Original Posted By: airlion(at)bellsouth.net
Subject: Pietenpol-List: latexIn accordance with the Radio Act of 1927 and the Communications Act of 1934 establishing equal time, here are a few about latex--- low cost, no fumes, easy to apply, water clean-up, and if done properly protects the fabric from UV. Fisher Flying Products was a pioneer in latex on fabric from what I recall and if not mistaken Lohele WWII replica's use a latex method to get that nice flat finish they are looking for. If a flat finish is desired latex is a good way to go however there are additives I understand that can provide some gloss. This is not a retraction of my opinion that latex looks like crap though:))Mike C. in Ohio________________________________________________________________________________
Pietenpol-List: latex
Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Original Posted By: airlion(at)bellsouth.net
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Original Posted By: Rick Holland
________________________________________________________________________________Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 19:22:57 -0700Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
________________________________________________________________________________Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 19:22:57 -0700Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Re: Pietenpol-List: latex-- some considerations
Original Posted By: Rick Holland
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: latex-- some considerations
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: latex-- some considerations
> > Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Original Posted By: H RULE
RE: Pietenpol-List: latex-- some considerations
Original Posted By: "Phillips, Jack"
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: latexRick,There was an older gent in the early 90's named Ed Snyder from Round Lake NY who had a red and cream Model A Piet at Brodhead and itwas done entirely in latex and he had a very nice gloss to it so I believe that you can achieve that type of finish if you desire it. Great endurancetest you're performing.Mikee________________________________________________________________________________Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: latex-- some considerationsDate: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 07:45:55 -0500
Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: latexRick,There was an older gent in the early 90's named Ed Snyder from Round Lake NY who had a red and cream Model A Piet at Brodhead and itwas done entirely in latex and he had a very nice gloss to it so I believe that you can achieve that type of finish if you desire it. Great endurancetest you're performing.Mikee________________________________________________________________________________Subject: RE: Pietenpol-List: latex-- some considerationsDate: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 07:45:55 -0500
> Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Original Posted By: Lawrence Williams
Re: Pietenpol-List: latex-- some considerations
Original Posted By: Ryan Mueller
1. I would not apply latex over Poly-Fiber finishes. Use one systemor the other. My concern would be for insufficient mechanical bondingor gripping of the latex to the Poly-Brush or Poly-Spray=2C althoughthat's just my gut feeling and I have no actual peel tests to proveanything either way. I guess that could be a whole other series oftests =3Bo)2. Punch testing: if you're using a Maule tester=2C read the Poly-Fibermanual section on the subject. ALL finishes must be removed from thetest area before using the punch tester. You need to test the fabric=2Cnot the finishes. In the case of Poly-Fiber system=2C you'd have to cleanthe test area of all finishes down to bare fabric before testing=2C probablywith MEK. In the case of latex=2C I think Steve Eldredge has demonstrateda method using a heat gun to soften the finish and then roll it off=2C but I'dbe very surprised if the initial coat (I guess I'll call it the grip coat) can beremoved that way since it is intentionally applied so as to soak into theweave and mechanically grip it. And of course you wouldn't want to useany sort of chemical paint stripper on fabric.3. I used the satin latex on my test panels and I'll bet the gloss finish is asglossy as anyone would ever want to use on an airplane.The Poly-Fiber manual explains that the Maule tester was developed foruse with organic coverings anyway (cotton)=2C NOT synthetics=2C and thatthe actual test involves loading a strip of unfinished fabric with a certaintest weight to see if it fails. I don't have the number here but I believeit's 46 lbs. weight. So the Maule tester should only be used as a pass/fail indication of fabric condition=2C not as an absolute value of itsstrength.I have acquired a very simple fabric tester that the ultralight folks useto test their Dacron sails. I got it from Lockwood Aviation. It's a modifiedbelt tension tester with a small aluminum tip. I plan to test my fabricsamples (with finishes removed) every three months for the next year=2C asthey weather outdoors=2C not as a specific value of fabric strength but asa relative indication between bare fabric and the three finishes that I used.Oscar ZunigaAir Camper NX41CCSan Antonio=2C TXmailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.comwebsite at http://www.flysquirrel.net________________________________________________________________________________Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 09:56:08 -0600Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: latex-- some considerations
1. I would not apply latex over Poly-Fiber finishes. Use one systemor the other. My concern would be for insufficient mechanical bondingor gripping of the latex to the Poly-Brush or Poly-Spray=2C althoughthat's just my gut feeling and I have no actual peel tests to proveanything either way. I guess that could be a whole other series oftests =3Bo)2. Punch testing: if you're using a Maule tester=2C read the Poly-Fibermanual section on the subject. ALL finishes must be removed from thetest area before using the punch tester. You need to test the fabric=2Cnot the finishes. In the case of Poly-Fiber system=2C you'd have to cleanthe test area of all finishes down to bare fabric before testing=2C probablywith MEK. In the case of latex=2C I think Steve Eldredge has demonstrateda method using a heat gun to soften the finish and then roll it off=2C but I'dbe very surprised if the initial coat (I guess I'll call it the grip coat) can beremoved that way since it is intentionally applied so as to soak into theweave and mechanically grip it. And of course you wouldn't want to useany sort of chemical paint stripper on fabric.3. I used the satin latex on my test panels and I'll bet the gloss finish is asglossy as anyone would ever want to use on an airplane.The Poly-Fiber manual explains that the Maule tester was developed foruse with organic coverings anyway (cotton)=2C NOT synthetics=2C and thatthe actual test involves loading a strip of unfinished fabric with a certaintest weight to see if it fails. I don't have the number here but I believeit's 46 lbs. weight. So the Maule tester should only be used as a pass/fail indication of fabric condition=2C not as an absolute value of itsstrength.I have acquired a very simple fabric tester that the ultralight folks useto test their Dacron sails. I got it from Lockwood Aviation. It's a modifiedbelt tension tester with a small aluminum tip. I plan to test my fabricsamples (with finishes removed) every three months for the next year=2C asthey weather outdoors=2C not as a specific value of fabric strength but asa relative indication between bare fabric and the three finishes that I used.Oscar ZunigaAir Camper NX41CCSan Antonio=2C TXmailto: taildrags(at)hotmail.comwebsite at http://www.flysquirrel.net________________________________________________________________________________Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 09:56:08 -0600Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: latex-- some considerations
Re: Pietenpol-List: latex-- some considerations
Original Posted By: Phillips, Jack
Good point Jack. The flybaby site bowersflybaby.com has the answers to about all the questions that have been asked about painting with latex. Very interesting site. Also a geat place for engine advise. Another wonderful wooden homebuilt airplane.Gene ----- Original Message -----
Good point Jack. The flybaby site bowersflybaby.com has the answers to about all the questions that have been asked about painting with latex. Very interesting site. Also a geat place for engine advise. Another wonderful wooden homebuilt airplane.Gene ----- Original Message -----
Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Original Posted By: Rick Holland
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Pietenpol-List: latex
Original Posted By: "Douwe Blumberg"
Hey Steve,My experience with spraying latex was that while it "felt" dry, if leanedagainst anything, it would still kind of stick or take an imprint. Anyclever means you can devise to move it so you don't have to stop spraying,YET doesn't have to put much pressure on newish paint is a good thing.I say you can't have too many inspection holes. Now's a great time to addthem to every conceivable location, just the rings and leave the fabric.Paint right over everything and then down the road you can cut out thefabric, paint a plate and start using it. Just the rings are pretty darninnocuous.Douwe________________________________________________________________________________
Hey Steve,My experience with spraying latex was that while it "felt" dry, if leanedagainst anything, it would still kind of stick or take an imprint. Anyclever means you can devise to move it so you don't have to stop spraying,YET doesn't have to put much pressure on newish paint is a good thing.I say you can't have too many inspection holes. Now's a great time to addthem to every conceivable location, just the rings and leave the fabric.Paint right over everything and then down the road you can cut out thefabric, paint a plate and start using it. Just the rings are pretty darninnocuous.Douwe________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Original Posted By: Rick Holland
PF, First, let me say again, thanks for the testing you and Don have done, it is thekind of "measure it, don't speculate" approach that I like. In my first commentsabout Chris Rusch debugging his stick pressure problem, I recommended hecontact PF and Don because I have seen their planes, and I know what effort theyput into a fair evaluation of the airfoils. My suggestion was, and still is,that Chris contact them and see if there is some large difference in tail riggingbetween his plane and Don's, as Don's is known to work.--------------------------------------------------------My interest in the incidence is primarily to know if BHP changed anything he didon this over time. If there is anyone out there who thinks that an incidencechange will suddenly show some advantage to the Riblett airfoil that PF and Dondidn't find, let me say that I don't think it's there. If a higher cruise speedPiet with a Riblett would do a bit better with less incidence, my feelingis that the BHP airfoil would do the same, and this would maintain PF and Don'sevaluation that the differences are small at best.---------------------------------------------------------Following PF suggestion to read the archives, I suddenly saw why he might thinkthis topic has been talked out.....There are dozens of headings on this in thearchives, many with 500-800 page reads. That is a lot of attention. One of thefirst things I came across was a comment for John Woods about Graham Hewitt'sflying Piet/Riblett plane down under, where Graham was suggesting one degreetotal incidence, which is the number Doug and I were steering toward from lookingat formulas. Again, I don't think this is magically going to make the Riblett'better' than the original, and I have some suspicion that the Last Originalmay have this kind of incidence reduction. Testing in two weeks may tell.------------------------------------------------------------------Something to think about for builders who thought there might be a big difference:A Cub (and almost all pipers to the Comanche) use a USA-35B airfoil. Taylorcraftsuse a NACA-23012. There is a radical shape difference between these two,the USA is under cambered, turbulent flow, and strong pitching moment; TheNACA is some what symmetrical, arguably laminar, and has no pitching moment. Thewings are both 60" cord, and have 31" spar spacing, and many people have builtCubs with NACA airfoils....it makes some difference, mostly about a 15% speedadvantage and some glide ratio. To expect such changes going from the BHPairfoil to the Riblett seems unrealistic, because there is far less differencein design and layout between the BHP and Riblett than there is between the USAand NACA airfoils.-----------------------------------------------------------------------For the people who thought the ultimate test would be two sets of wings on thesame day on the same plane, let me point out that there is one better.........Oneof each wing on the same plane in the same flight. Sound nuts? Yes, but notif you are one of the best pilots who ever lived. There is a legend that SteveWittman did this on a Tailwind to evaluate the difference between the W-8 wingand the 2nd gen airfoil. He was alleged to be happy that the plane took fullcontrol deflection to fly 'straight' in parts of the envelope. I thought itwas a half truth or myth, but John Monett and Bill Brennan have both said itwas actually done. Brennan added that there were European aviators visiting atthe time who left with the firm convictions that Americans are nuts and SteveWittman deserved the accolades people bestowed on him.------------------------------------------------------------------My only thought on this project was that a guy with a model A, wire wheels andstraight axle gear should obviously follow the incidence in the plans. As Doug'snote points out 65 mph cruise numbers calculation show the BHP airfoil to beat the idealized setting. But what about A guy building a light bird, with splitgear, 15-6x6's and a hand prop C-90 with a fast turning prop? Perhaps somebenefit to less incidence. My primary clue will come from looking at the LastOriginal, as it is something like that kind of evolution. If nothing else builderscan learn two good lessons, how to calculate incidence.... and to justgo read the archives. -wwRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 16:24:57 -0600Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
PF, First, let me say again, thanks for the testing you and Don have done, it is thekind of "measure it, don't speculate" approach that I like. In my first commentsabout Chris Rusch debugging his stick pressure problem, I recommended hecontact PF and Don because I have seen their planes, and I know what effort theyput into a fair evaluation of the airfoils. My suggestion was, and still is,that Chris contact them and see if there is some large difference in tail riggingbetween his plane and Don's, as Don's is known to work.--------------------------------------------------------My interest in the incidence is primarily to know if BHP changed anything he didon this over time. If there is anyone out there who thinks that an incidencechange will suddenly show some advantage to the Riblett airfoil that PF and Dondidn't find, let me say that I don't think it's there. If a higher cruise speedPiet with a Riblett would do a bit better with less incidence, my feelingis that the BHP airfoil would do the same, and this would maintain PF and Don'sevaluation that the differences are small at best.---------------------------------------------------------Following PF suggestion to read the archives, I suddenly saw why he might thinkthis topic has been talked out.....There are dozens of headings on this in thearchives, many with 500-800 page reads. That is a lot of attention. One of thefirst things I came across was a comment for John Woods about Graham Hewitt'sflying Piet/Riblett plane down under, where Graham was suggesting one degreetotal incidence, which is the number Doug and I were steering toward from lookingat formulas. Again, I don't think this is magically going to make the Riblett'better' than the original, and I have some suspicion that the Last Originalmay have this kind of incidence reduction. Testing in two weeks may tell.------------------------------------------------------------------Something to think about for builders who thought there might be a big difference:A Cub (and almost all pipers to the Comanche) use a USA-35B airfoil. Taylorcraftsuse a NACA-23012. There is a radical shape difference between these two,the USA is under cambered, turbulent flow, and strong pitching moment; TheNACA is some what symmetrical, arguably laminar, and has no pitching moment. Thewings are both 60" cord, and have 31" spar spacing, and many people have builtCubs with NACA airfoils....it makes some difference, mostly about a 15% speedadvantage and some glide ratio. To expect such changes going from the BHPairfoil to the Riblett seems unrealistic, because there is far less differencein design and layout between the BHP and Riblett than there is between the USAand NACA airfoils.-----------------------------------------------------------------------For the people who thought the ultimate test would be two sets of wings on thesame day on the same plane, let me point out that there is one better.........Oneof each wing on the same plane in the same flight. Sound nuts? Yes, but notif you are one of the best pilots who ever lived. There is a legend that SteveWittman did this on a Tailwind to evaluate the difference between the W-8 wingand the 2nd gen airfoil. He was alleged to be happy that the plane took fullcontrol deflection to fly 'straight' in parts of the envelope. I thought itwas a half truth or myth, but John Monett and Bill Brennan have both said itwas actually done. Brennan added that there were European aviators visiting atthe time who left with the firm convictions that Americans are nuts and SteveWittman deserved the accolades people bestowed on him.------------------------------------------------------------------My only thought on this project was that a guy with a model A, wire wheels andstraight axle gear should obviously follow the incidence in the plans. As Doug'snote points out 65 mph cruise numbers calculation show the BHP airfoil to beat the idealized setting. But what about A guy building a light bird, with splitgear, 15-6x6's and a hand prop C-90 with a fast turning prop? Perhaps somebenefit to less incidence. My primary clue will come from looking at the LastOriginal, as it is something like that kind of evolution. If nothing else builderscan learn two good lessons, how to calculate incidence.... and to justgo read the archives. -wwRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 16:24:57 -0600Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Original Posted By: Steven Dortch
Shad - They're my patented "one-size-larger-than-I-meant-to-order-but-I'm-too-cheap-to-replace-them"profile.Should be plenty strong.WW pointed out that the diagonals should be larger than the rod in my femur.--------Kevin "Axel" PurteeRebuilding NX899KPAustin/San Marcos, TXRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 11:52:21 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Shad - They're my patented "one-size-larger-than-I-meant-to-order-but-I'm-too-cheap-to-replace-them"profile.Should be plenty strong.WW pointed out that the diagonals should be larger than the rod in my femur.--------Kevin "Axel" PurteeRebuilding NX899KPAustin/San Marcos, TXRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ______Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 11:52:21 -0500Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: latex
Pietenpol-List: Re: latex
Original Posted By: "at7000ft"
That came thru Gary--------Earl BrownI may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where Iintended to be.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: latex
That came thru Gary--------Earl BrownI may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where Iintended to be.Read this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: latex
Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair College
Original Posted By: "wheelharp"
Attached pictures of my wing hangers. 4 8' 2x4, 4 5" bolts and nuts, some scrap1/4" ply for gussets, 8 1" .090 strips with a 1" 3/16 rod welded upright, and8 castors. Holds a single wing for painting and drying and both wings for storage.--------Rick HollandNX6819ZRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/2014 ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair College
Attached pictures of my wing hangers. 4 8' 2x4, 4 5" bolts and nuts, some scrap1/4" ply for gussets, 8 1" .090 strips with a 1" 3/16 rod welded upright, and8 castors. Holds a single wing for painting and drying and both wings for storage.--------Rick HollandNX6819ZRead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ttachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/2014 ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair College
Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair College
Original Posted By: "William Wynne"
Thanks for replies, everyone. I'm signed up, and did a search of WW website totry and find what to bring for tear down, but couldn't find anything. Not to saythere is nothing there, I just couldn't find it. I know you would probablywant to bring the obvious--- wrenches, socket set, screwdrivers, etc...but I wantedto make sure I don't need any special pullers or anything. Are there plentyof workbenches? I could bring my own if they are in short supply.--------Jon JonesIronton, MORead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair College
Thanks for replies, everyone. I'm signed up, and did a search of WW website totry and find what to bring for tear down, but couldn't find anything. Not to saythere is nothing there, I just couldn't find it. I know you would probablywant to bring the obvious--- wrenches, socket set, screwdrivers, etc...but I wantedto make sure I don't need any special pullers or anything. Are there plentyof workbenches? I could bring my own if they are in short supply.--------Jon JonesIronton, MORead this topic online here:http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.p ... ___Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Corvair College