #sn_ylw-pushpin highlight #sh_ylw-pushpin myplace 14.59800438862544 46.05490178405317 0 251.2305584083554 0 0.004708165356730392 #msn_ylw-pushpin 14.59800438862544,46.05490178405317,0 Dave Abramson wrote: > > Greetings all! > > There has been at least 1 catastrophic wing failier on a Pietenpol.... > > In Chet Peeks book..... There is a story of someone doing aerobatics, and > his Pietenpol fell apart in the air. (back in the 20's or 30's) > > Just wanted to throw that out there! > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Oscar > Zuniga > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:52 AM > To: Pietenpol List > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating > > > > > I would be concerned about a -3.5G load on the lift struts > on my airplane. Let's use very quick, rough, and conservative > numbers and say that the airplane is at gross, using a > rough 1100 lb. max gross. Under 3.5G loading, that's 3850 lbs. > and if we get really rough and say each of the four lift struts > is sharing that load equally (not even close to the actual > condition, but let's just say)- that's nearly 1000 lbs. that > each of the lift struts sees in compression loading. The jury > struts provide resistance against buckling failure in one mode, > but even at that- I would feel very iffy about that kind of > loading, particularly if there was any buffetting going on. > > The attach bolts would be fine, even the ones at the wing- if > I recall, those are AN4 and in double shear, so with a shear > strength of 76000 psi, they should be good for something like > 7000 lbs. each. > > I believe I've heard it said that there has never been a > catastrophic structural failure of a Piet. Knowing how many of > them have flown and are flying, and how many zillions of people > have piloted them through all sorts of conditions, I think it's > safe to say that you really have to mistreat one to break > something structural on them. > > And that's probably about as close as you're going to get to an > engineering analysis of the ultimate load rating on the airframe > unless someone wants to model it with a finite element analysis > or something sharper than a hardware-store yardstick. > > Oscar Zuniga > Air Camper NX41CC > San Antonio, TX > mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com > website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > > -- LP Rado ________________________________ Message 29 ____________________________________ Time: 12:43:43 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner From: gwread@aol.com I used 3/8" M-D rubber weather seal. I have attached a pixture of the package that you can pick up at your local big box home improvement center. I?just used the stick surface it came with as I wasnt sure I would like the results but it worked! Also a picture of the end result. Gap sealed. I also included a picture of "Rocky" with the Broadhead banner my wife won at the Brodhead fly in this year Gary N10GR -----Original Message----- From: Ross Alexander Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:52 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators How did you sealo the gaps on the vertical and horizontal stabilizer? Duct tape or what would you suggest. Ross in Orangeville, Ontario, Canada C-FTJM From: tengulfromeo Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:04:50 PM Subject: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol). Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare. Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? Gary N10GR Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/vsp; --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List _ref="http://forums.matronics.com" target="_blank">http://forums.matronibsp; Thank you for your generous nbsp; ? ? ? ? ? ? -Matt Dralle, List Admin. Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now! Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now! ________________________________ Message 30 ____________________________________ Time: 01:05:22 PM PST US From: Ryan Mueller Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating That statement is not quite correct. There are two stories in the book about crashes stemming from aerobatics; one was a Mr. Galen Elser and the other a gentleman named Bennie Skaarberg. Both aircraft reportedly fell inverted from the top side of an attempted loop, thereby putting negative loading on the wing struts. The struts promptly failed, and the wings departed the aircraft. The wings themselves did not fail, the struts did. As Chet later writes, 'Bernard always warned against doing "stunts"'. If you want to do stunts, build yourself a Pitts. :P Ryan Sent from my mobile device On Sep 29, 2009, at 2:16 PM, "Dave Abramson" wrote: > > > > Greetings all! > > There has been at least 1 catastrophic wing failier on a Pietenpol.... > > In Chet Peeks book..... There is a story of someone doing > aerobatics, and > his Pietenpol fell apart in the air. (back in the 20's or 30's) > > Just wanted to throw that out there! > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Oscar > Zuniga > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:52 AM > To: Pietenpol List > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating > > > > > > > I would be concerned about a -3.5G load on the lift struts > on my airplane. Let's use very quick, rough, and conservative > numbers and say that the airplane is at gross, using a > rough 1100 lb. max gross. Under 3.5G loading, that's 3850 lbs. > and if we get really rough and say each of the four lift struts > is sharing that load equally (not even close to the actual > condition, but let's just say)- that's nearly 1000 lbs. that > each of the lift struts sees in compression loading. The jury > struts provide resistance against buckling failure in one mode, > but even at that- I would feel very iffy about that kind of > loading, particularly if there was any buffetting going on. > > The attach bolts would be fine, even the ones at the wing- if > I recall, those are AN4 and in double shear, so with a shear > strength of 76000 psi, they should be good for something like > 7000 lbs. each. > > I believe I've heard it said that there has never been a > catastrophic structural failure of a Piet. Knowing how many of > them have flown and are flying, and how many zillions of people > have piloted them through all sorts of conditions, I think it's > safe to say that you really have to mistreat one to break > something structural on them. > > And that's probably about as close as you're going to get to an > engineering analysis of the ultimate load rating on the airframe > unless someone wants to model it with a finite element analysis > or something sharper than a hardware-store yardstick. > > Oscar Zuniga > Air Camper NX41CC > San Antonio, TX > mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com > website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 01:22:29 PM PST US From: Jim Markle Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating Agreed, there have actually been a number of "failures" with Pietenpols. Just none (that I've ever heard of) due to the design. I always enjoy pointing out to "non aviation types" that the so called "failures" had everything to do with the pilot. Seems everyone I've ever showed my project to (non aviation types, that is) always want to know if it's gonna fall apart in flight...it's nice to be able to say "As long as I fly it the way I'm supposed to fly it...no problem!" jm -----Original Message----- >From: Dave Abramson >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 2:16 PM >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com >Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating > > >Greetings all! > >There has been at least 1 catastrophic wing failier on a Pietenpol.... > >In Chet Peeks book..... There is a story of someone doing aerobatics, and >his Pietenpol fell apart in the air. (back in the 20's or 30's) > >Just wanted to throw that out there! > >Dave > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Oscar >Zuniga >Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:52 AM >To: Pietenpol List >Subject: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating > > > > >I would be concerned about a -3.5G load on the lift struts >on my airplane. Let's use very quick, rough, and conservative >numbers and say that the airplane is at gross, using a >rough 1100 lb. max gross. Under 3.5G loading, that's 3850 lbs. >and if we get really rough and say each of the four lift struts >is sharing that load equally (not even close to the actual >condition, but let's just say)- that's nearly 1000 lbs. that >each of the lift struts sees in compression loading. The jury >struts provide resistance against buckling failure in one mode, >but even at that- I would feel very iffy about that kind of >loading, particularly if there was any buffetting going on. > >The attach bolts would be fine, even the ones at the wing- if >I recall, those are AN4 and in double shear, so with a shear >strength of 76000 psi, they should be good for something like >7000 lbs. each. > >I believe I've heard it said that there has never been a >catastrophic structural failure of a Piet. Knowing how many of >them have flown and are flying, and how many zillions of people >have piloted them through all sorts of conditions, I think it's >safe to say that you really have to mistreat one to break >something structural on them. > >And that's probably about as close as you're going to get to an >engineering analysis of the ultimate load rating on the airframe >unless someone wants to model it with a finite element analysis >or something sharper than a hardware-store yardstick. > >Oscar Zuniga >Air Camper NX41CC >San Antonio, TX >mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com >website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > ________________________________ Message 32 ____________________________________ Time: 01:33:29 PM PST US Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing =?UTF-8?Q?=3F? From: Ken Howe Bill, I agree with everything you said, I perhaps wasn't very clear in what I intended to say. By 'insufficient clamping pressure' what I meant was "insufficient pressure to close up the small gaps and maintain contact given that I did not use enough T-88". I've read the Technical Data Sheet and have viewed the excellent EAA how-to videos. My comments on T-88 were a bit tongue-in-cheek. I realize that trying to use 'just enough' T-88 was plainly wrong, and in the grand scheme the cost of T-88 is not significant. As a result of my failed test I've made several changes to gluing process, including being more careful about leveling the contact areas of every joint (that's out of Tony B's book), using enough T-88 to fully wet both surfaces and a different clamping method that will insure contact even if I jar the jig as I progress around the rib. I also of course realize that I'm using a 'non-standard' building technique. That's one reason I wanted to test how I was doing. A basic principle of the Experimental Amateur Built classification is education, and I'm learning as I go. For me, using cement coated brass nails to hold the gussets in place is just as non-standard as clamping. I've never done it before and I've never watched anyone making a rib that way. Even the EAA video uses a technique that didn't exist in 1929 (staples). I highly value the work Mr. Pietenpol did, but you also have to remember that (as far as I know or have read) he never built 2 aircraft the same. He was experimenting all the time, some of the obvious things he changed were engines, landing gear, and spar dimensions. I'd be willing to bet that there are many little changes that aren't so obvious. When I'm done, my airplane will not be built exactly to plans, but then I doubt any of them truly are. You can't show everything exactly on 8 sheets (although they are amazingly complete for just being 8 sheets.) I'll still be proud to call it a Pietenpol. --Ken On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:15:58 -0400, "Bill Church" wrote: > Ken, > > If you build to the plans, using standard building practices, there > should be no need to test your construction. The only testing of > structures that makes any sense to me is with an unproven design. > It sounds like you were not using standard building practices. See the > attached Technical Data Sheet for "expensive" T-88. It clearly says that > "glue line thickness is not critical, and clamping is not necessary if > the joint is undisturbed during the setting of the adhesive." Your > conclusion that you were not using enough pressure is unfounded, since > T-88 (unlike Resorcinol) does NOT need to be clamped. You are correct > when you say you were being "too stingy" with the T-88. Wet both mating > surfaces with a liberal amount of adhesive before assembling the joints. > "Liberal" means that there is sufficient glue to fill any gaps that > might exist between the wood pieces. When you put the pieces together, > there should be a little squeeze-out. If you have a lot of squeeze-out, > use less glue on the next joint, until you get a feel for the correct > amount. > Go to the EAA website, and check out the hints for homebuilders videos > in the multimedia section. There is one specifically dealing with gluing > gussets with T-88. > By the way, you might spend $100 on T-88 to build the entire airplane. > That isn't a significant amount when you consider the total cost of the > project or the importance of what the epoxy does. > > Bill C. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken Howe > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 2:18 PM > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? > > > > My reason for testing is to see if my building is up to snuff. This is > the first aircraft project I've attempted. While I'm comfortable working > with wood, I've never tried to put together a structure anything like > this, and with such negative consequences for getting it wrong. So, if I > can see how others are testing their ribs and can test mine with a > comparable load, then I'll have a lot more confidence in my own > abilities. > > My test last week did show that my gluing techniques were sub-par. I'm > also not sure if my test rig was a reasonable approximation of actual > high-g loads on a rib - is my rib as weak as I think it is or is my test > rig applying the loads poorly? > > I'm glad I made a test. It showed that I was being way to stingy with > that expensive T-88. I've since reasoned that T-88 isn't so expensive > that I can't use enough :) I also decided that I was not using enough > clamping pressure (I'm going nail-less on my ribs.) I was using steel > weights set on the gussets to provide pressure, and I now don't think I > used enough weight. I've modified my jig so that I can use the ABS pipe > section clamps. > The first new rib came out of the jig this morning. It looks like good > squeeze out, but not excessive, around all of the gussets > > Just my thoughts. > > --Ken > ________________________________ Message 33 ____________________________________ Time: 02:31:46 PM PST US From: Doug Dever Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS vinyl ester resin is compatable with av gas Doug Dever In beautiful Stow Ohio > Date: Tue=2C 29 Sep 2009 09:36:29 -0500 > From: timothywillis@earthlink.net > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS > .net> > > Clif=2C > I am not asking for my own info=2C but for others who might be considerin g a fiberglass tank. Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only a ccommodate avgas and mogas=2C but mogas with ethanol (something we should a void for other reasons=2C too) just in case we get some=2C either by necess ity or ignorance? [I recall the problems some boaters had with ethanol in t heir glass tanks.] > Thanks=2C Tim in central TX > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Clif Dawson > >Sent: Sep 29=2C 2009 2:42 AM > >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys seem like they have a good sense of humor > > > >Ribs! forget the ribs. I'm all tanked up! Well=2C almost. > > > >Clif > >> > >> Still with the ribs! What's with you guys and the ribs! I did get 3/4 of > >> my > >> center section built last weekend! (sure wish I had built those ribs > >> first!) > >> > >> Gary Boothe > > =========== =========== =========== =========== > > > =0A _________________________________________________________________=0A Hotmail=AE has ever-growing storage! Don=92t worry about storage limits.=0A http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tuto rial_Storage_062009 ________________________________ Message 34 ____________________________________ Time: 02:43:31 PM PST US Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? From: "Bill Church" Ken, My comment regarding "standard construction practices" had nothing to do with clamping, or nailing, or stapling, or the lack thereof. It was based solely on the practice of using the materials specified by the designer, and using the adhesive of choice in the manner in which it is designed to be used. T-88 is a well proven adhesive which has been used in aircraft construction for quite a while - long enough to be considered a "standard practice" (as has Resorcinol, which has very different directions for use). But if an adhesive is not used as directed, then its use becomes "non-standard". With T-88, if not enough epoxy is applied to the joints, or if excessive clamping pressure is applied (resulting in glue starvation), the joints will not achieve the design strength. In your test rib, you did not use enough epoxy. That was my point. Having said that, from the sounds of things, you are on the right track. You obtained (and actually read) the Bingelis books. You've read the data sheets for your adhesive. You've witnessed (via video) some wood construction techniques. And now, you've tried building a rib, and seen what you needed to change in your technique. That's what it's all about. Live and learn (and live). While your comments regarding "expensive T-88" were intended to be tongue-in-cheek, it seems that many builders (and this comment is not directed at you, personally) appear to have a mentality that there are many opportunities to cut corners, in an attempt to reduce the cost to build. I have read many posts about builders trying to calculate the EXACT ideal amount of epoxy that one should mix to assemble a wing rib - with the goal being that the last drop scraped off the mixing board (or cup, or whatever) gets used to glue the last gusset in place. Well, what does a builder do if he comes up just a little bit short? I always was left with a bit of epoxy (about 1/8" deep) left in the bottom of my mixing cup when I finished a rib. Those remains are left in that mixing cup, dated, and kept as samples of my glue mix. I will probably end up with $25 worth of "wasted" epoxy by the time I'm finished. That will be less than a half tank of gas - maybe two hours in the air. If one is a scrounger, it is said that a Pietenpol can be built for under $10,000. But if you don't squeeze the pennies, your Piet might approach $20,000. That's not a huge range, and the upper value is still a very cheap airplane, and once finished, the building costs will become more and more insignificant when the costs of hangar space, insurance, fuel, oil and maintenance are factored in. I'm trying to keep my costs down as well, but sometimes I'm baffled by the "logic" of some builders. In my opinion (which is worth every penny you paid for it), if the cost of a bottle of epoxy is a financial concern, then maybe building an airplane isn't a good decision. Again, Ken, I'm not directing these comments at you, just putting it "out there". Bill C. (stepping off the soapbox now) ________________________________ Message 35 ____________________________________ Time: 03:22:29 PM PST US From: Thomas Bernie Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner Guys, Another way is to use fabric when covering, but you can't take the elevators off without cutting them. Regards, Tom On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:42 PM, gwread@aol.com wrote: > > I used 3/8" M-D rubber weather seal. I have attached a pixture of > the package that you can pick up at your local big box home > improvement center. I just used the stick surface it came with as I > wasnt sure I would like the results but it worked! Also a picture of > the end result. Gap sealed. > I also included a picture of "Rocky" with the Broadhead banner my > wife won at the Brodhead fly in this year > Gary > N10GR > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ross Alexander > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:52 pm > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators > > How did you sealo the gaps on the vertical and horizontal > stabilizer? Duct tape or what would you suggest. Ross in > Orangeville, Ontario, Canada C-FTJM > > From: tengulfromeo > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:04:50 PM > Subject: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators > > > I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. > (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on > the Pietenpol). > > Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the > underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed > improved elevator authority on landing flare. > > Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of > character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has > anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? > > Gary > N10GR > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/vsp; --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List > _ref="http://forums.matronics.com" target="_blank">http://forums.matronibsp > ; Thank you for your generous nbsp; -Matt Dralle, List > Admin. > > > Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark > your favourite sites. Download it now! > ________________________________ Message 36 ____________________________________ Time: 03:49:36 PM PST US From: Kip and Beth Gardner Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? AW Mikey - Why did you go & have to drag the Fisherman's construction methods into this? Kip Gardner DO NOT ARCHIVE On Sep 29, 2009, at 1:36 PM, Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation] wrote: > [ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" > > I have to wonder why anyone would need to test an 80 year old > airfoil design that has never (to my knowledge) had a failure ? > > I'm sure there is some satisfaction with finding out if you're ribs > are built safely but who of us has enough knowledge to even setup a > proper scenario that would represent a realistic load on the > rib ? Instead of doing all this fiddle-farting around I would > rather just build my plane with a/c grade materials and accepted > practices and enjoy flying it. Just my opinion but unless you're > building with knotty pine lumber and Elmer's glue you shouldn't > really even be concerned with the strength of a Pietenpol wing rib. > > Mike C. > > ________________________________ Message 37 ____________________________________ Time: 04:04:21 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner From: gwread@aol.com Nice work. I used fabric on the ailerons. Gary N10GR "If we love flying so much why are we in a hurry to get there?" -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Bernie Sent: Tue, Sep 29, 2009 6:20 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner Guys, Another way is to use fabric when covering, but you can't take the elevators off without cutting them. Regards, Tom On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:42 PM, gwread@aol.com wrote: I used 3/8" M-D rubber weather seal. I have attached a pixture of the package that you can pick up at your local big box home improvement center. I?just used the stick surface it came with as I wasnt sure I would like the results but it worked! Also a picture of the end result. Gap sealed. I also included a picture of "Rocky" with the Broadhead banner my wife won at the Brodhead fly in this year Gary N10GR -----Original Message----- From: Ross Alexander To:?pietenpol-list@matronics.com Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:52 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators How did you sealo the gaps on the vertical and horizontal stabilizer? Duct tape or what would you suggest. Ross in Orangeville, Ontario, Canada C-FTJM From:?tengulfromeo To:?pietenpol-list@matronics.com Sent:?Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:04:50 PM Subject:?Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol).? Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare.? Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing?? Gary? N10GR Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/vsp; -->?http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List _ref="http://forums.matronics.com" target="_blank">http://forums.matronibsp; Thank you for your generous nbsp; ? ? ? ? ? ? -Matt Dralle, List Admin. Yahoo! Canada Toolbar :?Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now! = ________________________________ Message 38 ____________________________________ Time: 05:51:32 PM PST US From: Ross Alexander Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner I am not familiar with this material called MD rubber weaqther seal. What store sells it? What are it's dimensions? Width, thickness, lengths? Appreciate any info. Thanx Ross ________________________________ From: Thomas Bernie Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 6:20:56 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner Guys, Another way is to use fabric when covering, but you can't take the elevators off without cutting them. Regards, Tom On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:42 PM, gwread@aol.com wrote: >I used 3/8" M-D rubber weather seal. I have attached a pixture of the package that you can pick up at your local big box home improvement center. I just used the stick surface it came with as I wasnt sure I would like the results but it worked! Also a picture of the end result. Gap sealed. >I also included a picture of "Rocky" with the Broadhead banner my wife won at the Brodhead fly in this year >Gary >N10GR > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ross Alexander >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com >Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:52 pm >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators > > >How did you sealo the gaps on the vertical and horizontal stabilizer? Duct tape or what would you suggest. Ross in Orangeville, Ontario, Canada C-FTJM > > ________________________________ From: tengulfromeo >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com >Sent: Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:04:50 PM >Subject: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators > > >I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol). > >Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare. > >Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? > >Gary >N10GR > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/vsp; --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List >_ref="http://forums.matronics.com" target="_blank">http://forums.matronibsp; Thank you for your generous nbsp; -Matt Dralle, List Admin. > > ________________________________ >Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now! __________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now ________________________________ Message 39 ____________________________________ Time: 05:53:18 PM PST US From: Doug Dever Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? You don't need toapproximate loading. All you need to do is see if the woo d failed or the glue joint failed first. The method of destruction doesn't really matter. Doug Dever In beautiful Stow Ohio > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: perplexed at wood testing ? > Date: Tue=2C 29 Sep 2009 12:18:04 -0600 > From: ken@cooper-mtn.com > > > > My reason for testing is to see if my building is up to snuff. This is th e > first aircraft project I've attempted. While I'm comfortable working with > wood=2C I've never tried to put together a structure anything like this =2C and > with such negative consequences for getting it wrong. So=2C if I can see how > others are testing their ribs and can test mine with a comparable load=2C > then I'll have a lot more confidence in my own abilities. > > My test last week did show that my gluing techniques were sub-par. I'm al so > not sure if my test rig was a reasonable approximation of actual high-g > loads on a rib - is my rib as weak as I think it is or is my test rig > applying the loads poorly? > > I'm glad I made a test. It showed that I was being way to stingy with tha t > expensive T-88. I've since reasoned that T-88 isn't so expensive that I > can't use enough :) I also decided that I was not using enough clamping > pressure (I'm going nail-less on my ribs.) I was using steel weights set on > the gussets to provide pressure=2C and I now don't think I used enough > weight. I've modified my jig so that I can use the ABS pipe section clamp s. > The first new rib came out of the jig this morning. It looks like good > squeeze out=2C but not excessive=2C around all of the gussets > > Just my thoughts. > > --Ken > > On Tue=2C 29 Sep 2009 12:36:06 -0500=2C "Cuy=2C Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASR C > Aerospace Corporation]" wrote: C > > Aerospace Corporation]" > > > > I have to wonder why anyone would need to test an 80 year old airfoil > > design that has never (to my knowledge) had a failure ? > > > > I'm sure there is some satisfaction with finding out if you're ribs are > > built safely but who of us has enough knowledge to even setup a proper > > scenario that would represent a realistic load on the rib ? Instead of > > doing all this fiddle-farting around I would rather just build my plane > > with a/c grade materials and accepted practices and enjoy flying it. > Just > > my opinion but unless you're building with knotty pine lumber and Elmer 's > > glue you shouldn't really even be concerned with the strength of a > > Pietenpol wing rib. > > > > Mike C. > > > > > > > > > > > > > =========== =========== =========== =========== > > > =0A _________________________________________________________________=0A Bing=99 brings you maps=2C menus=2C and reviews organized in one place. Try it now.=0A http://www.bing.com/search?q=restaurants&form=MLOGEN&publ=WLHMTAG&cre a=TEXT_MLOGEN_Core_tagline_local_1x1 ________________________________ Message 40 ____________________________________ Time: 06:51:48 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner From: gwread@aol.com I attached pictures of the package, showing the dimensions. Did they come through on the original email or do I need to post them somewhere? -----Original Message----- From: Ross Alexander Sent: Tue, Sep 29, 2009 8:47 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner I am not familiar with this material called MD rubber weaqther seal. What store sells it? What are it's dimensions? Width, thickness, lengths? Appreciate any info. Thanx? Ross From: Thomas Bernie Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 6:20:56 PM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators - Broadhead Banner Guys, Another way is to use fabric when covering, but you can't take the elevators off without cutting them. Regards, Tom On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:42 PM, gwread@aol.com wrote: I used 3/8" M-D rubber weather seal. I have attached a pixture of the package that you can pick up at your local big box home improvement center. I?just used the stick surface it came with as I wasnt sure I would like the results but it worked! Also a picture of the end result. Gap sealed. I also included a picture of "Rocky" with the Broadhead banner my wife won at the Brodhead fly in this year Gary N10GR -----Original Message----- From: Ross Alexander To:?pietenpol-list@matronics.com Sent: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 9:52 pm Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators How did you sealo the gaps on the vertical and horizontal stabilizer? Duct tape or what would you suggest. Ross in Orangeville, Ontario, Canada C-FTJM From:?tengulfromeo To:?pietenpol-list@matronics.com Sent:?Sunday, September 27, 2009 7:04:50 PM Subject:?Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol).? Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare.? Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing?? Gary? N10GR Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/vsp; -->?http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pietenpol-List _ref="http://forums.matronics.com" target="_blank">http://forums.matronibsp; Thank you for your generous nbsp; ? ? ? ? ? ? -Matt Dralle, List Admin. Yahoo! Canada Toolbar :?Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now! Instant message from any web browser! Try the new Yahoo! Canada Messenger for the Web BETA ________________________________ Message 41 ____________________________________ Time: 07:08:03 PM PST US From: "mike" Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List:electric engine That much power (300 Hp) would be spectacularly awesome in a Piet...for a few minutes of flight time. (Math is easier for me if we just go with 100 Hp, a more reasonable number for Piets, so that is what I use here initially.) The best energy storage density of lithium-ion batteries these days is around 200 W-hr/Kg, or about 0.12 Hp-Hr/Lb. To get 100 Hp for one hour would require about 850 Lbs of batteries (at an unattainable 100% efficiency). A Piet needs about 30-40 Hp to cruise straight and level at a relatively slow speed. Consider that two hours of gasoline (at 5 gph) is about 60 lbs. I'm guessing that the electric motor weighs something less than a 100 Hp aircraft motor so assume a motor that weighs 100 lb less than its internal combustion counterpart. To cruise electrically for two hours, you would need about 600 Lb of lithium-ion batteries (with something more for takeoff). Minus the motor and gas weight savings, that adds 440Lb to your existing takeoff weight. With a pre-existing 650 Lb empty weight and 200 lbs of pilot, you have a 1300 Lb airplane. That might upset the stress analysis guys, but a Piet is pretty strong. And, with 300 Hp of takeoff power, 1300 lb will get off the ground right smartly. However, every time you climb, you eat up cruising time. Everyone, please feel free to critique my reasoning. Mike Hardaway _____ From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of H RULE Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:08 AM Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List:electric engine What do you think of putting this engine in a Piet?I peronally think it would be awsome! WOW........ Check this out. www.opb.org/programs/ofg/videos/view/56-Electric-Drag-Racing ________________________________ Message 42 ____________________________________ Time: 07:09:38 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Russell Ray's rib test/ Wood Options From: Robert Ray Micheal, Oh it had rained so much I just decided to stay home and clean the garage and put my G-suit in the washer! Maybe I'll see you at Brodhead. Russell On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation] wrote: > Aerospace Corporation]" > > > Russell, > > Have you been watching one too many episodes of The Red Green Show ? > > No wonder I couldn't find you at Lee Bottom either last weekend. I should > have > been looking for the guy with the Jim Beam hat on AND the G-suit. My > bad---I wish > I'd have known ! > > Mike C. > > do not archive > > ________________________________ Message 43 ____________________________________ Time: 07:29:58 PM PST US From: "gcardinal" Subject: Pietenpol-List: Does anybody know this plane? See the attached photo. Does anybody know this plane? It appears to be a Grega with an oversized fin / rudder. The wheels are interesting...... I'm trying to find more pictures or who it belongs to. Greg Cardinal ________________________________ Message 44 ____________________________________ Time: 07:54:43 PM PST US From: "Cuy, Michael D. (GRC-RXD0)[ASRC Aerospace Corporation]" Subject: Pietenpol-List: The Book according to the Fisherman AW Mikey - Why did you go & have to drag the Fisherman's construction methods into this? You know Kip you're RIGHT ! He loved using Home Depot, Ace, and Lowe's for all his a/c construction needs. I think once he got to the metal fittings though his project came to a quick halt. He was a character wasn't he ? Good old Ray Axillou. He's probably on some beach in Belize trying to figure out a new way to build a mud hut without the mud and straw. Mike C. do not archive ________________________________ Message 45 ____________________________________ Time: 08:08:27 PM PST US From: "Clif Dawson" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Fuel valve control The handle on mine is 1/8" thick. I bent it in a U, drilled and tapped for the 1/4" brass rod. with the two capture nuts and the thread in the U I think it's not likely to move anywhere. Just make the inside of the U wide enough for a nut and maybe 1/4" more just because. Oh yeah, In the final assembly I'll use lock nuts. Clif > Hey Clif, > > How did you attach the bar (or tube) to the U shaped piece on the valve? > Just drill a round hole and tighten down with those bolts? Or some kind > of opening with flat sides and matching flat sides on the bar stock? What > keeps it from turning when you move the handle up or down? > jm ________________________________ Message 46 ____________________________________ Time: 08:10:29 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating From: Robert Ray I plan on using the aluminum struts from Carlson, I think the ultimate fail in tension is 23000 (positive) g's. I think they are strong enough. Especially when there are two of them, now how's that for engineering calculus! Didn't need no caculator on that one. Russell On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Jim Markle wrote: > jim_markle@mindspring.com> > > Agreed, there have actually been a number of "failures" with Pietenpols. > Just none (that I've ever heard of) due to the design. > > I always enjoy pointing out to "non aviation types" that the so called > "failures" had everything to do with the pilot. > > Seems everyone I've ever showed my project to (non aviation types, that is) > always want to know if it's gonna fall apart in flight...it's nice to be > able to say "As long as I fly it the way I'm supposed to fly it...no > problem!" > > jm > > > -----Original Message----- > >From: Dave Abramson > >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 2:16 PM > >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > >Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating > > > davea@symbolicdisplays.com> > > > >Greetings all! > > > >There has been at least 1 catastrophic wing failier on a Pietenpol.... > > > >In Chet Peeks book..... There is a story of someone doing aerobatics, > and > >his Pietenpol fell apart in the air. (back in the 20's or 30's) > > > >Just wanted to throw that out there! > > > >Dave > > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com > >[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Oscar > >Zuniga > >Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:52 AM > >To: Pietenpol List > >Subject: Pietenpol-List: Air Camper load rating > > > > > > > > > > > >I would be concerned about a -3.5G load on the lift struts > >on my airplane. Let's use very quick, rough, and conservative > >numbers and say that the airplane is at gross, using a > >rough 1100 lb. max gross. Under 3.5G loading, that's 3850 lbs. > >and if we get really rough and say each of the four lift struts > >is sharing that load equally (not even close to the actual > >condition, but let's just say)- that's nearly 1000 lbs. that > >each of the lift struts sees in compression loading. The jury > >struts provide resistance against buckling failure in one mode, > >but even at that- I would feel very iffy about that kind of > >loading, particularly if there was any buffetting going on. > > > >The attach bolts would be fine, even the ones at the wing- if > >I recall, those are AN4 and in double shear, so with a shear > >strength of 76000 psi, they should be good for something like > >7000 lbs. each. > > > >I believe I've heard it said that there has never been a > >catastrophic structural failure of a Piet. Knowing how many of > >them have flown and are flying, and how many zillions of people > >have piloted them through all sorts of conditions, I think it's > >safe to say that you really have to mistreat one to break > >something structural on them. > > > >And that's probably about as close as you're going to get to an > >engineering analysis of the ultimate load rating on the airframe > >unless someone wants to model it with a finite element analysis > >or something sharper than a hardware-store yardstick. > > > >Oscar Zuniga > >Air Camper NX41CC > >San Antonio, TX > >mailto: taildrags@hotmail.com > >website at http://www.flysquirrel.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 47 ____________________________________ Time: 08:19:02 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS From: Robert Ray I heard of building with epoxy however there is another resin thats better suited for it, It's NOT polyester resin it's some thing else, search in on the net and you'll find web sites that tell what to use and what not to and the weight of cloth is also important. There's a site where a guy has had gas setting in a tank for couple of years. humm sound like anybody we know? Russell On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Doug Dever wr ote: > vinyl ester resin is compatable with av gas > > Doug Dever > In beautiful Stow Ohio > > > > Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:36:29 -0500 > > From: timothywillis@earthlink.net > > To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > > Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS > > > timothywillis@earthlink.net> > > > > Clif, > > I am not asking for my own info, but for others who might be considerin g > a fiberglass tank. Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only > accommodate avgas and mogas, but mogas with ethanol (something we should > avoid for other reasons, too) just in case we get some, either by necessi ty > or ignorance? [I recall the problems some boaters had with ethanol in the ir > glass tanks.] > > Thanks, Tim in central TX > > > > -----Original Message----- > > >From: Clif Dawson > > >Sent: Sep 29, 2009 2:42 AM > > >To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com > > >Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys seem like they have a > good sense of humor > > > > > >Ribs! forget the ribs. I'm all tanked up! Well, almost. > > > > > >Clif > > >> > > >> Still with the ribs! What's with you guys and the ribs! I did get 3/ 4 > of > > >> my > > >> center section built last weekend! (sure wish I had built those ribs > > >> first!) > > >>====================== > &g====== > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > Hotmail=AE has ever-growing storage! Don=92t worry about storage limits. Check > it out. > > * > =========== =========== =========== =========== > * > > ________________________________ Message 48 ____________________________________ Time: 08:19:11 PM PST US From: "Clif Dawson" Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS Like all the others have said, Vinylester. I didn't find it excessively smelly and the layup went quite smoothly. One thing though, get the resin that's for laying up layers. There's a finishing resin that oozes out wax as it cures. The guy at the fiberglass store called it "surfboard resin". If you haven't done this before it would be wise to do some practice layup, particularely edges and corners! It doesn't have to be big, a few inches in area is fine. The more rounded corners and edges the better. USE PLENTY OF RELEASE WAX ON THE PLUG!!! Clif Remember, every drip or blob in a cosmetic area is going to have to be filed off! :-) > Clif, > I am not asking for my own info, but for others who might be considering a > fiberglass tank. Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only > accommodate avgas and mogas, but mogas with ethanol (something we should > avoid for other reasons, too)> Thanks, Tim in central TX ________________________________ Message 49 ____________________________________ Time: 08:24:27 PM PST US From: Dan Yocum Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Vortex Generators Gary, In the last BPA newsletter Bill Rewey talks about dimple tape and his experiences using it on his props (~10% increase in performance, quieter operation, less fuel burn, etc.). The page at http://www.dimpletape.com says you can put the stuff on your wings, too. It might be worth a try and it's not nearly as noticeable as VGs. There's something to this stuff - the following is a research paper on increasing the L/D (lift over drag) coefficient on a high performance sailplane by 7-11% in general and by up to 20% in specific speed regions by placing a deturbulator strip on the wing at the correct location. This deturbulator creates a "slip layer" a couple of microns thick which increases the efficiency of the wing: http://www.sinhatech.com/AIAA-2006.pdf Now, I'm not one to take food out of an honest man's mouth, but on a recent foray into a local sign making shop, I noticed that they sold dimpled adhesive backed vinyl in large rolls for quite a bit less than $4.95 per foot... Cheers, Dan tengulfromeo wrote: > > I recently sealed my elevator gap which improved control response. (I strongly recommend gap seals on ailerons, rudder and elevator on the Pietenpol). > > Just for kicks this weekend I added vortex generators to the underside of my horizontal stabilizer and definitely noticed improved elevator authority on landing flare. > > Crazy I know, and if they didn't look so darn noticeable and out of character for an antique, but still it has me thinking........has anyone had experience with vortex generators on the Piet wing? > > Gary > N10GR > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265239#265239 > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan Yocum Fermilab 630.840.6509 yocum@fnal.gov, http://fermigrid.fnal.gov Fermilab. Just zeros and ones. ________________________________ Message 50 ____________________________________ Time: 08:54:32 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Does anybody know this plane? From: "Bill Church" Greg, You're right. That is a Grega with a large tail - in fact, it's the tail off a J3 Piper Cub. I believe it also has Piper wings. The plane is French (based in France). Here are a couple of links to some pages with some more photos: http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage.php?immat=F-PBGT http://www.flickr.com/photos/8221101@N02/with/3522085948/ I did a little Google searching, and found only French websites, and based on my weak skills in French, I believe the plane had an incident in 2001 where the left wheel didn't bother to accompany the plane on one flight. The pilot had to land with only the right wheel. The wheels are from a motorcycle, and the axle cracked, and snapped off upon take-off. The pilot managed to fly around, and attract attention to himself and his problem by wagging his wings. The fire department was called, and he flew around to burn off the fuel. When he landed, he eventually ground looped, without injury. Those wheels do look interesting. There was an email address for the owner of the plane (from a few years ago) on one of the websites I found - but since it's in France, you'd likely need to "parlez Francais" to get some more info from the owner. Bill C.[size=18][/size] Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265665#265665 ________________________________ Message 51 ____________________________________ Time: 09:12:59 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Does anybody know this plane? From: Robert Ray Nice! On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Bill Church wrote: > billspiet@sympatico.ca> > > Greg, > > You're right. That is a Grega with a large tail - in fact, it's the tail > off a J3 Piper Cub. I believe it also has Piper wings. The plane is French > (based in France). Here are a couple of links to some pages with some more > photos: > http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage.php?immat=F-PBGT > http://www.flickr.com/photos/8221101@N02/with/3522085948/ > > I did a little Google searching, and found only French websites, and based > on my weak skills in French, I believe the plane had an incident in 2001 > where the left wheel didn't bother to accompany the plane on one flight. The > pilot had to land with only the right wheel. The wheels are from a > motorcycle, and the axle cracked, and snapped off upon take-off. The pilot > managed to fly around, and attract attention to himself and his problem by > wagging his wings. The fire department was called, and he flew around to > burn off the fuel. When he landed, he eventually ground looped, without > injury. > > Those wheels do look interesting. There was an email address for the owner > of the plane (from a few years ago) on one of the websites I found - but > since it's in France, you'd likely need to "parlez Francais" to get some > more info from the owner. > > Bill C.[size=18][/size] > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265665#265665 > > ________________________________ Message 52 ____________________________________ Time: 09:14:35 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Does anybody know this plane? From: Robert Ray I don't think the wings are Grega either, what airfoil is that? russell On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Robert Ray wrote: > Nice! > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Bill Church wrote: > >> billspiet@sympatico.ca> >> >> Greg, >> >> You're right. That is a Grega with a large tail - in fact, it's the tail >> off a J3 Piper Cub. I believe it also has Piper wings. The plane is French >> (based in France). Here are a couple of links to some pages with some more >> photos: >> http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage.php?immat=F-PBGT >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/8221101@N02/with/3522085948/ >> >> I did a little Google searching, and found only French websites, and based >> on my weak skills in French, I believe the plane had an incident in 2001 >> where the left wheel didn't bother to accompany the plane on one flight. The >> pilot had to land with only the right wheel. The wheels are from a >> motorcycle, and the axle cracked, and snapped off upon take-off. The pilot >> managed to fly around, and attract attention to himself and his problem by >> wagging his wings. The fire department was called, and he flew around to >> burn off the fuel. When he landed, he eventually ground looped, without >> injury. >> >> Those wheels do look interesting. There was an email address for the owner >> of the plane (from a few years ago) on one of the websites I found - but >> since it's in France, you'd likely need to "parlez Francais" to get some >> more info from the owner. >> >> Bill C.[size=18][/size] >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265665#265665 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > ________________________________ Message 53 ____________________________________ Time: 09:21:52 PM PST US Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Air Camper load rating From: "Bill Church" Russell, What on earth are you talking about? Aluminum struts rated for 23000 g's !!! I guess that would apply to ANY aircraft they get used on? I'm going to assume that you're joking around - but on the off-chance that you're not... Other Piet builders have successfully used the aluminum streamline struts sold by Carlson, but I think you're overstating the strength by "more than a bit". Here's a link to the company website: http://www.carlsonaircraft.com/struts.html I assume you're referring to the Ultimate strengths listed on the Carlson website. For starters, you want to base any design calculations on Yield strength as opposed to Ultimate strength (Yield is when the part will deform (stretch) and not return to it's original state, whereas Ultimate strength is when the strut snaps in two, and your wings fold up, and you plummet to the ground). Secondly, those strengths are listed in PSIs (pounds per square inch) not Gs - Believe it or not, those two things are NOT related. Bill C. PS No need to boil the aluminum struts. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265670#265670 ________________________________ Message 54 ____________________________________ Time: 10:55:10 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Air Camper load rating From: Robert Ray Yes I meant 2300 lbs not G's, have you heard anything negative about these struts? I was was planning on using the cabane struts they sell also. Russell On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 12:21 AM, Bill Church wrote: > billspiet@sympatico.ca> > > Russell, > What on earth are you talking about? > Aluminum struts rated for 23000 g's !!! > > I guess that would apply to ANY aircraft they get used on? > > I'm going to assume that you're joking around - but on the off-chance that > you're not... > > Other Piet builders have successfully used the aluminum streamline struts > sold by Carlson, but I think you're overstating the strength by "more than a > bit". > > Here's a link to the company website: > http://www.carlsonaircraft.com/struts.html > > I assume you're referring to the Ultimate strengths listed on the Carlson > website. For starters, you want to base any design calculations on Yield > strength as opposed to Ultimate strength (Yield is when the part will deform > (stretch) and not return to it's original state, whereas Ultimate strength > is when the strut snaps in two, and your wings fold up, and you plummet to > the ground). Secondly, those strengths are listed in PSIs (pounds per square > inch) not Gs - Believe it or not, those two things are NOT related. > > Bill C. > > PS No need to boil the aluminum struts. > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265670#265670 > > ________________________________ Message 55 ____________________________________ Time: 11:04:39 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Does anybody know this plane? From: Robert Ray I think I understand why the axle broke, the larger diameters wheels create more side loads than the smaller wheels normally used in that configuration. Where as the straight axle will take the larger diameter wheels the J-3 type landing gear will not take as well. The increased in diameter acts as a lever. However bush pilots used those large tires up north. Russell On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Robert Ray wrote: > I don't think the wings are Grega either, what airfoil is that? > > russell > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Robert Ray wrote: > >> Nice! >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Bill Church wrote: >> >>> billspiet@sympatico.ca> >>> >>> Greg, >>> >>> You're right. That is a Grega with a large tail - in fact, it's the tail >>> off a J3 Piper Cub. I believe it also has Piper wings. The plane is French >>> (based in France). Here are a couple of links to some pages with some more >>> photos: >>> http://tagazous.free.fr/affichage.php?immat=F-PBGT >>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/8221101@N02/with/3522085948/ >>> >>> I did a little Google searching, and found only French websites, and >>> based on my weak skills in French, I believe the plane had an incident in >>> 2001 where the left wheel didn't bother to accompany the plane on one >>> flight. The pilot had to land with only the right wheel. The wheels are from >>> a motorcycle, and the axle cracked, and snapped off upon take-off. The pilot >>> managed to fly around, and attract attention to himself and his problem by >>> wagging his wings. The fire department was called, and he flew around to >>> burn off the fuel. When he landed, he eventually ground looped, without >>> injury. >>> >>> Those wheels do look interesting. There was an email address for the >>> owner of the plane (from a few years ago) on one of the websites I found - >>> but since it's in France, you'd likely need to "parlez Francais" to get some >>> more info from the owner. >>> >>> Bill C.[size=18][/size] >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Read this topic online here: >>> >>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=265665#265665 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > ________________________________ Message 56 ____________________________________ Time: 11:15:45 PM PST US Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: these West Coast guys -- FUEL TANKS From: Robert Ray Makes me wonder if there is something you could coat epoxy lay up with to improve it's performance, I coated two motorcycles a 81 BMW gas tank and a Concours with POR-15 they claim that not even carb cleaner will break it down. So far they are holding up. russell On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Clif Dawson wrote: > > Like all the others have said, Vinylester. I didn't find it excessively > smelly > and the layup went quite smoothly. One thing though, get the resin that's > for laying up layers. There's a finishing resin that oozes out wax as it > cures. The guy at the fiberglass store called it "surfboard resin". > > If you haven't done this before it would be wise to do some practice > layup, particularely edges and corners! It doesn't have to be big, a few > inches in area is fine. The more rounded corners and edges the better. > > USE PLENTY OF RELEASE WAX ON THE PLUG!!! > > Clif > > Remember, every drip or blob in a cosmetic area is going to have to be > filed off! :-) > > > Clif, >> I am not asking for my own info, but for others who might be considering a >> fiberglass tank. Is there an epoxy and glass combo that will not only >> accommodate avgas and mogas, but mogas with ethanol (something we should >> avoid for other reasons, too)> Thanks, Tim in central TX >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message pietenpol-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Pietenpol-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/pietenpol-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/pietenpol-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.