Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:23 AM - Re: a common place to undersell yourself---diagonal struts (William Wynne)
2. 02:41 PM - Brodhead rigging project - 2014 (William Wynne)
3. 03:21 PM - Re: Brodhead 2014 (IT Girl)
4. 04:41 PM - Re: Re: Brodhead 2014 (Richard Schreiber)
5. 05:57 PM - Milestone Moment (shad bell)
6. 07:26 PM - Re: Milestone Moment (William Wynne)
7. 07:44 PM - Re: Milestone Moment (nightmare)
8. 08:31 PM - Re: Brodhead 2014 (IT Girl)
9. 09:18 PM - Re: Re: Brodhead 2014 (shad bell)
10. 10:35 PM - Re: Brodhead rigging project - 2014 (tools)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: a common place to undersell yourself---diagonal struts |
WF2, Scotty, Ray, friends,
An important point, that many have been covered many times: The type of firewall
with a shelf that Ford powered planes need is structurally a different situation
that a Corvair and Continental
one where the plywood can come all the way up to the top longerons. The latter
is reinforced and a lot more rigid in an extreme load. My Piet was original Ford
powered, it had the shelf set up, it was noticibly more rigid when we did
motor mount torsion load tests after the firewall was closed back up to the top
longerons. we did this by applying a 200 ft pound torque load to the mount,
I was looking for deflections in tubes in the mount tubes, but noticed that the
unsupported upper mount locations on the longerons deflected much more than
the mount. This could have been fixed with a cross tube in the mount, but I elected
to put the plywood back in. Today, if a builder opts for a continental
or a Corvair, there is no reason to have the shelf, the plywood should go all
the way to the top, and the fuselage will undoubtedly be more rigid.
Putting the plane on its back is less violent that a sudden stop or a very hard
hit. I think the loads from having the airplane roll over its' nose are different,
and the wing doesn't have the same deceleration, or impose the same force
on the diagonal cabanes.
None of the Piet crashes I have looked at closely had a "perfect impact", they
all hit one wing first. In my accident, you could have used the last 6 ribs on
the right wing again, the fabric as not even cut, and the left wing as a bag
of kindling and sawdust on impact. Planes that are spun in do this. Even planes
that are stalled at 15' tend to hit one wing first. a plane with it gear too
far back, or landing with a tailwind is much more likely to impose a symmetric
load as it goes over.
Again, theory vs observation: saying "The fuselage bracket will shear sideways
and the wing plane will twist down in a helical vector." is a reasonable sounding
theory, but observation says that the loads don't remove this bracket from
the longeron, they fail the diagonal cabane first. Any comment that includes
the word "Will" is a statement of certainty, and my experience, absolute predictions
like that don't address all the variables present in something like an
accident, even if a single accident produced a result that looked that way.
When a guy like Jack Phillips who has been flying his bird for a long time, decides
that he is going to put in the required effort to make an improvement to
his plane, an improvement which there is a 98% chance he will never use, It makes
me think that there is some good effect of trying to share with other builders
some things I paid a very high price to learn. This isn't ego telling anyone
how smart I am, just the reverse, read part 1 of my cabane and fuel line story,
and I have a picture there and directly say that I was doing something stupid
the way my plane was set up. Go back and read my words on the three effects
on other peoples lives that I didn't foresee, things you can't just fix with
time, money or an apology. If you spend a few moments considering them as your
wife, parents and friend, then you will have a much better understating of
why this isn't a lighthearted theoretical debate on structures to me.-ww.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=426528#426528
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: | Brodhead rigging project - 2014 |
Builders:
Just for my own personal interest, I am going to bring the tools to measure wing
incidence and rigging information to Brodhead. I mentioned this before, but
have not heard from anyone else, but I am going to spend some of the time there
measuring planes. Of particular interest is "The Last Original ", because I
want to see if BHP decreased the wing incidence on his last plane.
I am going to measure the stuff with a smart level working off a full chord profile
board, so it will not be necessary to even level the plane, I can just do
the math. I am also going to pick up the ground AOA number for planes while we
are at it. I would like to show a few people how to do this, and have a standard
measuring system so later data point collection is apples to apples.
The CAD drawings done by Bill Church got me looking at this after reading about
Chris Rusch's rigging condition. My book on Riblett airfoils is out on loan right
now, but staring at the lift curves in Theory of Wing Sections of NACA airfoils
with similar camber distributions to the GA30U-612 makes me think that
the Riblett airfoil might do better with a lot less incidence.
Structures is the hard part of Aerospace Engineering for people with robust gray
matter. Basic Aerodynamics that applies to light planes can even be done by
mathematical monkeys like me. The calculated numbers are very real world and useful.
When looking for a desired angle of incidence, you rearrange the lift formula
to solve for Coefficient of lift and stick in your numbers:
CL = Pounds of lift / ( .5 (density of air) (speed in feet per second squared)
(wing area in square feet)
Lift = the flying weight of the plane, lets call it 1150 pounds
Density of air at sea level = .00237
feet per second at 75 mph = 110.25 (projected cruise)
Piet wing area = 145
The Coefficient of lift for the above numbers is .55 You can go right to a lift
curve for the airfoil and look up which angle of attack on the airfoil produces
this CL. I don't have the Riblett book in front of me, and his data was mostly
computer simulation. Actual wind tunnel data for 6% camber airfoils suggests
that 2 degrees (measured through the leading edge to trailing edge not the
underside of the wing) might be very close. The goal is to have the plane set
so that the fuselage is level at cruise speed. It will fly best in this condition
and it will be easier to trim to fly well.
Why would BHP's plans have 3.5 degrees actual incidence? Go back and run through
the numbers, but look at it for a 62 mph cruise speed plane flying at 1100 pounds.
The CL for that condition is .77, and the original airfoil may be making
a number like that at an angle of attack of 3.5 degrees.
A few measurements, and a 20 minute flight with a smart level on the front cockpit
longeron and a GPS or calibrated airspeed, and we could have by reverse engineering,
the center of a lift curve for the BHP airfoil. A few planes worth
of data points, and a new builder could custom tailor the incidence for his plane
to have a much better chance of it flying in proper trim from the start.
The right incidence varies on different versions of the plane depending on the
weight and the cruise speed. Why I want to look at The Last Original is to see
if BHP lowered the incidence because the plane has a much higher cruise speed
than one built to the 1929 plans, (and is also lighter) The formula above is
very well known, and BHP absolutely would have seen, understood and used it. I
own an original set of Flying and Glider Manuals, and it is in there in an article
about selecting airfoils.
Many people who don't like math or numbers still like Pietenpols. This is fine,
but I contend that it is a false conclusion to suggest that BHP didn't know and
use math and aero formulas. If you look at the man's life work in things like
electronics, one can safely conclude he was comfortable with learning, and
particularly testing improvements, often by rapid iterations and modifications,
and this is why I suspect the Last Original may have something different for
incidence.
I have had a number of old breed Piet builders assure me that BHP was not the 'flying
farmer' image projected by the magazines of the 1930s, that he was much
more technical and insightful, and the farmer stuff was just editorial spin of
the day. To my eye, BHP's evolving work further debunks the 'country boy' myth.
There are people who actually believe that BHP's contribution to aviation was to
provide them with a flyable airframe that they can decorate with style sense
developed from watching Chitty Chitty Bang Bang too many times in an unfortunate
childhood. I am all for people building their creation any way they like,
I only object to BHP being recast as Dick Van Dike to support the idea that magic
is more important than math. -ww.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=426537#426537
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead 2014 |
I look forward to seeing you all.... and for you infidels who will not be attending,
just know that we will be talking about you in your absence (Mikee, Gary,
Billy, Matt).
Jack, please let Susan know how much we are looking forward to Brat fest, and please
let me know if I can be of assistance.
Rick, I cant wait to see you too! I assume you'll be camping in your usual spot?
--------
Shelley Tumino
IT Girl
wife of "Axel"
NX899KP
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=426538#426538
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Brodhead 2014 |
Shelly:
Yes I will! I am so glad that you and Kevin will be at Broadhead this
year. I was hoping to be flying my Piet by now, but the cold winter
slowed me down. I at least have it in a paint booth and and am now
applying paint.
Rick Schreiber
On 7/12/2014 5:21 PM, IT Girl wrote:
>
> I look forward to seeing you all.... and for you infidels who will not be attending,
just know that we will be talking about you in your absence (Mikee, Gary,
Billy, Matt).
>
> Jack, please let Susan know how much we are looking forward to Brat fest, and
please let me know if I can be of assistance.
>
> Rick, I cant wait to see you too! I assume you'll be camping in your usual spot?
>
> --------
> Shelley Tumino
> IT Girl
> wife of "Axel"
> NX899KP
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=426538#426538
>
>
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: | Milestone Moment |
I just got done flying around in the Pietenpol, and I promised the boys (Ja
ke 5, Joe 3) an airplane ride (taxi around the airport).- Joe the 3 yr ol
d went 1st and we taxied up and down the runway.- When it was Jake's turn
I figured he was ready to fly.- He said he wasn't scared, even though my
wife was giving me the evil eye.- I briefed him to keep his hands on the
top of the longerons and not touch his seat belt (wife's eyes-still burn
ing holes thru me).- We went up around the patch one time and he kept his
little hands right where I told him, he was actually drumming his fingers
on the longerons the whole 4-5 min we were flying.- He is the 3rd generat
ion "Bell Boy" to fly in NX92GB!- Now I need to see if Aircraft Spruce or
Wicks, sell Smile Remover, I can't get it off his face.=0A-=0AOne Proud
Papa, =0AShad
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: Milestone Moment |
Builders,
I just gathered up a number of photos of the Bell family Pietenpol, mostly from Brodhead 2008-2013, at this link: http://flycorvair.net/2014/07/13/the-bell-pietenpol-3-generations-of-flyers/
Hats off to Shad and Gary on a great day.
-------------------------------------------------------------
A link to a collection of Piet stories:
http://flycorvair.net/2013/11/28/corvair-pietenpol-reference-page/
.
For a link to Pictures of Pietenpols:
http://flycorvair.net/2013/01/11/pietenpol-review-in-pictures-15-more-corvair-powered-piets/
.
-ww.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=426553#426553
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: Milestone Moment |
Awesome Shad. I hope to do the same with my two boys in a couple of years when
I finish my build. It's the biggest motivator. Paul
--------
Paul Donahue
Started 8-3-12
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=426554#426554
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: Brodhead 2014 |
I really hoped we would be ready to bring FBG this year too, but Kevin says 2016
is more realistic. We are really close to start covering, but it is way too
hot, hopefully by Thanksgiving. If I remember right we did the fuselage one
weekend and the Wing on a second weekend, hopefully it will go faster this time
since we will be using the Stewarts System.
--------
Shelley Tumino
IT Girl
wife of "Axel"
NX899KP
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=426555#426555
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: Brodhead 2014 |
You and Kevin are going to set a record pace with the rebuild!- I am 21 m
onths into rebuilding an mostly completed airplane and MAYBE going to have
it flying before November.- I just used some Stewarts Eco Bond to glue so
me leather patches on the dope and fabric (inside of fuselage fabric) where
the aileron controls are close to rubbing). I could not use anything but w
ater base glue or it would have ruined my paint job.- If you have not use
d Stewarts before you will love it, no getting high on fumes or eating your
skin off with solvents.- What are you going to paint it with,?- All th
e way thru water born poly urethane stewarts?- If so talk to Randy Bush,
he said there is a learning curve when spraying the Stewarts water born pol
yurethane paint.- He said it took some time to get used to, I think it ru
ns easier than most other paints, probably due to viscosity and tack times.
- Back on subject, I am still undecided on Brodhead.- Don Emch texted m
e
today to see if I was going.- I will probably not know until the week of
.- If-I do Kevin is welcome to take NX92GB up for a spin, I will take i
t as a down payment for a spin in Fat Bottom Girl II (I think of you 2 ever
y time the song comes on the radio).- Fuel cost and false deadlines of fl
ying the Baby Lakes this year are the only 2 factors.=0A-=0AShad =0A=0A
=0AOn Saturday, July 12, 2014 11:37 PM, IT Girl <shlizbth@gmail.com> wrote:
il.com>=0A=0AI really hoped we would be ready to bring FBG this year too, b
ut Kevin says 2016 is more realistic.- We are really close to start cover
ing, but it is way too hot, hopefully by Thanksgiving.- If I remember rig
ht we did the fuselage one weekend and the Wing on a second weekend, hopefu
lly it will go faster this time since we will be using the Stewarts System.
=0A=0A--------=0AShelley Tumino=0AIT Girl=0Awife of "Axel"=0ANX89
9KP=0A=0ADO NOT ARCHIVE=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ARead this topic online here:=0A=0Ahtt
p://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=426555#426555=0A=0A=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: Brodhead rigging project - 2014 |
William,
BRILLIANT, sounds like fun and informational. Let me know if you need any help,
should be around for most of Brodhead.
Should also check the red and clear piet in the museum as well.
Honestly, I've kind of always thought of you as what BHP was in his day.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=426558#426558
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! --
|