Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:58 AM - Re: Re: Yak52 crash in Poland (Richard Goode)
2. 03:43 AM - Re: What is the cylinder torque value for the nuts at the base. (Craig Payne)
3. 04:31 AM - Re: Looking for metric anchor nut plates (Anthony Savarese)
4. 09:26 AM - Re: Yak52 crash in Poland (jay-dub)
5. 09:26 AM - CJ6 community (motoadve)
6. 09:49 AM - Re: CJ6 community (Justin Drafts)
7. 09:58 AM - Re: Re: What is the cylinder torque value for the nuts at the base. (Cliff Coy)
8. 10:14 AM - Re: CJ6 community (Warren Hill)
9. 11:27 AM - Re: CJ6 community (Bill Geipel)
10. 12:50 PM - Re: CJ6 community (Jj)
11. 06:47 PM - Hyd. Lock (William Geipel)
12. 08:17 PM - Re: Yak52 crash in Poland (\)
13. 09:06 PM - Re: Re: What is the cylinder torque value for the nuts at the base. (Walter Lannon)
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: Yak52 crash in Poland |
The pilot was experienced on the 52, and typically used a spin manoeuvre in
his display sequences. However, looking at the video, it does seem that the
elevator was up i.e. he was not attempting to recover. Whether this was
due to control restriction or some form of pilot incapacitation I don't
know. But from my previous experience, control jamming tends to be apparent
on detailed inspection, even although it was a violent accident and the
aircraft very badly damaged.
Richard
RICHARD GOODE AEROBATICS
Rhodds Farm, Lyonshall, Hereford, HR5 3LW, UK
Tel: +44 (0)1544 340120 Fax: +44 (0)1544 340129
e-mail: richard.goode@russianaeros.com
www.russianaeros.com
WORLD LEADERS IN RUSSIAN SPORTING AIRCRAFT & ENGINES
In partnership with Aerometal Kft, Hungary.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Vic
Sent: 19 June 2019 02:25
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Yak52 crash in Poland
Foreign objects blocking the elevator at the rear of the fuselage after
aerobatics. ?? A typical cause for a fatal crash in the 52 .
Vic
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=489727#489727
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: What is the cylinder torque value for the nuts at the base. |
Be sure and check that the *reason* why the nuts became loose was not
related to loosening and/or backing out of the cylinder studs. I have found
this to be more common. Double nut each stud and check tightness first
before proceeding.
Craig Payne
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
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: Looking for metric anchor nut plates |
You could also use metric rivet nuts. Available on Amazon.
Dennis
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:23 AM, Jon Boede <jonboede@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> The M3 anchor nut plates that go on the back of the Grimes wingtip lights were
apparently the wrong size (i.e. not SAE) for the person who put my plane together
initially, so he just screwed the light plates on with sheet metal screws.
I kid you not.
>
> Anybody got a source for these kinds of metric aircraft anchor nut plates? There
are 3 on each wingtip of the type xxo where x is a rivet and o is the M3 nut.
>
> Jon
>
>
>
>
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: Yak52 crash in Poland |
The FOD barrier is mandatory on G-reg Yaks, following the G-YAKW accident. I was
talking to my of the former co-owners of that aircraft today in fact. Whether
a control restriction was a factor in this case, I have no idea but Im surprised
the FOD barrier is not mandatory everywhere.
--------
CJ and Yak-52 owner
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=489736#489736
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 |
|
Have had my CJ6 for 8 months now, put about 100hrs.
When is not down for repairs I fly it about 3 times per week, rain or shine, cant
have enough of it.
Reflecting on it.
Best bang for the buck in aviation for sure, and the most fun airplane I have flown
Warbird feeling
Easy to fly
A pleasure and fun to fly, specially aerobatics
Amazing sound
Great community
Great looking
But since I got it.
Changed all the air valves, inspected air tanks, still leaks.
Starter valve failed
Trim light failed
Intake tube broke , big hole ,partial in flight failure (after market design to
clear the lower cylinders from oil)
Oil leak , loose Cylinders #4 and #5, which I think is very serious, and think
it is scary.
Not knowing how many hrs in the engine before overhaul is a mistery.
If it wasnt for this community I think I would have sold my CJ6 by now, since I
am not mechanically inclined at all.
People like Doug Sapp, Larry Pine,Craig Paine, Mike and Mike, Tom Elliott, Justin
Drafts, Jon Blake, and some others I dont remember their names have been very
helpful,specially Mike Michalak and Larry Pine.
Thank you all who are always helping, cant wait fly it again, glad to be part of
this community.
--------
www.Backcountry182.com
Cessna 182 P
CJ -6
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=489737#489737
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: CJ6 community |
Good note... yes, owning a warbird can be frustrating!
Soon after I bought my own CJ6, and such mechanical frustrations set in, I
started reading scores of old pilot memoirs from WW1 thru VietNam, of all
nationalities.
A common thread, across the ages, was how many gremlins appear in every
warplane ever to fly!!!
So, it was very comforting that this is a universal experience for all
warbirders, past & present...
It gets better, the more proper TLC you give them---
Justin
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 9:02 PM motoadve <motoadve@racsa.co.cr> wrote:
>
> Have had my CJ6 for 8 months now, put about 100hrs.
> When is not down for repairs I fly it about 3 times per week, rain or
> shine, cant have enough of it.
>
> Reflecting on it.
> Best bang for the buck in aviation for sure, and the most fun airplane I
> have flown
> Warbird feeling
> Easy to fly
> A pleasure and fun to fly, specially aerobatics
> Amazing sound
> Great community
> Great looking
>
> But since I got it.
> Changed all the air valves, inspected air tanks, still leaks.
> Starter valve failed
> Trim light failed
> Intake tube broke , big hole ,partial in flight failure (after market
> design to clear the lower cylinders from oil)
> Oil leak , loose Cylinders #4 and #5, which I think is very serious, and
> think it is scary.
> Not knowing how many hrs in the engine before overhaul is a mistery.
>
> If it wasnt for this community I think I would have sold my CJ6 by now,
> since I am not mechanically inclined at all.
> People like Doug Sapp, Larry Pine,Craig Paine, Mike and Mike, Tom Elliott,
> Justin Drafts, Jon Blake, and some others I dont remember their names have
> been very helpful,specially Mike Michalak and Larry Pine.
>
> Thank you all who are always helping, cant wait fly it again, glad to be
> part of this community.
>
> --------
> www.Backcountry182.com
> Cessna 182 P
> CJ -6
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=489737#489737
>
>
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: What is the cylinder torque value for the nuts at the |
base.
The torques are for clean and dry threads.
Please reference the M14-P Overhaul Manual Pg.142-143.
The Manual is available here: http://motorstarna.com/m-14p-overhaul-manual
Overtorque of the nuts will increase the chance of the studs pulling from
the crankcase leading to further leakage.
Cliff
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 2:33 PM doug sapp <dougsappllc@gmail.com> wrote:
> Also, from Mark Pennington, this is interesting:
>
> https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=rm&zx=vl5ywvgzpugl#inbox/FMfcgx
wChJkxdFPJVWFSFZcLkGTCcGrW?compose=DmwnWrRnXVSjzwCjrftdqMTFtpZNSfCdPxQgNr
BwDsFKJDZfWGgpgdvcrDhTRrHnqLgLwBlQDDDL&projector=1
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:52 AM doug sapp <dougsappllc@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I do believe the question was asked but maybe missed by some of us.
>> What is "wet" torque? What exactly does this mean? If I interpret the
>> cut n past from the net correctly then torquing the cly base studs to 30
4
>> to 330 inch pounds WET is way excessive.
>> From :
>> https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/torque-lubrication-effects-d_1693.htm
l
>>
>> When a bolt is lubricated - less torque is required to achieve bolt axia
l
>> load or tension. Reduction of torques for lubricated vs. dry bolts are
>> indicated in the table below.
>> LubricantTorque Reduction
>> *(%)*
>> No lube 0
>> Graphite 50 - 55
>> White Grease 35 - 45
>> SAE 30 oil 35 - 45
>> SAE 40 oil 30 - 40
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 3:56 AM A. Dennis Savarese <
>> dsavarese0812@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Matt,
>>> A torque spec is there for a reason. The "feels about right" spec is
>>> not in the spec sheet. Over-torquing is definitely not a good thing.
You
>>> may want to reconsider your torquing technique in the future.
>>>
>>> The M14 torque specs are no where near 35 ft/lbs. That is actually 25%
>>> more than the high end of the spec. The torque specs are as posted on
this
>>> subject.
>>> Dennis
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, June 18, 2019, 1:57:39 AM EDT, woodja51 <mwuillemin@mac.com
>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I bought an electronic torque wrench that beeps when you get close to
>>> and the again when at the correct torque. And used the Chinese spanner
with
>>> it attached. I took my nuts up on paper gaskets ( there are aluminium
ones
>>> there it seems as standard ?) to 35 =C3=A2=82=AC=CB=9C lbs which is
closer to the values
>>> on the m14 I think. They should always be wet/ lubed for torque setting
I
>>> believe. I might have slightly over torqued them but would rather be a
>>> little in the high side. Matt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=489701#489701
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
>>> http://ww=================
>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>> http://www.matronics.com/contr=============
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
--
Clifford Coy
Border Air Ltd.
C-Parts Inc.
629 Airport Rd.
Swanton, VT 05488
802-868-2822 TEL
802-868-0035 FAX (MANUAL RECEIVE)
Skype: Cliff.Coy
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: CJ6 community |
The basic premise of the CJ is that we fly it to see what needs to be fixed next.
If were not repairing something, were looking to see what's most likely to be an
issue at sometime in the near future. There is no way around this. Recall that
each CJ while in China used to have a crew that keep it going. Here in the
States, its mostly each of us individually. For those who do not like to turn
a wrench, this may not be the best airplane.
Of course, the most problematic part of the CJ is the pneumatic system. Here, replacing
things like check valves on a schedule and before they go south is well
worth the effort. If you have not replaced one of these in five years, remove
and open it up to see what I mean.
If it wasnt for the many members of the CJ community, who are so very generous
with their time and knowledge, Id still be flying a Cirrus.
Warren Hill
N464TW
Mesa, AZ
> On Jun 19, 2019, at 9:26 AM, motoadve <motoadve@racsa.co.cr> wrote:
>
>
> Have had my CJ6 for 8 months now, put about 100hrs.
> When is not down for repairs I fly it about 3 times per week, rain or shine,
cant have enough of it.
>
> Reflecting on it.
> Best bang for the buck in aviation for sure, and the most fun airplane I have
flown
> Warbird feeling
> Easy to fly
> A pleasure and fun to fly, specially aerobatics
> Amazing sound
> Great community
> Great looking
>
> But since I got it.
> Changed all the air valves, inspected air tanks, still leaks.
> Starter valve failed
> Trim light failed
> Intake tube broke , big hole ,partial in flight failure (after market design
to clear the lower cylinders from oil)
> Oil leak , loose Cylinders #4 and #5, which I think is very serious, and think
it is scary.
> Not knowing how many hrs in the engine before overhaul is a mistery.
>
> If it wasnt for this community I think I would have sold my CJ6 by now, since
I am not mechanically inclined at all.
> People like Doug Sapp, Larry Pine,Craig Paine, Mike and Mike, Tom Elliott, Justin
Drafts, Jon Blake, and some others I dont remember their names have been
very helpful,specially Mike Michalak and Larry Pine.
>
> Thank you all who are always helping, cant wait fly it again, glad to be part
of this community.
>
> --------
> www.Backcountry182.com
> Cessna 182 P
> CJ -6
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=489737#489737
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: CJ6 community |
Wish I could afford a Cirrus.
On Thursday, June 20, 2019, Warren Hill <hill@doctor-hill.com> wrote:
>
> The basic premise of the CJ is that we fly it to see what needs to be
> fixed next.
>
> If we=99re not repairing something, we=99re looking to see wh
at's most likely
> to be an issue at sometime in the near future. There is no way around thi
s.
> Recall that each CJ while in China used to have a crew that keep it going
.
> Here in the States, it=99s mostly each of us individually. For thos
e who do
> not like to turn a wrench, this may not be the best airplane.
>
> Of course, the most problematic part of the CJ is the pneumatic system.
> Here, replacing things like check valves on a schedule and before they go
> south is well worth the effort. If you have not replaced one of these in
> five years, remove and open it up to see what I mean.
>
> If it wasn=99t for the many members of the CJ community, who are so
very
> generous with their time and knowledge, I=99d still be flying a Cir
rus.
>
> Warren Hill
> N464TW
> Mesa, AZ
>
>
> > On Jun 19, 2019, at 9:26 AM, motoadve <motoadve@racsa.co.cr> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Have had my CJ6 for 8 months now, put about 100hrs.
> > When is not down for repairs I fly it about 3 times per week, rain or
> shine, cant have enough of it.
> >
> > Reflecting on it.
> > Best bang for the buck in aviation for sure, and the most fun airplane
I
> have flown
> > Warbird feeling
> > Easy to fly
> > A pleasure and fun to fly, specially aerobatics
> > Amazing sound
> > Great community
> > Great looking
> >
> > But since I got it.
> > Changed all the air valves, inspected air tanks, still leaks.
> > Starter valve failed
> > Trim light failed
> > Intake tube broke , big hole ,partial in flight failure (after market
> design to clear the lower cylinders from oil)
> > Oil leak , loose Cylinders #4 and #5, which I think is very serious, an
d
> think it is scary.
> > Not knowing how many hrs in the engine before overhaul is a mistery.
> >
> > If it wasnt for this community I think I would have sold my CJ6 by now,
> since I am not mechanically inclined at all.
> > People like Doug Sapp, Larry Pine,Craig Paine, Mike and Mike, Tom
> Elliott, Justin Drafts, Jon Blake, and some others I dont remember their
> names have been very helpful,specially Mike Michalak and Larry Pine.
> >
> > Thank you all who are always helping, cant wait fly it again, glad to b
e
> part of this community.
> >
> > --------
> > www.Backcountry182.com
> > Cessna 182 P
> > CJ -6
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Read this topic online here:
> >
> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=489737#489737
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
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: CJ6 community |
Dawg,
You=99re too badass to ever own a Cirrus!!!! =9CA man has to kno
w his limitations=9D. =F0=9F=98=8E
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 19, 2019, at 11:26 AM, Bill Geipel <l129bs@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Wish I could afford a Cirrus.
>
>> On Thursday, June 20, 2019, Warren Hill <hill@doctor-hill.com> wrote:
>>
>> The basic premise of the CJ is that we fly it to see what needs to be fix
ed next.
>>
>> If we=99re not repairing something, we=99re looking to see wh
at's most likely to be an issue at sometime in the near future. There is no w
ay around this. Recall that each CJ while in China used to have a crew that k
eep it going. Here in the States, it=99s mostly each of us individuall
y. For those who do not like to turn a wrench, this may not be the best airp
lane.
>>
>> Of course, the most problematic part of the CJ is the pneumatic system. H
ere, replacing things like check valves on a schedule and before they go sou
th is well worth the effort. If you have not replaced one of these in five y
ears, remove and open it up to see what I mean.
>>
>> If it wasn=99t for the many members of the CJ community, who are so
very generous with their time and knowledge, I=99d still be flying a C
irrus.
>>
>> Warren Hill
>> N464TW
>> Mesa, AZ
>>
>>
>> > On Jun 19, 2019, at 9:26 AM, motoadve <motoadve@racsa.co.cr> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Have had my CJ6 for 8 months now, put about 100hrs.
>> > When is not down for repairs I fly it about 3 times per week, rain or s
hine, cant have enough of it.
>> >
>> > Reflecting on it.
>> > Best bang for the buck in aviation for sure, and the most fun airplane I
have flown
>> > Warbird feeling
>> > Easy to fly
>> > A pleasure and fun to fly, specially aerobatics
>> > Amazing sound
>> > Great community
>> > Great looking
>> >
>> > But since I got it.
>> > Changed all the air valves, inspected air tanks, still leaks.
>> > Starter valve failed
>> > Trim light failed
>> > Intake tube broke , big hole ,partial in flight failure (after market d
esign to clear the lower cylinders from oil)
>> > Oil leak , loose Cylinders #4 and #5, which I think is very serious, an
d think it is scary.
>> > Not knowing how many hrs in the engine before overhaul is a mistery.
>> >
>> > If it wasnt for this community I think I would have sold my CJ6 by now,
since I am not mechanically inclined at all.
>> > People like Doug Sapp, Larry Pine,Craig Paine, Mike and Mike, Tom Ellio
tt, Justin Drafts, Jon Blake, and some others I dont remember their names ha
ve been very helpful,specially Mike Michalak and Larry Pine.
>> >
>> > Thank you all who are always helping, cant wait fly it again, glad to b
e part of this community.
>> >
>> > --------
>> > www.Backcountry182.com
>> > Cessna 182 P
>> > CJ -6
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Read this topic online here:
>> >
>> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=489737#489737
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> =========================
>> List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> =========================
>> FORUMS -
>> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>> =========================
>> WIKI -
>> lank">http://wiki.matronics.com
>> =========================
>> b Site -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> =========================
>>
>>
>>
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 |
|
Don=99t forget to turn the prop once or twice.
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: Yak52 crash in Poland |
I watched the video also and agree with Greg.=C2- He started recovering t
o low.=C2- The spin looked flat to me.=C2-=C2-Jim "Pappy" Goolsby
-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Wrobel <clouddog22@gmail.com>
Sent: Tue, Jun 18, 2019 5:45 pm
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak52 crash in Poland
I saw another video and the ailerons are not neutral during the spin but ar
ound 60 meters (200 feet) the ailerons appear to be neutral, the elevator i
s still full up indicating the aircraft is still stalled but he stops the s
pin to the right, gets the aircraft neutral and begins a=C2- slight left
turn before impacting the water. It appears he began the recovery too low i
n order to complete the maneuver. More altitude and he would have successfu
lly recovered.
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019, 16:30 <michael@wikstrom.cc> wrote:
HiThere was a fatal yak52 crash in Poland this last week-end, very tragic f
or all involved.=C2-I=99m just curious on what could have gone wron
g and why the pilot didn=99t manage to get out of it, looks to me lik
e a normal spin, not flat, but also looks like ailerons are not where they
should be to get out of this spin.?=C2-Here is one of the links to the vi
deohttps://youtu.be/laHVmAmuY6U=C2-=C2-Michael WikstromCannes, FranceYa
k-18T F-HYAC
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: What is the cylinder torque value for the nuts at the |
base.
Thanks Cliff;
The Overhaul manual section you reference certainly confirms the torque val
ue of 304 lb/in. It does not support the maximum of 330 lb/in we have seen
recently from other sources.
It does not however address the question of dry or lubed and makes no recom
mendation in this area that I could find.
Agreed that over torque must be avoided but I would suggest that under rath
er than over torque is the most likely cause of loose studs. Consider that
, at the correct torque, the studs are stretched within the elastic limit a
nd as such are providing a downward load on the cylinder flange. Lets call
that load 2400 lbs. With each combustion event in the cylinder the upward
load (call it 2200 lbs.) is fully reacted with no resulting cylinder move
ment.
If the studs have been over-torqued and stretched beyond the elastic limit
that 2400 buffer load is drastically reduced and broken studs are the likel
y result
as the over-torque has probably introduced microscopic cracking.
In the event of under torque the result is similar, The buffer load is not
adequate to contain the cyclic combustion loading. Loose, cracked or broke
n studs will be the result.
I think under is the most likely scenario since anything placed under the
flange or under the nut that is softer than the steel flange is going to de
grade the
joint and will eventually cause a problem. Including tab washers!
Re dry or lubed it would be interesting to see the M 462 RF Overhaul Manual
=2E
Walt
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Re: What is the cylinder torque value for the nuts a
t the base.
The torques are for clean and dry threads.
Please reference the M14-P Overhaul Manual Pg.142-143.
The Manual is available here: http://motorstarna.com/m-14p-overhaul-manual
Overtorque of the nuts will increase the chance of the studs pulling from t
he crankcase leading to further leakage.
Cliff
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 2:33 PM doug sapp <dougsappllc@gmail.com> wrote:
Also, from Mark Pennington, this is interesting:
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=rm&zx=vl5ywvgzpugl#inbox/FMfcgx
wChJkxdFPJVWFSFZcLkGTCcGrW?compose=DmwnWrRnXVSjzwCjrftdqMTFtpZNSfCdPxQgNr
BwDsFKJDZfWGgpgdvcrDhTRrHnqLgLwBlQDDDL&projector=1
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:52 AM doug sapp <dougsappllc@gmail.com> wrote:
I do believe the question was asked but maybe missed by some of us.
What is "wet" torque? What exactly does this mean? If I interpret the
cut n past from the net correctly then torquing the cly base studs to 304
to 330 inch pounds WET is way excessive.
From :https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/torque-lubrication-effects-d_1
693.html
When a bolt is lubricated - less torque is required to achieve bolt axi
al load or tension. Reduction of torques for lubricated vs. dry bolts are i
ndicated in the table below.
Lubricant Torque Reduction
(%)
No lube 0
Graphite 50 - 55
White Grease 35 - 45
SAE 30 oil 35 - 45
SAE 40 oil 30 - 40
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 3:56 AM A. Dennis Savarese <dsavarese0812@bells
outh.net> wrote:
Matt,
A torque spec is there for a reason. The "feels about right" spec is
not in the spec sheet. Over-torquing is definitely not a good thing. You
may want to reconsider your torquing technique in the future.
The M14 torque specs are no where near 35 ft/lbs. That is actually 2
5% more than the high end of the spec. The torque specs are as posted on t
his subject.
Dennis
On Tuesday, June 18, 2019, 1:57:39 AM EDT, woodja51 <mwuillemin@mac.c
om> wrote:
I bought an electronic torque wrench that beeps when you get close to
and the again when at the correct torque. And used the Chinese spanner wit
h it attached. I took my nuts up on paper gaskets ( there are aluminium on
es there it seems as standard ?) to 35 =C3=A2=82=AC=CB=9C lbs which is
closer to the values on the m14 I think. They should always be wet/ lubed f
or torque setting I believe. I might have slightly over torqued them but wo
uld rather be a little in the high side. Matt
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=489701#489701
Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
http://ww=================
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contr=============
--
Clifford Coy
Border Air Ltd.
C-Parts Inc.
629 Airport Rd.
Swanton, VT 05488
802-868-2822 TEL
802-868-0035 FAX (MANUAL RECEIVE)
Skype: Cliff.Coy
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
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! --
|