Hi Chuck and all
We had exactly the same situation as you. I too had large gaps
between the fuse and the sockets. Just build up plywood shims as the
manual suggests, but remember to take into account the thickness of
the layups that will go over the plywood. Also check that the
aluminuim plates under the fuselage skins are in exactly the right
place to accomodate all of the bolts with enough (10mm I think) area
around the bolt holes so they cannot rip through. We had to remove
one and add a section to another.
Our wings were also different regarding the amount of washout. We
didn't take this into account when setting up the incidence angle.
Hope it flies straight!!!
After everthing was bonded in, the pin insertion was hard for us too,
however a little grease was applied and after a couple of months,
they seem to insert and withdraw reasonably easily. I too had
considered heating the trial bolts supplied and pushing them in to
the assy with the hope that the heat would move the socket bushes and
relieve the binding. I have concerns regarding the structural
integrity of the fiberglass after that kind of abuse. It no longer
seems necessary, so I wont do it now unless someone gives me a good
reason to do so.
Take care
Eddie
Quoting Chuck Popenoe <cpops@bellatlantic.net>:
> Dear Collective Wisdom-
>
> I'm about to attach the lift pin sockets to my Classic (with MTOW
mod)
> and
> have a couple of questions:
>
> 1. The manual states that you may need plywood shims under the W26 &
> W27
> sockets. The gap between the fuselage side and the sockets are
about 12
> mm
> with the greatest one 14 mm. This seems excessive, but that's what
> they
> measure. Is this normal? Also, the manual doesn't mention it, but I
> assume
> that you have to grind a relief in the root rib flange to allow
> insertion
> of the pip pin.
>
> 2. The washout of the two wings differs! (with my meticulous--read
> SLOW--
> building, I can't figure how this happened!!!). The 70% span
starboard
> wing
> incidence measures 1.4 deg. when the root is at 2.5 deg. Not bad!
But
> when
> the port wing 70% span section is set for 1.5 deg. its root
incidence is
> 2.1
> deg. Much less twist. So, I programmed an Excel spreadsheet to sum
> the
> sectional lifts and moments at 1 ft. intervals, and diddled the
> incidence
> until
> the lift moments of the two wings balanced. The best result is when
> the
> stbd.
> wing is set for 2.55 deg. at the root, which gives 1.45 deg. at
70%, and
> the
> port wing root at 2.1 deg., which gives 1.5 deg. at 70% span. The
sums
> of
> the lift-moments are exactly equal with this setup. Any comments
pro
> or
> con?
>
> 3. Now, the tough problem--it is REALLY hard getting the spar pins
in! I
> had
> easy pin insertion before converting to the MTOW 1/2" pins and
bushings.
> I
> very carefully transferred the geometry to the new bushings, using
> 1/2"
> bolts
> to cast in place the new bushings using the old bushings as jigs.
The
> two
> wings
> alone allow easy pin insertion. When I insert the port wing alone,
the
> pins
> slide
> in with no problem. I then slide in the stbd. wing and the port
> pin--no
> problem. Then, the stbd. pip pin gives me fits getting it in, even
> with
> grease,
> etc. I can barely get it inserted, but the pin will barely rotate
once
> it
> is in. Way too tight! I'm afraid that I will never be able to rig
> the
> wings
> once all of the lift pins, flap pins, etc. are in place. I believe
that
> the
> bushing spacing must be off by a half mm or so in the stbd. wing.
>
> I have pondered on this, and have come to the conclusion that I will
> have to
> either remove the stbd. bushings in the wing and try recasting them
in
> situ.
> Or, another scheme would be to assemble the wings, substituting a
1/2"
> OD
> tube for
> the pip pin, brute force into into place, and insert a heating
element
> inside to
> soften the Redux in the stbd. wing bushes, allowing some time to
> relieve
> stresses,
> i.e. to have the Redux flow or creep slightly. This seems like it
> might
> work.
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks for any suggestions!
>
> Pops
> A036
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: forum-owner@europaclub.org.uk
> Subject: Re: Wing angle of incidence
>
>
> Cleve,
>
> Yes, unless for some reason the bushings that you glued into the
module
> are
> very out of line. Which would be hard to do. The bushings allow
for
> at
> least the required amount of play to get the 2.5 degree angle of
> Incidence.
>
> Bill McClellan
> A164
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <clevelee@cswebmail.com>
> Subject: Wing angle of incidence
>
>
> > Collective Wisdom,
> >
> > I'm about to go about setting the wing incidence. I am puzzled by
an
> aspect of
> > the mechanics.
> >
> > The pin busings that were bonded into the cockpit module did not
have
> a
> specific
> > wing angle of incidence associated with the installation.
> >
> > Does it really work, that with those bushings already bonded in
place,
> I
> can
> > expect to rotate the wing spar relative to the outside of the
fuselage
> to
> obtain
> > the 2 1/2 degrees incidence, and still expect the pin passing
through
> the
> > cockpit bushing to slide smoothly into the spar bushings?
> >
> > What am I not realizing?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Cleve Lee
> > Mono XS A198 N396ST
> > Detroit, MI
> >
> >
> > ___________________________________________________
> > The ALL NEW CS2000 from CompuServe
> > Better! Faster! More Powerful!
> > 250 FREE hours! Sign-on Now!
> > http://www.compuserve.com/trycsrv/cs2000/webmail/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
_
> > The Europa Forum is supported by Aviators Network UK
> <info@avnet.co.uk>
>
>
>
_
> The Europa Forum is supported by Aviators Network UK
> <info@avnet.co.uk>
>
>
_
> The Europa Forum is supported by Aviators Network UK
> <info@avnet.co.uk>
>
/////Eddie Hatcher Bill Lams Nick Crisp///////
///SouthEastLondonFlyingGroup///G-SELF powered by Jabiru 3300///
www.crispsite.flyer.co.uk/newropa.htm
|