From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net To: John Bouyea Subject: KRnet Digest, Vol 347, Issue 60 Date: 2/8/2005 6:18:19 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: To laminate or not ... (patrusso) 2. Re: To laminate or not ... (patrusso) 3. Re: To laminate or not ... (Bubba) 4. Unsubscribe (The12vtman2@aol.com) 5. Question on bent spars (Ron Smith) 6. Re: Question on bent spars (Mark Langford) 7. Re: Parachutes (robert glidden) 8. Re: props (robert clark) 9. RE: To laminate or not ... (Ron Freiberger) 10. To laminate or not /...dihedral (larry flesner) 11. Re: Thanks Mark (Ron Smith) 12. Re: Parachutes (Mark Langford) 13. All the metal bits (Bubba) 14. Re: To laminate or not /...dihedral (Bubba) 15. recovery parachute system (joe) 16. Re: Question on bent spars (Bubba) 17. Re: Unsubscribe (JEHayward@aol.com) 18. Re: recovery parachute system (Brant Hollensbe) 19. Re: To laminate or not /...dihedral (JAMES FERRIS) 20. Re: Re: props (Dan Heath) 21. RE: To laminate or not ... (Brian Kraut) 22. Re: recovery parachute system (Matthew Elder) 23. Spar questions (B. Ferguson) 24. Re: All the metal bits (robert glidden) 25. RE: Re: props (Brian Kraut) 26. RE: To laminate or not ... (Donald Reid) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:27:07 -0500 From: "patrusso" Subject: Re: KR> To laminate or not ... To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <001201c50e14$2e1b8f20$5ca772d8@patrusso> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Not a good idea. Not all the plys are going in the direction you would want them to for the spar. There are many planes with plywood spars but they are usually capped with a solid timber. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bubba" To: "KRnet" Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:00 AM Subject: Re: KR> To laminate or not ... > Stephen Jacobs wrote: >> >> I also believe this - so here is a question for the knowledgeable >> among us: >> >> How about making up wing spar caps out of several laminations of ply? >> As we are taught, a good scarf makes for any length you like without >> any strength compromise. >> >> 8 x 1/4" laminations would make up the correct depth (for a 2" spar >> cap) and work just fine for the bent spar. >> >> Using 5 ply must surely result in a bullet proof spar? > > If we can collectively prove to me that this would be structurally > sound I'll build it that way. I'd rather have the dihedral be set at > the centerline than at the end of the stub wings. I know it's strong > enough, but I still want solid proof of it. > > Laminating the longerons would make life a lot easier, too. No more > trying to find 14 foot pieces. Just scarf 8 foot pieces together to > make pieces as long as you need, staggering the joints, and laminate > it all together. > -- > Steve > N205FT > mysticz28@swbell.net > He who seeks will find, and he who knocks will be let in. > > > > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > 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: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:37:21 -0500 From: "patrusso" Subject: Re: KR> To laminate or not ... To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <001f01c50e15$9bb9e300$5ca772d8@patrusso> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original You could, but since pine does not have the strenght that other wood s have you will have to make it beefier or face the sides with 3/32 ply, so now we are back to COST and WEIGHT. No doubt, you get the biggest bang for your buck with spruce. I did make wing spars with regular lumber yard spruce, selecting the best and straightest grain stock in the piles. It took several hours to find clear enough stock and in the end I wound up laminating up from smaller pieces and ply facing both sides of the spars. It would have been cheaper to buy from wicks!! ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "KRnet" Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 11:10 AM Subject: Re: KR> To laminate or not ... > > ----- Original Message ----- > >>Paul Wrote> >> >unless you're just talking laminated spar CAPS. >> >>> If laminations are as strong as I think they are, why couldn't a >>> person > laminate a well grained piece of pine for spar caps? > Pat Driscoll > Saint Paul, MN 55102 > patrick36@usfamily.net> >> _______________________________________ >> Search the KRnet Archives at >> http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp >> to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net >> please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > > > --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- > http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- > > > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 13:51:53 -0600 From: "Bubba" Subject: Re: KR> To laminate or not ... To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <047a01c50e17$a4c90000$0200a8c0@Katana> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original patrusso wrote: > Not a good idea. Not all the plys are going in the direction you > would want them to for the spar. There are many planes with plywood > spars but they are usually capped with a solid timber. We're not talking about going down to Home Depot and getting a sheet of 1" CDX. All the layers would have the grain running spanwise, but every other one is flipped so any grain angularity is cancelled out. I know that laminated wood is stronger, I've done it myself and seen the results, but I have no idea how to calculate it to put a number to the strength. I know the design, built to plans, is more than strong enough, but I'd really like to put the dihedral break in the middle of the fuselage instead of out in the airstream. -- Steve N205FT mysticz28@swbell.net He who seeks will find, and he who knocks will be let in. ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:50:39 EST From: The12vtman2@aol.com Subject: KR> Unsubscribe To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <15c.49b32ad8.2f3a720f@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Unsubscribe ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 12:43:40 -0800 (PST) From: Ron Smith Subject: KR> Question on bent spars To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <20050208204340.81862.qmail@web81703.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I plan to make my spars with the dihedral bend at the fuselage. Mark Lankford wrote that this bend might occur inside the fuselage. If they are built that way I don't see how they can rest on the bottom longeron, and still be in plane with the rear spar. (because of the taper) I plan to bend mine just after the fuselage wall. Am I missing something? Ron Smith Kr2s boat stage ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 15:12:01 -0600 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Question on bent spars To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <015e01c50e22$d7954c90$5e0ca58c@net.tbe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Ron Smith wrote: > I plan to bend mine just after the fuselage wall. Am I missing something? That'll work just fine, and is the way I would do it. The wing root fairing will cover it anyway. Mark Langford, Huntsville, AL N56ML at hiwaay.net see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 17:15:38 -0500 From: "robert glidden" Subject: Re: KR> Parachutes To: "Jim Sellars" , "KRnet" Message-ID: <00eb01c50e2b$b8583be0$0c00000a@computer2> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" If your KR is as fast as most being built,if you have a failure bad enought to need a personal chute it is going to happen so fast that the chute is going to just be extra padding for when you hit the ground.If you are that uncomfortable with your ability to build a good flying airplane then put a recovery chute on the aircraft itself.At the speeds you will be going by the time it happens and you think about jumping it will probly be to late unless you are going to make yours a low and slow airplane.just a thought....Bob > > > > > > _______________________________________ > > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > 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: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:30:30 -0800 (PST) From: robert clark Subject: KR> Re: props To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <20050208223030.25333.qmail@web51408.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Looking for some input on props. What are you guys running. Iam currently running 52X50 on my 2180 V.W. I can turn it to 3300 and am getting 150 M.P.H. Just wondering if it would pay me to move up a couple in pitch. All take care Bob Clark Florida --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 18:36:49 -0500 From: "Ron Freiberger" Subject: RE: KR> To laminate or not ... To: "'KRnet'" Message-ID: <000001c50e37$10514980$8f722241@Disorganized> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" This thread goes on and on... Plywood is NOT as strong as spruce in a single direction. Most woods have very little strength crossways of the gain,. This is why plywood will be about 1/2 as strong as spruce in the primary stress direction. If you're gonna DESIGN, look up the strength of the materials. Ron Freiberger mail to rfreiberger at swfla.rr.com <- substitute an @ sign ;o) -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces+rfreiberger=swfla.rr.com@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces+rfreiberger=swfla.rr.com@mylist.net] On Behalf Of Bubba Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 2:52 PM To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> To laminate or not ... patrusso wrote: > Not a good idea. Not all the plys are going in the direction you > would want them to for the spar. There are many planes with plywood > spars but they are usually capped with a solid timber. We're not talking about going down to Home Depot and getting a sheet of 1" CDX. All the layers would have the grain running spanwise, but every other one is flipped so any grain angularity is cancelled out. I know that laminated wood is stronger, I've done it myself and seen the results, but I have no idea how to calculate it to put a number to the strength. I know the design, built to plans, is more than strong enough, but I'd really like to put the dihedral break in the middle of the fuselage instead of out in the airstream. -- Steve N205FT mysticz28@swbell.net He who seeks will find, and he who knocks will be let in. _______________________________________ Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp 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: 10 Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 17:48:53 -0600 From: larry flesner Subject: KR> To laminate or not /...dihedral To: KRnet Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20050208174853.007bdd70@pop.midwest.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I know the >design, built to plans, is more than strong enough, but I'd really like to >put the dihedral break in the middle of the fuselage instead of out in the >airstream. >Steve ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++= If you're looking for pure speed, why have any dihedral at all ?? Dihedral = stability and stability = drag ? Or has my brain exceeded Vne? Larry Flesner ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 15:52:12 -0800 (PST) From: Ron Smith Subject: Re: KR> Thanks Mark To: KRnet Message-ID: <20050208235212.79697.qmail@web81705.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I just needed some validation of my thinking process. I was also thinking that the fillet would cover the bend. I have just a little more to do and I will begin the laminating process. It will be exciting to see those spars sitting in the fuselage. If you email me with your address offine I'll send you some pics of my progress. ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 17:55:16 -0600 From: "Mark Langford" Subject: Re: KR> Parachutes To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <005401c50e39$a3786bb0$1202a8c0@1700xp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Bob Glidden wrote: > At the speeds you will be going by the > time it happens and you think about jumping it will probly be to late unless > you are going to make yours a low and slow airplane.just a thought... Absolutely. And not only that, but structural failures are incredibly rare in aircraft in general, KRs in particular. Only in these rare cases will a parachute help, and as Bob says, there's no guarantee then. Far more likely is fuel starvation, or an engine problem of some sort, like carb ice, ignition, valve train, or crank problems. In these cases, I'd try to put it on the ground if at all possible. I agree that if you're feeling that unlucky, or live in an area with particularly unfriendly terrain, go for a ballistic chute. I think there's probably a good reason why you rarely see a pilot get into a perfectly good airplane wearing a parachute... Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford email to N56ML "at" hiwaay.net -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 18:21:50 -0600 From: "Bubba" Subject: KR> All the metal bits To: "KRNet" Message-ID: <066901c50e3d$5b341120$0200a8c0@Katana> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Is there currently a source for wing attach fittings, control surface horns, and all those other little metal bits scattered through the airframe? If not I might be able to do something about that. I just accepted a job at a shop with, among other things, the biggest waterjet I've ever seen. I could easily cut multiple sets of every metal bit in a KR2 in one setup. I've seen smaller swimming pools before. First project is going to be my firewall, then the airfoil templates. This is gonna be fun :) -- Steve N205FT mysticz28@swbell.net He who seeks will find, and he who knocks will be let in. ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 18:22:52 -0600 From: "Bubba" Subject: Re: KR> To laminate or not /...dihedral To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <066e01c50e3d$80071970$0200a8c0@Katana> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original larry flesner wrote: > > If you're looking for pure speed, why have any dihedral at all ?? > > Dihedral = stability and stability = drag ? Or has my brain exceeded > > Vne? Yeah it's probably a little more drag, but I kinda like it when my landing gear would rather point down than up ;) -- Steve N205FT mysticz28@swbell.net He who seeks will find, and he who knocks will be let in. ------------------------------ Message: 15 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 16:17:46 -0800 From: "joe" Subject: KR> recovery parachute system To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <002a01c50e3c$c82ac540$0a0110ac@o7p4e3> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" If one is really concerned, then lose some weight and install a BRS. From what I have read they have a %100 successful personal safety rate and in most cases the aircraft can be reconstituted. Has anyone ever read any information that contradicts this claim. ------------------------------ Message: 16 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 18:30:56 -0600 From: "Bubba" Subject: Re: KR> Question on bent spars To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <067901c50e3e$a007bcb0$0200a8c0@Katana> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Ron Smith wrote: > I plan to make my spars with the dihedral bend at the fuselage. Mark > Lankford wrote that this bend might occur inside the fuselage. > > If they are built that way I don't see how they can rest on the > bottom longeron, and still be in plane with the rear spar. (because > of the taper) > > I plan to bend mine just after the fuselage wall. > > Am I missing something? I'd a bit hesitant to put the bend at the fuselage sides. Spar loads are highest right at the sides of the fuselage and drop to zero inside the fuse. Bending the spar instead of cutting it is certainly stronger, but I still don't know if I'd want the bend right there. If the bend is inside the fuselage you just have to move the spars to set the incidence. It may very well put the wing higher on the fuselage than intended, but I doubt that would be an issue aerodynamically. Worst case you have to build a foam and glass belly pan and make the bottom of the fuselage rounded like the turtledeck and front deck. Hey, here's a thought, why not get some good, straight grained pine and make a couple of test pieces? Make one perfectly straight and the other bent and see which breaks where. Or even balsa would do. It isn't a test to see how strong the actual spar is, just whether the bend costs strength. -- Steve N205FT mysticz28@swbell.net He who seeks will find, and he who knocks will be let in. ------------------------------ Message: 17 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 19:28:56 EST From: JEHayward@aol.com Subject: Re: KR> Unsubscribe To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <1f0.352fe090.2f3ab348@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" In a message dated 2/8/2005 12:51:19 PM Mountain Standard Time, The12vtman2@aol.com writes: > Unsubscribe > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > That won't work. You have to follow the instructions at the bottom of each e-mail. It's the middle line above. Jim ------------------------------ Message: 18 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 18:50:32 -0600 From: "Brant Hollensbe" Subject: Re: KR> recovery parachute system To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <001e01c50e41$5e000590$0702a8c0@bruntson> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original The insurance guru, Sky Smith, is a member of our local EAA chapter. He presented a insurance program, one meeting, in which he told us that when insurance companies caculate premim rates, they figure that if you deploy the BSR chute while in flight, the aircraft will be a total loss. They believe the sudden deacceleration stresses (160 mph to zero in a matter of seconds) of chute deployment and your random landing on whatever terain is below you (trees, rocks, mountains, houses), is so unpredictable that they must assume the worst and the airraft will be totaled. Your airplane insurance premiums will be higher with a BSR, than an identical airplane that has none. Brant Hollensbe bhollensbe@mchsi.com DSM Iowa ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 19:56:18 -0500 From: JAMES FERRIS Subject: Re: KR> To laminate or not /...dihedral To: krnet@mylist.net Message-ID: <20050208.195620.2856.0.mijnil@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii yeah, thats the kind of real bad gear up landings. Jim On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 18:22:52 -0600 "Bubba" writes: > larry flesner wrote: > > > > If you're looking for pure speed, why have any dihedral at all ?? > > > > Dihedral = stability and stability = drag ? Or has my brain > exceeded > > > > Vne? > > Yeah it's probably a little more drag, but I kinda like it when my > landing > gear would rather point down than up ;) > -- > Steve > N205FT > mysticz28@swbell.net > He who seeks will find, and he who knocks will be let in. > > > > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at > http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > 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, 8 Feb 2005 19:59:05 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) From: "Dan Heath" Subject: Re: KR> Re: props To: "krnet@mylist.net" Message-ID: <42096059.000001.03972@DANHOMECOMPUTER> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Robert, If you don't get an answer on that from the net, address it to Ed Sterba, his address on on krnet.org See N64KR at http://KR-Builder.org - Then click on the pics There is a time for building and a time for FLYING and the time for building has expired. Daniel R. Heath - Columbia, SC See you in Mt. Vernon - 2005 - KR Gathering -------Original Message------- Looking for some input on props. What are you guys running. Iam currently running 52X50 on my 2180 V.W. I can turn it to 3300 and am getting 150 M.P.H. Just wondering if it would pay me to move up a couple in pitch. ------------------------------ Message: 21 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 20:07:07 -0500 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: KR> To laminate or not ... To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >From the FAA A.C. 43.13 (You have read the FAA bible, havn't you?): 1-43. REPLACING SOLID TYPE SPARS WITH LAMINATED TYPE SPARS Solid spars may be replaced with laminated spars or vice versa, provided the material is of the same high quality. There is also supposedly excellent book on wood aircraft design and construction that someone mentioned a while back (Don Reid?). Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of Bubba Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:01 AM To: KRnet Subject: Re: KR> To laminate or not ... Stephen Jacobs wrote: > > I also believe this - so here is a question for the knowledgeable > among us: > > How about making up wing spar caps out of several laminations of ply? > As we are taught, a good scarf makes for any length you like without > any strength compromise. > > 8 x 1/4" laminations would make up the correct depth (for a 2" spar > cap) and work just fine for the bent spar. > > Using 5 ply must surely result in a bullet proof spar? If we can collectively prove to me that this would be structurally sound I'll build it that way. I'd rather have the dihedral be set at the centerline than at the end of the stub wings. I know it's strong enough, but I still want solid proof of it. Laminating the longerons would make life a lot easier, too. No more trying to find 14 foot pieces. Just scarf 8 foot pieces together to make pieces as long as you need, staggering the joints, and laminate it all together. -- Steve N205FT mysticz28@swbell.net He who seeks will find, and he who knocks will be let in. _______________________________________ Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp 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, 8 Feb 2005 17:08:24 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Elder Subject: Re: KR> recovery parachute system To: KRnet Message-ID: <20050209010824.28725.qmail@web30204.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Well that is interesting. That seems to me akin to insurance costing more for cars with airbags than without.... Which we know doesn't make any sense. I don't quite follow their logic... The way I see it, the need to deploy a BRS is either a) an unrecoverable situation (spin, DEEEP stall, etc..) or b) a structural failure. In either of the two cases, the pilot has no real control over when he's going to hit REGARDLESS of whether or not he deploys the BRS... So in the end, the BRS only helps save the life of pilot/pax... Maybe they just don't want to pay for the medical payments and such... It's cheaper for them to let the life insurance people handle it??? Matt --- Brant Hollensbe wrote: > The insurance guru, Sky Smith, is a member of our > local EAA chapter. He > presented a insurance program, one meeting, in which > he told us that when > insurance companies caculate premim rates, they > figure that if you deploy > the BSR chute while in flight, the aircraft will be > a total loss. They > believe the sudden deacceleration stresses (160 mph > to zero in a matter of > seconds) of chute deployment and your random landing > on whatever terain is > below you (trees, rocks, mountains, houses), is so > unpredictable that they > must assume the worst and the airraft will be > totaled. Your airplane > insurance premiums will be higher with a BSR, than > an identical airplane > that has none. > > Brant Hollensbe > bhollensbe@mchsi.com > DSM Iowa > > > > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at > http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to > KRnet-leave@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at > http://www.krnet.org/info.html > ===== ------------------------------------------------- Matthew Elder Orangeburg, SC http://www.infinigral.com/melder My Airplane Project: http://kr1.infinigral.com ------------------------------ Message: 23 Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 19:10:28 -0600 From: "B. Ferguson" Subject: KR> Spar questions To: KRnet Message-ID: <42096300.5987@houston.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hello, With this discussion on spar strength I was curious to know if any of the techniques discussed, along with the extra thickness of the 5048 airfoil, would add enough strength to the center section to allow for fitting of the 1-B wings? Adding a large amount to the span would no doubtedly lower the g rating, but would it not be feasable to build a 2-B using a laminated center section to beef up the structure for the needed support? Steve and I have a lot in common, we're both in Houston headed for Reno. He wants to race and I'd like to catch some of that Minden wave. Been lurking here for most of 2003 and have found the discussion interesting, so I finally decided to throw out my first newbie/dumb questions. As for me I'm not an engineer, but one sure fire way to see if the spar would take the weight would be to build one and test to destruction. If anyone has a slightly less expensive solution I'd love to hear and yes, I need to do some homework with regards to wood strength, any suggested reading besides the archives? I'm sure anyone that might want to avoid the hassle of medical exams would be too. (trust me doc, my prostate is A-OK) KR design decision made, still gravity bound on Suzuki. B. Ferguson Houston, TX ------------------------------ Message: 24 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 20:22:21 -0500 From: "robert glidden" Subject: Re: KR> All the metal bits To: "KRnet" Message-ID: <016501c50e45$ce020ba0$0c00000a@computer2> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I could > easily cut multiple sets of every metal bit in a KR2 in one setup. I may be interested in a few things if you can swing them,let me know.. glidden@ccrtc.com First project is going to be my firewall, > then the airfoil templates. This is gonna be fun :) Why would you need to make your firewall on a water jet? Is your new employer going to have a problem with you tieing up a very expensive machine with KR parts? -- > Steve > N205FT > mysticz28@swbell.net > He who seeks will find, and he who knocks will be let in. > > > > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > 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: 25 Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 20:33:27 -0500 From: "Brian Kraut" Subject: RE: KR> Re: props To: "KRnet" Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Different brands of props measure their pitch a little differently. I had a Props, Inc. 52-50 that would only turn 3,200 on a 2180. I switched to a Sterba 54-52 if I remember correctly and I picked up about 150 RPM, 5 MPH, and at least 100 FPM climb. I highly recommend that you call Ed Sterba. He is a master and he knows KRs very well. Anyway, if you uped the pitch of your current prop you would lower the RPM and probably loose a little speed and a lot of climb. The VW will produce more power in the 3,400 to 3,500 RPM range. I wouldn't increase pitch while only turning 3,300. Brian Kraut Engineering Alternatives, Inc. www.engalt.com -----Original Message----- From: krnet-bounces@mylist.net [mailto:krnet-bounces@mylist.net]On Behalf Of robert clark Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 5:31 PM To: krnet@mylist.net Subject: KR> Re: props Looking for some input on props. What are you guys running. Iam currently running 52X50 on my 2180 V.W. I can turn it to 3300 and am getting 150 M.P.H. Just wondering if it would pay me to move up a couple in pitch. All take care Bob Clark Florida --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. _______________________________________ Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp 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: 26 Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 21:18:17 -0500 From: Donald Reid Subject: RE: KR> To laminate or not ... To: KRnet Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.2.20050208210802.01b0d460@mail.peoplepc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 08:07 PM 2/8/2005, you wrote: > >From the FAA A.C. 43.13 (You have read the FAA bible, havn't you?): > >1-43. REPLACING SOLID TYPE SPARS WITH LAMINATED TYPE SPARS >Solid spars may be replaced with laminated spars or vice versa, provided the >material is of the same high quality. > >There is also supposedly excellent book on wood aircraft design and >construction that someone mentioned a while back (Don Reid?). > > How about making up wing spar caps out of several laminations of ply? > > As we are taught, a good scarf makes for any length you like without > > any strength compromise. > > > Using 5 ply must surely result in a bullet proof spar? The book is ANC-18, Design of Wood Aircraft Structures. It is the bible of wooden airplane design. You do NOT want to make spar caps out of plywood. In the FAA reference, they are talking about laminating using with the wood fibers oriented along the length of the spar. The grain may be oriented in a variety of different ways in spar lamination, but the wood fibers must run the length of the spar. There is a lot of science involved in structural design and it is certainly one area in which you do not want to do something stupid Don Reid - donreid "at" peoplepc.com Bumpass, Va Visit my web sites at: AeroFoil, a 2-D Airfoil Design And Analysis Computer Program: http://aerofoilengineering.com KR2XL construction: http://aerofoilengineering.com/KR/KR2XL.htm Aviation Surplus: http://aerofoilengineering.com/PartsListing/Airparts.htm EAA Chapter 231: http://eaa231.org Ultralights: http://usua250.org VA EAA State Fly-in: http://vaeaa.org ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ See KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html End of KRnet Digest, Vol 347, Issue 60 ************************************** ================================== ABC Amber Outlook Converter v4.20 Trial version ==================================