From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net To: John Bouyea Subject: KRnet Digest, Vol 346, Issue 14 Date: 4/5/2004 10:18:18 PM Send KRnet mailing list submissions to krnet@mylist.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mylist.net/listinfo/krnet or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to krnet-request@mylist.net You can reach the person managing the list at krnet-owner@mylist.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of KRnet digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Painting - Should I shoot another layer of primer (Dan Heath) 2. Bearings (Martindale Family) 3. flying update (larry flesner) 4. Re: Re: wing tanks &Simpsons Rule (BABYWOLF@aol.com) 5. RE: Painting - Should I shoot another layer of primer (Ron Freiberger) 6. Re: Bearings (Orma Robbins) 7. RE: Engine Bearing (Doug Rupert) 8. Re: Painting (Ron Eason) 9. Re: Bbq at S-n-F (Ray Fuenzalida) 10. Re: Engine Bearing (Phil Matheson) 11. Re: Engine Bearing (Veeduber@aol.com) 12. Re: Engine Bearing (Orma Robbins) 13. Diehl Wings on KR-2 (Kenneth B. Jones) 14. Re: Engine Bearing (Ron Eason) 15. RE: Engine Bearing (Wood, Sidney M.) 16. Spar Design (Stephen Jacobs) 17. Re: Aircraft parts of steel (joe) 18. Re: Aircraft parts of steel (Bob Stone) 19. Re: Re: KR> Bbq at S-n-F (skphil@charter.net) 20. Re: elevator mass balancing!! (Phillip Matheson) 21. Re: elevator mass balancing!! (Steve and Lori McGee) 22. Re: elevator mass balancing!! (Ross Evans) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 18:53:59 -0400 (Eastern Standard Time) From: "Dan Heath" Subject: Re: KR> Painting - Should I shoot another layer of primer To: , "krnet@mylist.net" Message-ID: <40709207.000003.03156@COMPUTER> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Well, I'll let you know how it goes after I paint mine. I'll bet that no local paint person knows anything about Smooth Prime. See N64KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Then click on the pics Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC DanRH@KR-Builder.org See you in Mt. Vernon - 2004 - KR Gathering See our EAA Chapter 242 at http://EAA242.org -------Original Message------- From: Orma Robbins; KRnet Date: 04/04/04 18:30:49 To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> Painting - Should I shoot another layer of primer "it is primer, so it is OK." Sorry, that may not be true. I think that it depends on the type of paint used. I, don't know, but I would ask a paint supply if the paint system intended to be used is compatible with the two different primers.. An experienced painter would probably know also. I personally would rather spray the entire project uniformly just to make sure that the paint did not curdle and cause me to have to re-accomplish part of all of my work. Orma L. Robbins Southfield MI 19 Years flying KR-2 N110LR http://www.aviation-mechanics.com _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 08:19:37 +1000 From: "Martindale Family" Subject: KR> Bearings To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <00a901c41a99$da9c2080$75a0fea9@athlon2400> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Well they often omit bearings for the cam so I suppose with proper engineering analysis of loads (power stroke, precession, prop overhang etc.) one can do the same with the mains....but in a little VW running back to front??? Let us know of the results of your investigations, Orma, I'd be interested to know whether yours is unique or whether there are others out there marketted under some name. John The Martindale Family 29 Jane Circuit TOORMINA NSW 2452 AUSTRALIA phone: 61 2 66584767 email: johnjane@chc.net.au ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2004 19:58:58 -0500 From: larry flesner Subject: KR> flying update To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20040404195858.008a1b30@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Netters, I've managed to log about 4 hours of flight time in the last few days. Three of them were today. Friday I made a trip for fuel. 38 miles is not too far to fly in a KR when you can get auto fuel for $1.25 !! It's going up to $1.60 as of yesterday but that's still cheap. I had flown 3.2 hours and it took 15.5 gal to fill the tanks. That's a tad over 5 gal per hour but I had some flight time at reduced throttle like a decent from 7500 feet. The wind has been pretty strong the last few days. On the fuel trip the wind was a steady 15 to 19 at 45 degrees to the runway. Today it was approx 12 to 15 from the NW so we were using RW 36, again with a bit of crosswind. No problems. I also made my first landing on grass in a KR. The only problem was the grass was long, about 5 inches or so and very thick, and we had a cross wind of about 90 degees. Did I mention that part of the runway has a bit of a grade, a pond on the right side, and a very large hangar/ machine shed and house on the left. The long grass accounted for more then half of the 1500 to 1700 foot takeoff roll. I used about the same going in. I sure wish I could kill some more of the float this thing has. I was using full speed brake and holding 80mph all the way to flare as the ASI would jump 10 mph in the gusty air. I didn't want to get too slow and I had plenty of runway. Most of the three hours was flown in formation with a Zenair 601 running a Harly Davidson engine, an Acro Sport II, and on one flight the Tripacer. Needless to say I ran at much reduced throttle most of the time. 1850 rpm gives me approx 110 mph cruise. I shut down after the last flight with 34.5 hours on the meter. Not bad considering it's been less than 4 months since sign-off and I've rebuilt the left wing tank, had the prop repitched, rebuilt the induction system, moved the battery, installed a replacement tailwheel, repaired oil leaks, and I guess that's about it. I did a few stalls today and did some more testing on the slips. The stalls are amazingly gentle. As for the slips I think I found the technique for the KR. I found I don't want to put the wing down with aileron but simply start the slip with rudder. As I bring in rudder the opposit wing goes down and the nose pitches down. As the nose pitches down I come in with a bit of back stick to hold the attitude I want. When I want to end the slip I slowly bring the controls back to nuetral. If not done smoothly it will really toss you around. I could start the slip with the VSI showing 500 to 600 fpm decent and in the slip it went past 1000 fpm decent. The KR is much quicker responding to control inputs then anything you buy at the store. For those of you setting up your cockpit, make your stick layout so you can rest the weight of your arm on something other than the stick. It's the only way to fly the KR smoothly. In mine, my wrist rest on my leg and I fly with wrist and finger action. ( I have dual sticks) Returning home on the fuel run I stretched my legs out to the firewall between the peddles. This dropped my leg too low to rest my arm and the KR had a totally different feel. I moved my hand down the stick and that too gave it a different feel but one I could get used to if I could rest my arm on something. Anyway, something to think about. If you want to fly a fighter and are too old to join the Air Force, get back out to the shop and finish the KR!!!!!!!!!!!!! Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 21:03:31 EDT From: BABYWOLF@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Re: wing tanks &Simpsons Rule To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <166.2dafb406.2da20a63@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" You might try a math formula called Simpson's Rule- I used it once to figure the water line stripe on a Luger sail boat that I b built- it worked but it would have been easier to put the boat in the water and mark the line with chalk ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 21:03:29 -0400 From: "Ron Freiberger" Subject: RE: KR> Painting - Should I shoot another layer of primer To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I've attended seminars with Jon Goldblum of Poly Fiber, and he emphasized one thing over all the other issues. "Use the same vendors products all the way through". Ron Freiberger mailto: rfreiberger@swfla.rr.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of Dan Heath Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 6:54 PM To: Orma@aviation-mechanics.com; krnet@mylist.net Subject: Re: KR> Painting - Should I shoot another layer of primer Well, I'll let you know how it goes after I paint mine. I'll bet that no local paint person knows anything about Smooth Prime. See N64KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Then click on the pics Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC DanRH@KR-Builder.org See you in Mt. Vernon - 2004 - KR Gathering See our EAA Chapter 242 at http://EAA242.org -------Original Message------- From: Orma Robbins; KRnet Date: 04/04/04 18:30:49 To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> Painting - Should I shoot another layer of primer "it is primer, so it is OK." Sorry, that may not be true. I think that it depends on the type of paint used. I, don't know, but I would ask a paint supply if the paint system intended to be used is compatible with the two different primers.. An experienced painter would probably know also. I personally would rather spray the entire project uniformly just to make sure that the paint did not curdle and cause me to have to re-accomplish part of all of my work. Orma L. Robbins Southfield MI 19 Years flying KR-2 N110LR http://www.aviation-mechanics.com _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 21:04:47 -0400 From: "Orma Robbins" Subject: Re: KR> Bearings To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <02f801c41aa9$fe4338b0$e33ed445@ROBBINS1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" "Let us know of the results of your investigations, Orma, I'd be interested to know whether yours is unique or whether there are others out there marketed under some name." Earlier today I made a simple measurement with string around the prop hub and around the diameter of the #4 bearing, and they were approximately the same. Tomorrow I will use the real tool. As to other engines, I would guess that there were others. Attrition has probably removed a lot of them from service. Because there are no real accurate records as to how many or which engines were installed, it would be anyone's guess. Also there were a few different engine makers of the day. Another point is that the use of the type 4 was never in the main stream. You will note that I have not mentioned the name, and that is because I have no proof that this person actually assembled this engine, only the hear say of others. Orma L. Robbins Southfield MI 19 Years flying KR-2 N110LR http://www.aviation-mechanics.com ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 23:05:18 -0400 From: "Doug Rupert" Subject: RE: KR> Engine Bearing To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <005201c41aba$d8dedd20$666cd1d8@office> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Open up one of the larger Briggs & Stratton lawn mower engines and you'll see that they have now opted for NO bearings whatsoever, just aluminum rods on steel crank. Also running an aluminum block. Always wondered whether this was just a built in engine replacement scam. Doug Rupert Simcoe Ontario -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces+drupert=sympatico.ca@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces+drupert=sympatico.ca@mylist.net] On Behalf Of Brian Kraut Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 9:30 AM To: Orma Robbins; KRnet Subject: RE: KR> Engine Bearing The material that they make the bearings out of is not that hard. Apparently, using the aluminum case as the bearing with an oversize hub works to some degree. The biggest problem is that you have to change the whole crankcase when the bearing surface wears out. I am certainly not suggesting that anyone do this on their engine. I remembered hearing about an engine at one time that was made to use aluminum beraings so I did a search and found that it is common. I coppied this from an article I found on bearings: BEARING MATERIALS At the original equipment level, the use of aluminum main and rod bearings is growing for a variety of reasons. One is that aluminum bearings are less expensive to manufacturer than bimetal or trimetal copper/lead bearings. Switching to aluminum also gets rid of lead, which is an environmental concern for manufacturers. But there are many other reasons, too. "Federal-Mogul provides both copper/lead and aluminum bearings. But perceptions are changing with respect to aluminum versus copper/lead," said Federal-Mogul's Ron Thompson. "Most of the original equipment manufacturers are going to aluminum bearings, as are a growing number of rebuilders in the aftermarket. Many people are switching to aluminum because it provides improved durability and better control over tolerances. The whole article is here in case anyone is interrested: http://members.aol.com/carleyware/library/ar797.htm Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of Orma Robbins Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 9:05 AM To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> Engine Bearing "for even suggesting" Morning John; Like I said, having two open cases side by side was interesting. I lifted out my crank and sat it inside the type 2 case, and sat the other crank still with the bearing installed into my type 4 case and the fit was nearly exact. For me that varified that the builder intended to omit that bearing. It looks like the prop hub was made to be the exact size that the case is. With the Force One bearing the case is opened to accept the bearing. Tomorrow I will go to the airport and get my mic and measure the prop hub diameter and compair it to the diameter of the #4 crank bearing on the type 2 crank. Orma L. Robbins Southfield MI 19 Years flying KR-2 N110LR http://www.aviation-mechanics.com _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html _______________________________________ to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 22:15:08 -0500 From: "Ron Eason" Subject: Re: KR> Painting To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <004001c41abc$34e87580$6501a8c0@Administration> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I would suggest that you thin out the primer at least 2:1 over what you used, spray it wet. It will act as a sealer coat or use "sealer primer" [they do make such a product] and the sand out the dust, and paint the color. KRron ----- Original Message ----- From: "JIM VANCE" To: "krnet" Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 1:58 PM Subject: KR> Painting > I'm finishing up the 600 grit wet sand on my primer. Since I haven't painted vehicles before, I need guidance from the experts. > > I put acrylic lacquer primer over the Smooth Prime, which is water soluble. I have sanded through the primer in a couple of places. Should I shoot another layer of primer, or will this be okay? > > When painting the wings, do I paint them with the ailerons in place? > If I'm to paint the ailerons and wings separately, how do I keep the paint out of the piano hinge? I don't want to spend the rest of my life cleaning them. > > Building airplanes is a learning experience. I think I've earned a Master's degree in the school of hard knocks. > > Thanks for your help. > > Jim Vance > Vance@ClaflinWildcats.com _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 20:39:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Ray Fuenzalida Subject: Re: KR> Bbq at S-n-F To: KRnet Message-ID: <20040405033932.21700.qmail@web42003.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I will be camping and am a member of EAA. Will get there Wednesday night or Thursday morning. Look forward to meeting some of the KR gang. Ray --- Linda Warner wrote: > Hi Netters. Tried twice to send an amended letter to > the net. Sorry. > > What I was trying to do was answer Brian Kraut's > letter about meeting up > for a Bbq. I told him there is no particular place > that I can think of > to hold this. I also told him that the first one to > arrive should come > back out to the camper registration building and > we'll make up a note > with a map so that all the rest of you can see it as > you register to > camp. > > A side note: to camp on the grounds... you must be > either a member (in > good standing) of the EAA, or the Florida air > museum. > > Hope to see many of you there & enjoy some bbq or > brats with you. > > John Sickafoose > Co-chairman, camper registration s-n-f > Naples, Fl > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to > KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/ ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 19:26:01 +1000 From: "Phil Matheson" Subject: Re: KR> Engine Bearing To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <007b01c41af0$1aff2ae0$7297dccb@Office> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Open up one of the larger Briggs & Stratton lawn mower engines and you'll see that they have now opted for NO bearings whatsoever, just aluminum rods ------------------------- I would call this a throw away engine. Not something that is flying you around. Phil Matheson matheson@dodo.com.au VH-PKR ( reserved) 61 3 58833588 See our VW Engines and Home built web page at http://www.vw-engines.com/ www.homebuilt-aviation.com/ ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 06:12:29 EDT From: Veeduber@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Engine Bearing To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <1df.1d13c82d.2da28b0d@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" The original VW did not use bearing shells. Crank & cam ran directly in the parent metal of the crankcase. Indeed, this is a common practice with overhead cams in many of today's engines using aluminum heads. (Of generous area and running at just half the speed of the crankshaft, in engines fitted with full-flow oil filtration systems the MTBF of the cam's bearings will exceed most other parts of the powertrain.) As a point of interest, Bob Huggins' first 'long-hub' VW conversion used the hub as the bearing journal, running directly on the parent metal of the crankcase. (circa 1960's) -R.S.Hoover ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 07:38:11 -0400 From: "Orma Robbins" Subject: Re: KR> Engine Bearing To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <033501c41b02$7a2dc140$e33ed445@ROBBINS1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" 'long-hub' VW conversion This hub qualifies as long. It fits all the way to the retaining ring. Do you have any thoughts on the windage tray that is not present. The type 2 tray was bolted to the oil pick up. The type 4 oil pick up did not have a bolt hole and no windage tray. Could it be that the type 4 uses the oil splash to better lub the cam and bearings? Orma L. Robbins Southfield MI 19 Years flying KR-2 N110LR http://www.aviation-mechanics.com ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 07:50:07 -0400 From: "Kenneth B. Jones" Subject: KR> Diehl Wings on KR-2 To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <011801c41b04$2468e5d0$8d7ba8c0@oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Last November I purchased a "completed" KR-2 which has Diehl wing skins. In reviewing the plane, I don't see any changes to the empennage. I was wondering if there needs to be any change to the empennage or elsewhere due to having the larger wing. Also, does anyone have any specific data on the effects of having the Diehl wing vs. the original wing? I saw a general statement concerning improved climb and improved performance on the Diehl web site. My KR-2 weighs about 620 lbs. empty. Thanks in advance, Kenneth B. Jones N5834 11713 Bedivere Court Sharonville, OH 45241-5914 Phone: 513-489-6506 Mobile: 513-604-3273 Email: kenbjones@cinci.rr.com ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 10:28:32 -0500 From: "Ron Eason" Subject: Re: KR> Engine Bearing To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <002901c41b22$a7cfada0$6501a8c0@Administration> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I suspect that B/S is using new technology of bonding nickel/silicate or something like that to the journals for bearings. I have a set of Nickel cylinders and its hard to identify the difference between aluminum and nickel. The surface is a little grayer. KRron ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil Matheson" To: "KRnet" Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 4:26 AM Subject: Re: KR> Engine Bearing > Open up one of the larger Briggs & Stratton lawn mower engines and you'll > see that they have now opted for NO bearings whatsoever, just aluminum rods > ------------------------- > > > I would call this a throw away engine. Not something that is flying you > around. > > > Phil Matheson > matheson@dodo.com.au > VH-PKR ( reserved) > 61 3 58833588 > > See our VW Engines and Home built web page at > http://www.vw-engines.com/ > www.homebuilt-aviation.com/ > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > ------------------------------ Message: 15 Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 12:50:46 -0400 From: "Wood, Sidney M." Subject: RE: KR> Engine Bearing To: "Ron Eason" , "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" The pro drag racers use aluminum connecting rods to steel crank shaft, no bearing inserts. These engines generate about 3,000 hp for 5 seconds or so. Then it's do a re-build for the next run. Sid Wood, KR-2 N6242 Mechanicsville, MD sidney.wood@titan.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net] On Behalf Of Ron Eason Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 11:29 AM To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> Engine Bearing I suspect that B/S is using new technology of bonding nickel/silicate or something like that to the journals for bearings. I have a set of Nickel cylinders and its hard to identify the difference between aluminum and nickel. The surface is a little grayer. KRron ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil Matheson" To: "KRnet" Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 4:26 AM Subject: Re: KR> Engine Bearing > Open up one of the larger Briggs & Stratton lawn mower engines and you'll > see that they have now opted for NO bearings whatsoever, just aluminum rods > ------------------------- > > > I would call this a throw away engine. Not something that is flying you > around. > > > Phil Matheson > matheson@dodo.com.au > VH-PKR ( reserved) > 61 3 58833588 > > See our VW Engines and Home built web page at > http://www.vw-engines.com/ > www.homebuilt-aviation.com/ ------------------------------ Message: 16 Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 20:08:40 +0200 From: "Stephen Jacobs" Subject: KR> Spar Design To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <000001c41b39$08d32e40$6764a8c0@homedesktop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Good day all - some advice would be greatly appreciated. My plans are very old (circa 1976/77) so some of this may not make sense to those with more recent issues. The spar pillar spacing for the centre section (Main Spar) varies - typically: FWD Spar Dwg 5 (from the centre out) - 7.5"; 7"; 5"; 10"' 10" = total 39.5" half-span. I assume this spacing was relevant to the mountings of the original retract gear. The same dwg also shows another view of the fwd main spar with a pillar spacing of 13.5" centres?? Question 1: What have the builders done that opted for the later fixed u/c? The overall spar length (Center Fwd) is given as 83" with (*65) in parenthesis? Could this be the KR1 wing dimensions? Similarly, the Outer fwd spar length 77.5" (*59.5"). The outer fwd spar the pillar spacing is given as 6" TYP. It has intrigued me for many years that the pillars are not all the same thickness (shear web to shear web). Is there an engineering reason for this or is weight reduction the reason? Maybe spar breathing? We all want the strongest and lightest spar - I am placing more emphasis on strong, so the main spar will be laminated from 6mm (1/4") or whatever it takes to make the bend to the dihedral angle at the fuselage (refer Mark Langford's notes on his mods). I was further encouraged when I saw that Riley Collins did something similar - a bent spar. Using full length spruce (14') allows the center spar to go up to half span (for better flaps). The WAF's move further from the cantilever pivot, so they carry less load. One-piece spars were considered (and designed) but if ever I had an off-field landing ...... Question 2 is: The KR plans call for no taper on the centre section and a double taper for the outer spar caps. That makes sense with a short carry through spar but in my case the centre section spar is much longer. I am making the spar caps nearly 30% deeper (66mm vs. 50mm) and would like to shed some weight by uniformly (proportionately) reducing the thickness all the way out. With a laminated spar it will be extremely convenient if it is OK to keep the same cap width and reduce the cap depth all the way out (through the joiners at half span). i.e. - a single taper in front view (no taper in plan view). Is there and engineering reason /principle that makes this a bad idea? As a matter of interest - I opted for the P51 wing section (BL17.5). I was stunned to see the similarity to the 16% AS5046 section - I will probably use the Ashok 15% for the tip. (Plus 2 degs with 2 degs washout) Regards Steve J Askies"AT"microlink.zm ------------------------------ Message: 17 Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 15:31:29 -0700 From: "joe" Subject: Re: KR> Aircraft parts of steel To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <001d01c41b5d$bd6c0ce0$0a0110ac@o7p4e3> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Pardon me. I am unfamiliar with being spammed. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Edward Seaman" To: "KRnet" Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 2:57 AM Subject: Re: KR> Aircraft parts of steel > However, I was indicating to someone the strength of > aluminum. From an experience of mine in trying to > drill through an aluminum aircraft hinge. > > Pardon? > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > WIN FREE WORLDWIDE FLIGHTS - nominate a cafe in the Yahoo! Mail Internet Cafe Awards www.yahoo.co.uk/internetcafes > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 18 Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 18:31:11 -0500 From: "Bob Stone" Subject: Re: KR> Aircraft parts of steel To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <000a01c41b66$147a73c0$ba21f218@hot.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "joe" To: "KRnet" Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 5:31 PM Subject: Re: KR> Aircraft parts of steel > Pardon me. I am unfamiliar with being spammed. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Edward Seaman" > To: "KRnet" > Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 2:57 AM > Subject: Re: KR> Aircraft parts of steel > > > > However, I was indicating to someone the strength of > > aluminum. From an experience of mine in trying to > > drill through an aluminum aircraft hinge. > > > > Pardon? > > > > > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > > WIN FREE WORLDWIDE FLIGHTS - nominate a cafe in the Yahoo! Mail Internet > Cafe Awards www.yahoo.co.uk/internetcafes > > > > _______________________________________ > > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2004 0:02:18 +0000 From: Subject: Re: Re: KR> Bbq at S-n-F To: KRnet Message-ID: <200404060002.i3602IbI000634@mxsf06.cluster1.charter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Ray, and others. I plan on getting there Thursday about 1:00. Never camped there. Hope I can get a site. Maybe I'll make a flag with a KR logo on it so others can find. Not going in the gates until Friday and Saturday. Steven Phillabaum Auburn, Alabama Table Stage > > From: Ray Fuenzalida > Date: 2004/04/05 Mon AM 03:39:32 GMT > To: KRnet > Subject: Re: KR> Bbq at S-n-F > > I will be camping and am a member of EAA. Will get > there Wednesday night or Thursday morning. > Look forward to meeting some of the KR gang. > Ray > > --- Linda Warner wrote: > > Hi Netters. Tried twice to send an amended letter to > > the net. Sorry. > > > > What I was trying to do was answer Brian Kraut's > > letter about meeting up > > for a Bbq. I told him there is no particular place > > that I can think of > > to hold this. I also told him that the first one to > > arrive should come > > back out to the camper registration building and > > we'll make up a note > > with a map so that all the rest of you can see it as > > you register to > > camp. > > > > A side note: to camp on the grounds... you must be > > either a member (in > > good standing) of the EAA, or the Florida air > > museum. > > > > Hope to see many of you there & enjoy some bbq or > > brats with you. > > > > John Sickafoose > > Co-chairman, camper registration s-n-f > > Naples, Fl > > > > > > _______________________________________ > > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to > > KRnet-leave@mylist.net > > please see other KRnet info at > http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway > http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/ > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > ------------------------------ Message: 20 Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2004 14:54:59 +1000 From: "Phillip Matheson" Subject: Re: KR>elevator mass balancing!! To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <006f01c41b93$5199e880$ab96dccb@ralf> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi all I have ,for sometime been concerned about the mass balancing of my elevator. This has been a hot subject lately, and many have talked about elevator tip weights. I would like to hand on some points I found out when I visited an aircraft structural engineer on the weekend. I took my tail plane and elevator along to show him. Note: My tail plan has been extended 12 inches, due to longer Dan Diehl wing skins used. I also took the KR plans with me. After much talk on my building techniques I was happy to say it passed his inspection. I wanted to pass on some of his comments on mass balancing a tail plane He was concerned about placing weights onto the elevator tips, as the elevator plans are not designed for this and twisting of the elevator MAY be a problem. His advise was to do as Mark Langford has done( or similar) and place the weights on the Control linkage , and not the elevator tips. Reasons 1. twisting of the elevator tips 2. the mass balance arm and mountings must be able to carry 15 times the weight of the mass balance ( 12 times minimum and 3 for safety factor). >From this I would be concerned at adding 4130 lead filled tubing or similar to my elevator tips. He was not impressed with the Aileron mass balance mounting arms as well. He could believe the plans do not insist on a gusset welded to the mass balance arm to stop cracking , failure. Now I'll stand back and face the music. Phil Matheson matheson@dodo.com.au Australia 61 3 58833588 See our VW Engines and home built Parts and Kits at: http://www.vw-engines.com/ www.homebuilt-aviation.com ------------------------------ Message: 21 Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2004 00:06:37 -0500 From: "Steve and Lori McGee" Subject: Re: KR>elevator mass balancing!! To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <000701c41b94$f058d5c0$0202a8c0@lori8v5h2xi9m3> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" 15 Gs - hahhah - hehheh - in a tail, thats a good one. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phillip Matheson" To: "KRnet" Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 11:54 PM Subject: Re: KR>elevator mass balancing!! > Hi all > I have ,for sometime been concerned about the mass balancing of my elevator. > This has been a hot subject lately, and many have talked about elevator tip > weights. I would like to hand on some points I found out when I visited an > aircraft structural engineer on the weekend. > I took my tail plane and elevator along to show him. > Note: My tail plan has been extended 12 inches, due to longer Dan Diehl wing > skins used. > I also took the KR plans with me. > > After much talk on my building techniques I was happy to say it passed his > inspection. > I wanted to pass on some of his comments on mass balancing a tail plane > > He was concerned about placing weights onto the elevator tips, as the > elevator plans are not designed for this and twisting of the elevator MAY be > a problem. > His advise was to do as Mark Langford has done( or similar) and place the > weights on the Control linkage , and not the elevator tips. > > Reasons > 1. twisting of the elevator tips > 2. the mass balance arm and mountings must be able to carry 15 times the > weight of the mass balance > ( 12 times minimum and 3 for safety factor). > >From this I would be concerned at adding 4130 lead filled tubing or similar > to my elevator tips. > > He was not impressed with the Aileron mass balance mounting arms as well. He > could believe the plans do not insist on a gusset welded to the mass balance > arm to stop cracking , failure. > > Now I'll stand back and face the music. > > > Phil Matheson > matheson@dodo.com.au > Australia > 61 3 58833588 > See our VW Engines and home built Parts > and Kits at: > http://www.vw-engines.com/ > www.homebuilt-aviation.com > > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > ------------------------------ Message: 22 Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2004 15:17:51 +1000 From: "Ross Evans" Subject: Re: KR>elevator mass balancing!! To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed HI phil I have put the tubing with the lead at the tips I am going to glass around the tube and over the elevator to past the hinge point as I thought that a twisting problem could arise!! I would guess that after the elevator is properly balanced the extra weight would be less than 750 grams I have also used mil fibre as it has good compressive strength under the glass as I have removed some foam at the attachment area. Yes I was worried about it being a problem and looked at the possible problems and I feel that it should not be to much of a problem I would have liked to have a linkage inside the boat but the aircraft was finished there when I got it! I beleive the original builder was looking to do the same as I am doing. I also wonder about the aeileron balancing arms they look a little week to me to!!! cheers Ross >From: "Phillip Matheson" >Reply-To: KRnet >To: "KRnet" >Subject: Re: KR>elevator mass balancing!! >Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2004 14:54:59 +1000 > >Hi all >I have ,for sometime been concerned about the mass balancing of my >elevator. >This has been a hot subject lately, and many have talked about elevator tip >weights. I would like to hand on some points I found out when I visited an >aircraft structural engineer on the weekend. >I took my tail plane and elevator along to show him. >Note: My tail plan has been extended 12 inches, due to longer Dan Diehl >wing >skins used. >I also took the KR plans with me. > >After much talk on my building techniques I was happy to say it passed his >inspection. >I wanted to pass on some of his comments on mass balancing a tail plane > >He was concerned about placing weights onto the elevator tips, as the >elevator plans are not designed for this and twisting of the elevator MAY >be >a problem. >His advise was to do as Mark Langford has done( or similar) and place the >weights on the Control linkage , and not the elevator tips. > >Reasons >1. twisting of the elevator tips >2. the mass balance arm and mountings must be able to carry 15 times the >weight of the mass balance >( 12 times minimum and 3 for safety factor). > >From this I would be concerned at adding 4130 lead filled tubing or >similar >to my elevator tips. > >He was not impressed with the Aileron mass balance mounting arms as well. >He >could believe the plans do not insist on a gusset welded to the mass >balance >arm to stop cracking , failure. > >Now I'll stand back and face the music. > > >Phil Matheson >matheson@dodo.com.au >Australia >61 3 58833588 >See our VW Engines and home built Parts >and Kits at: >http://www.vw-engines.com/ >www.homebuilt-aviation.com > > > >_______________________________________ >to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net >please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html _________________________________________________________________ We've 100s of NEW questions! Play Millionaire online to win $$$$. Click here http://sites.ninemsn.com.au/minisite/millionaire/default.asp ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ See KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html End of KRnet Digest, Vol 346, Issue 14 ************************************** ================================== ABC Amber Outlook Converter v4.20 Trial version ==================================