Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:19 AM - Re: Control Cable Diameter (Aucountry@aol.com)
2. 12:24 AM - Re: Control Cable Diameter (Aucountry@aol.com)
3. 01:57 AM - Re: Re: Control Cable Diameter (Gil Alexander)
4. 09:00 PM - Cylinder Base Stud Update (Steven Jackson)
5. 10:48 PM - Fw: Control Cable Diameter (Aucountry@aol.com)
6. 11:06 PM - Re: Cylinder Base Stud Update (Aucountry@aol.com)
7. 11:23 PM - Cowling Update3 (Aucountry@aol.com)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Control Cable Diameter |
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Aucountry@aol.com
In a message dated 07/24/03 12:08:35 AM, cs11873@comcast.net writes:
> Gary,
> I noticed the same thing a while back. I looked all over and could not find
> any other standard sizes between 1/8" and 5/32.=A0 Did a Google search and
> found some data that suggested the diameter tol. on 1/8" cable was
> +.018" -0.0" but I am sure that depends on the material and stranding.=A0=20Then
> again the cable does reduce in diameter under load.
>
> I think the only way to know is to have Garner look it up. Let me know what
> you find out.
>
> Craig N28997
>
I've just been going by the part number and it said it was 1/8 inch. Just
for grins I measured it. Seriously thought about doing linear interpolation
and computing the required tension based on actual diameter.
Gary
www.AuCountry.com
Home of "Team Grumman"
TeamGrumman-List@matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe
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: Control Cable Diameter |
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Aucountry@aol.com
Hi Gary
I used the ratchet to snug up to micrometer. I was measuring in about 100
degree heat. original cables, from a 1977 Cheetah. I'm not really sure why
the 1/8 inch cable is larger than it's diameter designation. Must have been
an FAA decision.
Gary
www.AuCountry.com
Home of "Team Grumman"
TeamGrumman-List@matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe
In a message dated 07/24/03 12:13:34 AM, GryBendall writes:
> Hi Gary ( Cool name!)
>
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 I just thought I`d mention a couple of factors
that may be
> worth considering when taking your measurements ( hope you don`t mind).
>
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 (1) How tight do you have your digital micrometer
on the cable?
> Does it have a "ratchet mechanism" on it as it only has to be the lightest
> touch on the cable. Some people try to wind them up as far as they can and
> this will dramatically alter the readings.
>
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 (2) What temperature are you measuring the cable
in as they do
> expand and contract and this will vary according to the tension.
>
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 (3) Then there is the age of the cable to be
taken in to
> consideration as they do stretch and wear but by miniscule amounts over time.
>
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 It sounds to me like it`s more likely to be
the larger of the 2
> but under either or all of the conditions above.
>
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 I hope you don`t mind me giving my opinion,
I just hope I`ve
> been of help.
>
> Kindest Regards
> Gary
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: Control Cable Diameter |
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Gil Alexander <gilalex@earthlink.net>
Negative on the FAA decision, 1/8 is a MINIMUM.
The tolerance is + 0.014 and minus 0.000
This enables all product to meet a design strength.
It's all in the MIL Spec., not a FAA spec.
It's closer to 1/8 than commercial pipe thread.....
gil A
At 03:23 AM 7/24/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Aucountry@aol.com
>
>Hi Gary
>I used the ratchet to snug up to micrometer. I was measuring in about 100
>degree heat. original cables, from a 1977 Cheetah. I'm not really sure why
>the 1/8 inch cable is larger than it's diameter designation. Must have been
>an FAA decision.
>
>Gary
>www.AuCountry.com
>
>Home of "Team Grumman"
>TeamGrumman-List@matronics.com
>http://www.matronics.com/subscribe
>
>
>In a message dated 07/24/03 12:13:34 AM, GryBendall writes:
>
> > Hi Gary ( Cool name!)
> >
> >=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 I just thought I`d mention a couple of
> factors that may be
> > worth considering when taking your measurements ( hope you don`t mind).
> >
> >=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 (1) How tight do you have your digital
> micrometer on the cable?
> > Does it have a "ratchet mechanism" on it as it only has to be the lightest
> > touch on the cable. Some people try to wind them up as far as they can and
> > this will dramatically alter the readings.
> >
> >=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 (2) What temperature are you measuring
> the cable in as they do
> > expand and contract and this will vary according to the tension.
> >
> >=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 (3) Then there is the age of the cable
> to be taken in to
> > consideration as they do stretch and wear but by miniscule amounts over
> time.
> >
> >=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 It sounds to me like it`s more likely
> to be the larger of the 2
> > but under either or all of the conditions above.
> >
> >=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 I hope you don`t mind me giving my
> opinion, I just hope I`ve
> > been of help.
> >
> > Kindest Regards
> > Gary
>
>
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: | Cylinder Base Stud Update |
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: "Steven Jackson" <steven.jackson14@adelphia.net>
Thought I would spare myself the flood of emails that would result from
posting this on the Gang.
Anyway, finally got the cylinder off and began removing studs. My mechanic
started looking at my cylinder while I was working on the studs and started
noticing things. The intake valve stem was damaged, the followers were both
pitted with resulting cam lobe wear, etc. Oh yeah, I almost forgot to say
that the base nuts, well half of them we got off without even using the
socket wrench connected to the cylinder base wrench. About 10-15 ft/lbs on
most of them. Only two were even close to what they should have been, and
neither were torque to the proper amount. So, instead of too tight, they
were way too loose, etc. So, I'm getting ready to embark on an overhaul,
270 hours after the engine was last "overhauled". My mechanic says he
thinks the problem probably has existed for some time--he suspects the
overhauler pretty much gaffed off some stuff, and took some short cuts. I'm
going to take some pictures of the damaged parts if anyone's interested in
checking them out. I don't know if I can post them on Team Grumman, so if
anyone is interested in taking a look, I can send them later.
I'll keep updating as I go with this. I still haven't exactly figured out
what I'm going to do with regards to the overhaul yet.
You don't know what you don't know...
Steven Jackson
N1434R
L22
Yucca Valley, CA
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: | Fwd: Control Cable Diameter |
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Aucountry@aol.com
In a message dated 07/24/03 09:34:35 AM, cs11873@comcast.net writes:
>
> Gary,
>
> I think that is what I did, just averaged the scales.=A0=A0 I would like=20to
get
> about 4 feet of junk cable from Fletchar and make up a calibration fixture
> with some dead weights.
>
>
>
> Craig
>
>
That's a good idea. That would at least provide some actual measurements.
Gary
www.AuCountry.com
Home of "Team Grumman"
TeamGrumman-List@matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe
From: "Craig Schaffter" <cs11873@comcast.net>
Subject: RE: Control Cable Diameter
Gary,
I think that is what I did, just averaged the scales. I would like to get
about 4 feet of junk cable from Fletchar and make up a calibration fixture
with some dead weights.
Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: Aucountry@aol.com [mailto:Aucountry@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 12:18 AM
To: cs11873@comcast.net; teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Control Cable Diameter
In a message dated 07/24/03 12:08:35 AM, cs11873@comcast.net writes:
Gary,
I noticed the same thing a while back. I looked all over and could not
find
any other standard sizes between 1/8" and 5/32. Did a Google search and
found some data that suggested the diameter tol. on 1/8" cable was
+.018" -0.0" but I am sure that depends on the material and stranding.
Then
again the cable does reduce in diameter under load.
I think the only way to know is to have Garner look it up. Let me know
what
you find out.
Craig N28997
I've just been going by the part number and it said it was 1/8 inch. Just
for grins I measured it. Seriously thought about doing linear interpolation
and computing the required tension based on actual diameter.
Gary
www.AuCountry.com
Home of "Team Grumman"
TeamGrumman-List@matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe
<META content"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1170" nameGENERATOR>
Gary,
I
think that is what I did, just averaged the scales. I would like to
get about 4 feet of junk cable from Fletchar and make up a calibration fixture
with some dead weights.
Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: Aucountry@aol.com
[mailto:Aucountry@aol.com]
AM
teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Control Cable
Diameter
In a message dated 07/24/03
12:08:35 AM, cs11873@comcast.net writes:
Gary,
I noticed the same thing a while back. I looked all over and
could not find
any other standard sizes between 1/8" and 5/32.=20Did
a Google search and
found some data that suggested the diameter tol.=20on
1/8" cable was
+.018" -0.0" but I am sure that depends on the material
and stranding. Then
again the cable does reduce in diameter under
load.
I think the only way to know is to have Garner look it up.=20Let
me know what
you find out.
Craig N28997
I've just been going
by the part number and it said it was 1/8 inch. Just for grins I
measured it. Seriously thought about doing linear interpolation and
computing the required tension based on actual diameter.
Gary
www.AuCountry.com
Home of "Team
Grumman"
TeamGrumman-List@matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe
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: Cylinder Base Stud Update |
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Aucountry@aol.com
In a message dated 07/24/03 09:01:07 PM, steven.jackson14@adelphia.net
writes:
> My mechanic says he
> thinks the problem probably has existed for some time--he suspects the
> overhauler pretty much gaffed off some stuff, and took some short cuts.=A0 I'm
> going to take some pictures of the damaged parts if anyone's interested in
> checking them out.=A0 I don't know if I can post them on Team Grumman, so=20if
> anyone is interested in taking a look, I can send them later.
>
Matt has a page that he uses to upload pictures. Go to his home page and
follow the directions or email him for instructions. Now is a good time to
suggest LyCon in Visalia.
Gary
www.AuCountry.com
Home of "Team Grumman"
TeamGrumman-List@matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe
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 |
|
--> TeamGrumman-List message posted by: Aucountry@aol.com
Monday, I tried painting the cowling with primer surfacer. The ambient temp
was 112. I mixed up the paint, got it in the gun and the paint started to
catalyze. Within 5 minutes, it was getting too hard to clean out of the gun.
I dumped it out real quick and filled the gun with MEK. It still took 3
hours to clean the gun.
Monday night, at 11:00p, I painted the cowling in 85 degrees. It went on
very dry. Sanded it Tuesday, Tuesday night I painted it again, this time the
primer was thinned with some reducer formulated for the primer.
I don't know if you're all familiar with K-36 Primer from PPG but it's great
primer. It's also $112/gal plus $38 for a quart of catalyst. Plus, $32 for
the reducer.
Wednesday, I sanded and touched up the cowling. Today, the cowling came off
and the paint boot prepped for painting the cowling with color. White, of
course. I think I'll paint the inside a light gray.
Tomorrow, the plan is to touch up the cowling and paint the inside. Then,
the next day or so, paint the outside. If possible, fly it on Tuesday.
You heard it here first.
Gary
www.AuCountry.com
Home of "Team Grumman"
TeamGrumman-List@matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe
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! --
|