Oops! It.s easy to mix up the nautical stabd/port concept - even with
sailing experience, which I have. To correct: By peering through the PORT
hole with the STBD bolt inserted, ..etc, should satisfy all you nit-pickers
out there, - those of you who knows that the spar cup for the PORT spar sits
on the STARBOARD side....
Hans
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hans Jrgen Danielsen" <hansjd@online.no>
Subject: Re: Wing angle of incidence
> Hi Rob and all.
>
> I too reduxed the spar bushings in place using the factory supplied dummy
> spar. My wings were stored in a friends barn, due to limited space in my
> garage, and to speed up things I found it convenient to simply use the
> dummy. Prior to this I checked the spacing between the holes against those
> on the spars and everything matched perfectly. The 1/2" inch bolts
supplied
> slid in and out without a hitch.
>
> Now to the strange part: After some time, and having installed the
cockpit
> module I reinserted the dummy spar - just to make sure that everything was
> OK - and found it impossible to insert both bolts! By peering into the
stbd
> hole with the port bolt inserted I found a slight misalignment - a half mm
> or so. I started to tremble with all bad thoughts about my inability to
> build correctly, when I pulled myself together and machined a new dummy
spar
> out of thick plywood and a new set of bushings. Dimensions were taken from
> the cockpit module - and both the new dummy and the old one were brought
to
> my good friends barn to check them against the spars. To my suspicion the
> factory supplied dummy showed the same misalignment, while the one I built
> fit perfectly - confirming that all was well regarding alignment. Much to
my
> relief!!
>
> It's obvious then that a certain expansion has taken place to the company
> supplied dummy spar over time - after my work on the bushings. What's
caused
> it is a mysteri, but it's made of some sort of compressed materiel, and my
> bet is that it has been influenced by atmospheric conditions.
>
> Be cautious out there!
>
> Hans.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rob Housman" <RobH@hyperion-ef.com>
> Subject: Re: Wing angle of incidence
>
>
> > In re: 1.
> >
> > If I understand you correctly you have a WIDE gap to fill between the
W27
> > assembly and the fuselage. If you followed instructions you may be deep
> in
> > something you rather not be in. I say "may" because the pins supplied
> with
> > my kit (A070, one of the first XS kits) had the pip pin hole drilled way
> too
> > close to the wing root, and had I bonded that pin into the wing root
when
> > instructed, I would not even have been able to get the pip pin into the
> > hole. Fortunately I had the pin in place, but not bonded in place, when
I
> > began installing W26 & W27, and I discovered that the hole was so close
to
> > the wing root that it was not possible to mate the W26 assembly to the
> wing
> > pin. The replacement pins supplied by Europa were drilled further from
> the
> > threaded end of the pin. Obviously the "relocated" pip pin holes put
the
> > W26 assembly closer to the fuselage. If your pip pin hole is too close
to
> > the wing root and the pin is already bonded to the wing root, I am not
> sure
> > what to recommend other than to check with Andy or Neville. You may
need
> to
> > remove the pin.
> >
> > In re: 2.
> >
> > Sorry, but I have no useful comments.
> >
> > In re: 3.
> >
> > This sounds entirely too familiar, but you may be luckier than I. First
> > check that there is no epoxy inside any of the wing spar bushings. The
> > factory was a bit sloppy in making my wings so there was a some in each
> > bushing. It doesn't take much, and it is hard to see (clear epoxy in a
> > black hole), especially since it never occurred to me to check for
sloppy
> > work. Unfortunately, cleaning out the bushings was not sufficient to
get
> > things to fit. My XS wings fit fine, but ONLY one at a time, and the
two
> > wing spars will accept both spar pins as long as the wings are not in
the
> > fuselage. There seems to be a slight difference in spacing, wing to
wing,
> > but I have an additional greater error in the location or alignment of
the
> > seat back bushings, and it may be that both the alignment and spacing
are
> in
> > error. I barely have a big enough hammer to fit the spar pins with both
> > wings in place. I attribute this to the fact that my early XS project
was
> > built out of sequence because when I was ready to continue, the wings
were
> > not available so I built the fuselage first and used two factory
supplied
> > dummy spars for bonding the bushings into the seat backs. That's right,
> two
> > dummy spars, because the first one did not seem right so I asked for a
> > replacement. The centerline distance between the holes was not the
same,
> so
> > I arbitrarily picked the second one and used it. BIG MISTAKE. To see
how
> > badly the alignment really was I machined several dummy spar pins at
> various
> > undersize diameters to see what would fit. At about .050 inch / .013 mm
> > undersize the dummy spar pins fit without needing the big hammer.
> > Conclusion: I will remove both seat back bushings and replace them, this
> > time with both wings in place, because my preference is to avoid making
> any
> > changes in the factory made wing spars. I have yet to do this because I
> am
> > waiting until I have the landing gear installed (this is a Tri-Gear,
with
> > mains in place and the nose gear is almost finished) so that the
fuselage
> > will stay in place while fitting the wings.
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Rob Housman
> > A070
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: forum-owner@europaclub.org.uk
> > Behalf Of Chuck Popenoe
> > Subject: Re: Wing angle of incidence
> >
> > 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>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
|