Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:02 AM - Air Force Museum (Douwe Blumberg)
2. 06:47 AM - Re: NC Piet NX327BC (Jerry Dotson)
3. 07:00 AM - Upcoming Corvair Colleges (kevinpurtee)
4. 07:18 AM - Dynamic balancing ? (Larry Vetter)
5. 07:38 AM - Re: Dynamic balancing ? (Gary Boothe)
6. 07:47 AM - Re: Dynamic balancing ? (tools)
7. 07:53 AM - Re: Re: Dynamic balancing ? (Ken Bickers)
8. 08:03 AM - Re: Re: NC Piet NX327BC (randy cary)
9. 09:18 AM - Re: Re: Dynamic balancing ? (Michael Perez)
10. 09:19 AM - Re: Re: Dynamic balancing ? (Michael Perez)
11. 09:21 AM - Re: Upcoming Corvair Colleges (bdewenter)
12. 10:44 AM - Re: Air Force Museum (Steve Emo)
13. 12:34 PM - Re: Dynamic balancing ? (tools)
14. 03:43 PM - Re: Off Topic -- Ohio Flyers -- Help (dgaldrich)
15. 09:51 PM - ford oil pressure (Oscar Zuniga)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Air Force Museum |
Hey,
Does anyone have a contact at the Dayton/Wright Patterson Air Force Museum?
Douwe
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: NC Piet NX327BC |
I know very little. A guy named Jack (last name escapes me) from around the Orlando
area owned it some years ago. It was hangared at X61. My friend has his J3
there. The airplane has some damage history.......a landing accident at Thomasville,
Ga fly-in a couple or 3 years back. I could find the previous owner last
name if need be.
--------
Jerry Dotson
First flight June 16,2012
Flying in phase 2
Lycoming O-235 C2C
Jay Anderson CloudCars prop 76 X 44
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=406693#406693
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Upcoming Corvair Colleges |
If you're considering using a Corvair for your Piet then plan to attend one of
the three upcoming Corvair Colleges. The return on investment is incredible.
CC26: 18 - 20 Sep, Mexico, MO, Zenith Factory
CC27: 8 - 10 Nov, Barnwell, SC, PF Beck & Friends
CC28: 28 Feb - 2 Mar, San Marcos, TX, Shelley & me
See you there!
--------
Kevin "Axel" Purtee
Rebuilding NX899KP
Austin/San Marcos, TX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=406695#406695
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Dynamic balancing ? |
Its been suggested by the previous owner that both wooden props I have be dynamically
balanced. Both were carved by a prop carving machine. I haven't researched
dynamic balancing, but have heard it was rather expensive.
Have any of you using a hand carved or machine carved prop had one dynamically
balanced? Doesn't it require balancing the prop to the engine?
Thanks for any input.
Larry
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=406697#406697
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynamic balancing ? |
Larry,
My Corvair powered Piet has flown with 3 hand carved props, all hand balanced on
3 axis and adjusted to track true within 1/8". All ran very smoothly, but I
have no idea if dynamic balance would improve anything.
Gary
NX308MB
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 14, 2013, at 7:18 AM, "Larry Vetter" <vetter@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> Its been suggested by the previous owner that both wooden props I have be dynamically
balanced. Both were carved by a prop carving machine. I haven't researched
dynamic balancing, but have heard it was rather expensive.
> Have any of you using a hand carved or machine carved prop had one dynamically
balanced? Doesn't it require balancing the prop to the engine?
> Thanks for any input.
> Larry
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=406697#406697
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynamic balancing ? |
In the case of a propeller, dynamic balancing is more effective than static balancing
when it's installed where it's going to be used.
In other words, there is NO advantage taking the prop somewhere and asking them
to dynamically balance it and return it. It has to be installed on YOUR plane.
And if you ever remove it, you've lost that advantage, it would have to be
done again (unless CAREFULLY reinstalled EXACTLY like it was... never a certainty).
The reason for this is a propeller is not thick, compared to it's diameter, it's
a "single plane" balancing problem. Careful static balancing (where you hang
it and determine the heavy blade and either remove a bit, or add some varnish
to the other blade) is completely effective.
A crankshaft, on the other hand, is long compared to it's diameter and NEEDS to
be dynamically balanced. It can be perfectly statically balanced but still be
so out of balance the engine won't even run... Static balancing cannot detect
multi plane problems.
So, do you need dynamic balancing? First, lets say with a known good propeller
(and metal for it's repeatability) does your engine run smoothly? It's a subjective
thing, but still, it's a reasonable thing to ask and the common guy's
determination is a decent evaluation. If so, then, your engine is well balanced
(unless the prop JUST HAPPENS to correct a problem). So if you REALLY want
to be sure, run the engine. Remove the prop, move it one bolt hole and repeat.
Do this six times and see if there's really any noticeable difference. If
not, you can say with reasonable conviction, your engine is well balanced.
Now, make sure your wood prop is properly statically balanced. Put it on your
engine and run it. Is it smooth? If not, the problem HAS to be in the mounting
of the prop. Dynamic balancing can correct this problem. However, you could
do like before, try the prop in all six possible locations and see if the problem
goes away or gets better enough (EVERYTHING that rotates vibrates, it's
really a matter of it being smooth enough for the application). If so, you've
empirically balanced the thing yourself, using guestimates just like balancing
a ceiling fan. There may also be the problem of the prop being in the right
location for hand propping.
If it does vibrate, like I said, the problem is in the mounting. Or the prop was
statically balanced about a center of rotation DIFFERENT than the center of
rotation your prop sees on your engine. So...
If we're talking about, say, a Cont A65 with a taper shaft, static balance the
prop with the hub in place and you'll likely solve your problems.
If you don't have a removable hub, you just REALLY REALLY need to be anal about
static balancing with a WELL FITTING dummy hub to make sure you're balancing
about the correct center of rotation. Does this make sense?
If your prop fits loosely on your hub, you HAVE to dynamically balance... or remanufacture
the hub on the prop to where it does fit will and repeatably, giving
you a chance at proper static balancing.
This is a weird area. I went to Oshkosh's dynamic balancing workshop a couple
years ago. The guys GIVING the seminar, were equipment salesmen who really didn't
understand dynamic balancing, which shocked me. Shoot away with any questions,
I'll do my best to explain more if necessary!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=406700#406700
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynamic balancing ? |
Tool, great explanation. Thanks, Ken
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 8:47 AM, tools <n0kkj@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> In the case of a propeller, dynamic balancing is more effective than
> static balancing when it's installed where it's going to be used.
>
> In other words, there is NO advantage taking the prop somewhere and asking
> them to dynamically balance it and return it. It has to be installed on
> YOUR plane. And if you ever remove it, you've lost that advantage, it
> would have to be done again (unless CAREFULLY reinstalled EXACTLY like it
> was... never a certainty).
>
> The reason for this is a propeller is not thick, compared to it's
> diameter, it's a "single plane" balancing problem. Careful static
> balancing (where you hang it and determine the heavy blade and either
> remove a bit, or add some varnish to the other blade) is completely
> effective.
>
> A crankshaft, on the other hand, is long compared to it's diameter and
> NEEDS to be dynamically balanced. It can be perfectly statically balanced
> but still be so out of balance the engine won't even run... Static
> balancing cannot detect multi plane problems.
>
> So, do you need dynamic balancing? First, lets say with a known good
> propeller (and metal for it's repeatability) does your engine run smoothly?
> It's a subjective thing, but still, it's a reasonable thing to ask and the
> common guy's determination is a decent evaluation. If so, then, your
> engine is well balanced (unless the prop JUST HAPPENS to correct a
> problem). So if you REALLY want to be sure, run the engine. Remove the
> prop, move it one bolt hole and repeat. Do this six times and see if
> there's really any noticeable difference. If not, you can say with
> reasonable conviction, your engine is well balanced.
>
> Now, make sure your wood prop is properly statically balanced. Put it on
> your engine and run it. Is it smooth? If not, the problem HAS to be in
> the mounting of the prop. Dynamic balancing can correct this problem.
> However, you could do like before, try the prop in all six possible
> locations and see if the problem goes away or gets better enough
> (EVERYTHING that rotates vibrates, it's really a matter of it being smooth
> enough for the application). If so, you've empirically balanced the thing
> yourself, using guestimates just like balancing a ceiling fan. There may
> also be the problem of the prop being in the right location for hand
> propping.
>
> If it does vibrate, like I said, the problem is in the mounting. Or the
> prop was statically balanced about a center of rotation DIFFERENT than the
> center of rotation your prop sees on your engine. So...
>
> If we're talking about, say, a Cont A65 with a taper shaft, static balance
> the prop with the hub in place and you'll likely solve your problems.
>
> If you don't have a removable hub, you just REALLY REALLY need to be anal
> about static balancing with a WELL FITTING dummy hub to make sure you're
> balancing about the correct center of rotation. Does this make sense?
>
> If your prop fits loosely on your hub, you HAVE to dynamically balance...
> or remanufacture the hub on the prop to where it does fit will and
> repeatably, giving you a chance at proper static balancing.
>
> This is a weird area. I went to Oshkosh's dynamic balancing workshop a
> couple years ago. The guys GIVING the seminar, were equipment salesmen who
> really didn't understand dynamic balancing, which shocked me. Shoot away
> with any questions, I'll do my best to explain more if necessary!
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=406700#406700
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: NC Piet NX327BC |
Thanks for the info! I will call if I get any farther.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 14, 2013, at 9:49 AM, "Jerry Dotson" <jdotson@centurylink.net> wrote:
>
> I know very little. A guy named Jack (last name escapes me) from around the Orlando
area owned it some years ago. It was hangared at X61. My friend has his
J3 there. The airplane has some damage history.......a landing accident at Thomasville,
Ga fly-in a couple or 3 years back. I could find the previous owner
last name if need be.
>
> --------
> Jerry Dotson
>
> First flight June 16,2012
> Flying in phase 2
> Lycoming O-235 C2C
> Jay Anderson CloudCars prop 76 X 44
> do not archive
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=406693#406693
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynamic balancing ? |
Great intell. Tools...and the timing could not be better with this post!-
I will be fabricating my prop. balancer soon and starting the varnish proc
ess. A point you made that I didn't think of was to static balance with the
tapered hub on the prop.- Is there any worthy benefit of also installing
the bolts, washers, nuts on the prop./hub while doing the static balance?
Of course each would need to be reinstalled on the plane is the exact same
fashion.=0A=0A=0A-=0AMichael Perez=0APietenpol HINT Videos=0AKaretaker Ae
ro=0Awww.karetakeraero.com=0A=0A=0A=0A>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynamic balancing ? |
Oh and don't forget the crush plate...=0A=0A=0A-=0AMichael Perez=0APieten
pol HINT Videos=0AKaretaker Aero=0Awww.karetakeraero.com=0A
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Upcoming Corvair Colleges |
Kevin is 100% correct. I would just like to encourage ANYONE building a Piet to
attend a Corvair College. No matter which engine you are planning on you will
learn a TON about flight engines, meet a lot of nice folks, and perhaps score
a ride in a Piet.
I attended #19, #20 and #21 as a builder #24 as a helper and will do so again for
#27 in Barnwell.
I'm thinking about attending #28 in Texas.
--------
Bob 'Early Builder' Dewenter
Dayton OH
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=406713#406713
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Air Force Museum |
It depends on what you want. I work on the base and know people that work i
n the museum restoration shop. What do you want?
Steve
On Aug 14, 2013, at 8:02 AM, "Douwe Blumberg" <douweblumberg@earthlink.net> w
rote:
> Hey,
>
> Does anyone have a contact at the Dayton/Wright Patterson Air Force Museum
?
>
> Douwe
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynamic balancing ? |
Ya, the more parts that are going to be used, the better.
Once it's all together, you need as nice a fit for a dummy shaft as you can find.
It's probably worth considering making some dummy shafts and then passing them
around for folks like engine mount jigs, wing rib jigs, etc.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=406724#406724
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Off Topic -- Ohio Flyers -- Help |
Thanks for all your inputs. I'm back in Maine safely and the Dakota Hawk is in
its new home. The trip around ORD and east over Elser was uneventful. Stopped
for fuel at Fulton Co, NY (NY0) and chatted with the guys at the 195 Factory
who maintain and restore some beautiful Cessna 195's. I hope the drool in my
shirt dries out soon.
Dave
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=406729#406729
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | ford oil pressure |
I may have missed it=2C but did anyone ever comment or respond to 'bender's
question about oil pressure and how the oil passages and tubes all feed th
e Ford engine? As a mechanical engineer I'm interested in this because one
of the articles in the upcoming all-Piet issue of Contact! will focus on t
he most classic of Piet powerplants=2C the Ford "A" engine=2C and its conve
rsion. So far=2C what I have gathered is that the formula for success with
it is "start with one part cast iron=2C add some Babbitt=2C mix some water
with a touch of steam and pour it in through a rubber hose=2C add four sho
rt stacks=2C give it a quick blue spark=2C swing a dead chicken by its neck
=2C and spin the prop".
Seriously=2C the oiling system seems to me to be (from Mr. Pietenpol's conv
ersion plans for the Ford engine) one of the biggest differences between th
e land and air applications. The other two are=2C of course=2C the ignitio
n (magneto) and the output (propeller hub). "bender" seems to have problem
s with too much oil finding its way to one spot=2C thus diverting it from o
ther spots where it is needed as well. Is this common in the Ford=2C or do
es "bender" perhaps have excessive clearance in one of the oiling paths and
it's shunting the flow?
Oscar Zuniga
Medford=2C OR
Air Camper NX41CC "Scout"
A75 power (NO water involved!)
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|