Original Posted By: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
Hi,I'm still fiddling the rib jig. I drew it out again on a slightly larger board.I drew in the spars and braces so I can plan where the clamps will go and raninto another quandry. 1. Using 3/4" thick spars changes the measurements a little. I placed the aftside of the leading edge spar and the front side of the trailing edge spar inthe same position the 1" spar would be. I figured the fuel tank dimensions andothers depend on that being 27 3/4" between them. Is that right? 2. The original wing drawings show blocks (wedges) between the spar and the capstripon the top of both spars. According to the measurements I've made (andI double-checked) if the rear spar is 4 3/4" tall, not only will I not need thespruce blocks, but I'll have to chamfer the top edge of the spar to make itfit. Am I doing something wrong? Somebody told me there is a low spot in theplans. I just finished my bending jig so after I steam a piece and set the bend,I'll put it on the board and see if maybe there is a discrepancy with themeasurements on the plans. I think a low spot will show up with a piece of woodlaying over the drawn measurements. I've seen a couple of exceptions withthe given dimensions so I'm hoping this is just another slight plans error.Any feedback would be appreciated.Thanks!--------Glenn ThomasN?????http://www.flyingwood.comRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Pietenpol-List: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)
Pietenpol-List: Re: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)
Original Posted By: "Glenn Thomas"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)In a message dated 2/12/2006 8:31:35 PM Central Standard Time, glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com writes:1. Using 3/4" thick spars changes the measurements a little. I placed the aft side of the leading edge spar and the front side of the trailing edge sparin the same position the 1" spar would be. I figured the fuel tank dimensionsand others depend on that being 27 3/4" between them. Is that right? Glen,The spar centerline is what should be maintained. I used 3/4" Douglas Fir Spars, and used 1/8" plywood shims on the front and back sides of each spar, thus maintaining the spar centerline, (which according to my notes, came out tobe about 28 1/16" to 28 1/8" between the spars). Maintaining the centerline of the spars keeps the cabane / fuselage attach fittings, and the lower lift strut fittings all in alignment, thus giving the Pietenpol the unique ability toadjust the wing for and aft for Weight & Balance.In leu of the wedge above the front spar, I used a unique kind of an L shaped gusset there, that took the place of the wedge.Chuck G.NX770CG________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)In a message dated 2/12/2006 8:31:35 PM Central Standard Time, glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com writes:1. Using 3/4" thick spars changes the measurements a little. I placed the aft side of the leading edge spar and the front side of the trailing edge sparin the same position the 1" spar would be. I figured the fuel tank dimensionsand others depend on that being 27 3/4" between them. Is that right? Glen,The spar centerline is what should be maintained. I used 3/4" Douglas Fir Spars, and used 1/8" plywood shims on the front and back sides of each spar, thus maintaining the spar centerline, (which according to my notes, came out tobe about 28 1/16" to 28 1/8" between the spars). Maintaining the centerline of the spars keeps the cabane / fuselage attach fittings, and the lower lift strut fittings all in alignment, thus giving the Pietenpol the unique ability toadjust the wing for and aft for Weight & Balance.In leu of the wedge above the front spar, I used a unique kind of an L shaped gusset there, that took the place of the wedge.Chuck G.NX770CG________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)
Original Posted By: "Hayes, Mike"
Thanks Chuck,That answers my question about the location of the spars. Did you have any clearance between the rear spar and the top capstrip? Is thata low spot on the plans (mistake)? Somebody once told me that on the aft 1/3of the wing there is one point about 1/8 too low. That is pretty much wherethe problem is. Thanks for helping out.Glenn--------Glenn ThomasN?????http://www.flyingwood.comRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Thanks Chuck,That answers my question about the location of the spars. Did you have any clearance between the rear spar and the top capstrip? Is thata low spot on the plans (mistake)? Somebody once told me that on the aft 1/3of the wing there is one point about 1/8 too low. That is pretty much wherethe problem is. Thanks for helping out.Glenn--------Glenn ThomasN?????http://www.flyingwood.comRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
RE: Pietenpol-List: Starting Troubles
Original Posted By: "Steve Eldredge"
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Starting TroublesChaps,The problem with my Piet was that I could EVENTUALLY get the C65 to run butonly after a LOT of prop swinging, firing a few times then dying with theoccasional bit of snatching and running backwards. Sound familiar to anyone?I knew it was rather cold at just below freezing and my compressions are notwhat they used to be, but it has been no problem at all in previous winters.I ruled out a Bendix mag problem because once started, it would runperfectly with a drop of about 75 RPM and no discernable difference betweenleft and right and good static RPM of 2250 with my Sensenich 72-42. Mythoughts therefore turned to mixture and I was just about to take the scarystep of playing with some of those brass screws on the side of the carb whenan old boy from the gliding club pointed out that there was absolutely nonoise to indicate that the impulse coupling was working. I remainedsceptical because there has never been a distinctive "click" as can be heardon some aircraft, and in any case the engine was firing - albeit onlyoccasionally.Sure enough, after removal of the mag it became apparent that one of thepawls in the impulse coupling was very worn and would never engage, whilstthe other one would occasionally do its thing, causing two cylinders tofire, but only for one or two cycles. I guess that explains the symptoms!Just heard from the overhaul shop that they are fitting a new impulsecoupling, which hopefully will solve my problems. Anybody had any similarwoes regarding mags and should I be looking for some other problem that mayhave caused premature impulse coupling failure? Idling speed is the usual600 or so RPM on the ground, and it doesn't spend a lot of time groundidling.PS Whilst I'm posting has everybody seen this? Its a UK based AVTUR burningPietenpol with impressive fuel economy. Pictures and video clip available.www.wilksch.comMike HayesG-BKVOGetting far too warm whilst groundedThis message and any associated files sent by Denco Limited are confidential, and intended only for the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the IT Helpdesk by telephone immediately on 01432 377368 (UK) or +(44) 1432 377 368 (international) or return it to us by e-mail quoting the name of the sender and the address. Please also be advised that you have received this email in error and that any disclosure and/or use of the information contained within this email or attachments is strictly prohibited. Any views or opinions expressed in this e-mail are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent those of Denco Limited, its divisions and/or subsidiaries, unless otherwise specifically stated. Please note that this e-mail and any attachments have not been encrypted. They may therefore be liable to be compromised. This is an inherent risk in relation to e-mail. Denco Holdings Limited its divisions subsidiaries and divisions of subsidiaries do not, to the extent permitted by law, accept any liability (whether in contract, negligence or otherwise) for any changes made to this e-mail after it has been sent by the original sender, any external compromises of security and/or breaches of confidentiality in relation to transmissions sent by e-mail. We cannot to the extent permitted by law accept any liability (whether in contract, negligence or otherwise) for any damage sustained as a result of any software viruses and it is therefore your responsibility to scan the attachments (if any) and carry out your own virus check before opening any attachments.________________________________________________________________________________Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Starting TroublesDate: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 08:39:27 -0700
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Starting TroublesChaps,The problem with my Piet was that I could EVENTUALLY get the C65 to run butonly after a LOT of prop swinging, firing a few times then dying with theoccasional bit of snatching and running backwards. Sound familiar to anyone?I knew it was rather cold at just below freezing and my compressions are notwhat they used to be, but it has been no problem at all in previous winters.I ruled out a Bendix mag problem because once started, it would runperfectly with a drop of about 75 RPM and no discernable difference betweenleft and right and good static RPM of 2250 with my Sensenich 72-42. Mythoughts therefore turned to mixture and I was just about to take the scarystep of playing with some of those brass screws on the side of the carb whenan old boy from the gliding club pointed out that there was absolutely nonoise to indicate that the impulse coupling was working. I remainedsceptical because there has never been a distinctive "click" as can be heardon some aircraft, and in any case the engine was firing - albeit onlyoccasionally.Sure enough, after removal of the mag it became apparent that one of thepawls in the impulse coupling was very worn and would never engage, whilstthe other one would occasionally do its thing, causing two cylinders tofire, but only for one or two cycles. I guess that explains the symptoms!Just heard from the overhaul shop that they are fitting a new impulsecoupling, which hopefully will solve my problems. Anybody had any similarwoes regarding mags and should I be looking for some other problem that mayhave caused premature impulse coupling failure? Idling speed is the usual600 or so RPM on the ground, and it doesn't spend a lot of time groundidling.PS Whilst I'm posting has everybody seen this? Its a UK based AVTUR burningPietenpol with impressive fuel economy. Pictures and video clip available.www.wilksch.comMike HayesG-BKVOGetting far too warm whilst groundedThis message and any associated files sent by Denco Limited are confidential, and intended only for the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the IT Helpdesk by telephone immediately on 01432 377368 (UK) or +(44) 1432 377 368 (international) or return it to us by e-mail quoting the name of the sender and the address. Please also be advised that you have received this email in error and that any disclosure and/or use of the information contained within this email or attachments is strictly prohibited. Any views or opinions expressed in this e-mail are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent those of Denco Limited, its divisions and/or subsidiaries, unless otherwise specifically stated. Please note that this e-mail and any attachments have not been encrypted. They may therefore be liable to be compromised. This is an inherent risk in relation to e-mail. Denco Holdings Limited its divisions subsidiaries and divisions of subsidiaries do not, to the extent permitted by law, accept any liability (whether in contract, negligence or otherwise) for any changes made to this e-mail after it has been sent by the original sender, any external compromises of security and/or breaches of confidentiality in relation to transmissions sent by e-mail. We cannot to the extent permitted by law accept any liability (whether in contract, negligence or otherwise) for any damage sustained as a result of any software viruses and it is therefore your responsibility to scan the attachments (if any) and carry out your own virus check before opening any attachments.________________________________________________________________________________Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: Starting TroublesDate: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 08:39:27 -0700
Pietenpol-List: Starting Troubles
Original Posted By: "Mark Blackwell"
RE: Pietenpol-List: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)
Original Posted By:> Glenn Thomas
GlennThats what I did .Chamfered the front & rear spar to match the ribs.elimating the wedges.D J in Mpls> [Original Message]
GlennThats what I did .Chamfered the front & rear spar to match the ribs.elimating the wedges.D J in Mpls> [Original Message]
Pietenpol-List: Re: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)
Original Posted By: "Glenn Thomas"
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)In a message dated 2/13/2006 3:24:42 AM Central Standard Time, glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com writes:Did you have any clearance between the rear spar and the top capstrip? Is that a low spot on the plans (mistake)? Somebody once told me that on the aft1/3 of the wing there is one point about 1/8 too low. That is pretty much where the problem is. Yes, there is a slight wedge shaped cavity above the aft spar, but is not a problem, because the rib gussets carry the load. Do Not camphor the top of theaft spar. Yes, there is a low spot on the plans dimensions of the ribs...just blend it out with the top cap strip when you lay out the Rib Jig. Do Not nail down through the cap strips...I used T88 throughout the construction of theentire airframe, and held the ribs in the pre marked locations on the spars (so they don't move while the epoxy cures), with a couple of very tiny coated nails through the uprights. When you get the ribs complete, you are entitled to do the dance called 'The Rib Jig' !! :)Chuck G.NX770CG________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Re: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)In a message dated 2/13/2006 3:24:42 AM Central Standard Time, glennthomas(at)flyingwood.com writes:Did you have any clearance between the rear spar and the top capstrip? Is that a low spot on the plans (mistake)? Somebody once told me that on the aft1/3 of the wing there is one point about 1/8 too low. That is pretty much where the problem is. Yes, there is a slight wedge shaped cavity above the aft spar, but is not a problem, because the rib gussets carry the load. Do Not camphor the top of theaft spar. Yes, there is a low spot on the plans dimensions of the ribs...just blend it out with the top cap strip when you lay out the Rib Jig. Do Not nail down through the cap strips...I used T88 throughout the construction of theentire airframe, and held the ribs in the pre marked locations on the spars (so they don't move while the epoxy cures), with a couple of very tiny coated nails through the uprights. When you get the ribs complete, you are entitled to do the dance called 'The Rib Jig' !! :)Chuck G.NX770CG________________________________________________________________________________Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)
Original Posted By: "Oscar Zuniga"
Thanks to both of you for your replies. I have a better idea for how this willgo now. Without a background in aviation sometimes I feel like I have no businessbuilding this thing. After I saw Chuck's feedback on the positioning ofthe spars I thought "Of course, how stupid was I to ask that" but as ill equippedas I am, I do see this as a massive learning experience in an area I'vewanted to explore since I was a high school kid and since there's no lack of passionto do this I guess I'll just expose myself as often as necessary to learnhow it works.Thanks guys,Glenn--------Glenn ThomasN?????http://www.flyingwood.comRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
Thanks to both of you for your replies. I have a better idea for how this willgo now. Without a background in aviation sometimes I feel like I have no businessbuilding this thing. After I saw Chuck's feedback on the positioning ofthe spars I thought "Of course, how stupid was I to ask that" but as ill equippedas I am, I do see this as a massive learning experience in an area I'vewanted to explore since I was a high school kid and since there's no lack of passionto do this I guess I'll just expose myself as often as necessary to learnhow it works.Thanks guys,Glenn--------Glenn ThomasN?????http://www.flyingwood.comRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... __________
> Pietenpol-List: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)
Original Posted By: Rcaprd(at)aol.com
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)>>> Hi,> I'm still fiddling the rib jig. I drew it out again on a slightly largerboard. I drew in the spars and braces so I can plan where the clamps willgo and ran into another quandry. >> 1. Using 3/4" thick spars changes the measurements a little. I placedthe aft side of the leading edge spar and the front side of the trailingedge spar in the same position the 1" spar would be. I figured the fueltank dimensions and others depend on that being 27 3/4" between them. Isthat right? >> 2. The original wing drawings show blocks (wedges) between the spar andthe capstrip on the top of both spars. According to the measurements I'vemade (and I double-checked) if the rear spar is 4 3/4" tall, not only willI not need the spruce blocks, but I'll have to chamfer the top edge of thespar to make it fit. Am I doing something wrong? Somebody told me thereis a low spot in the plans. I just finished my bending jig so after Isteam a piece and set the bend, I'll put it on the board and see if maybethere is a discrepancy with the measurements on the plans. I think a lowspot will show up with a piece of wood laying over the drawn measurements. I've seen a couple of exceptions with the given dimensions so I'm hopingthis is just another slight plans error.>> Any feedback would be appreciated.>> Thanks!>> --------> Glenn Thomas> N?????> http://www.flyingwood.com>>> Read this topic online here:>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=11742#11742>>> > > >>________________________________________________________________________________
> Subject: Pietenpol-List: Rib Question (Yeah Another One)>>> Hi,> I'm still fiddling the rib jig. I drew it out again on a slightly largerboard. I drew in the spars and braces so I can plan where the clamps willgo and ran into another quandry. >> 1. Using 3/4" thick spars changes the measurements a little. I placedthe aft side of the leading edge spar and the front side of the trailingedge spar in the same position the 1" spar would be. I figured the fueltank dimensions and others depend on that being 27 3/4" between them. Isthat right? >> 2. The original wing drawings show blocks (wedges) between the spar andthe capstrip on the top of both spars. According to the measurements I'vemade (and I double-checked) if the rear spar is 4 3/4" tall, not only willI not need the spruce blocks, but I'll have to chamfer the top edge of thespar to make it fit. Am I doing something wrong? Somebody told me thereis a low spot in the plans. I just finished my bending jig so after Isteam a piece and set the bend, I'll put it on the board and see if maybethere is a discrepancy with the measurements on the plans. I think a lowspot will show up with a piece of wood laying over the drawn measurements. I've seen a couple of exceptions with the given dimensions so I'm hopingthis is just another slight plans error.>> Any feedback would be appreciated.>> Thanks!>> --------> Glenn Thomas> N?????> http://www.flyingwood.com>>> Read this topic online here:>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=11742#11742>>> > > >>________________________________________________________________________________