Richard
That explains things and I can see why you wouldnt want to remove any layers
of bid fron the upper recess. The standard design dosent seem to have much
contact area at the base
Is there any reason why one couldnt cut away a small amount of the bottom
bid layups using the tip of a twist drill - just enough to allow the pip to
open. I cant see this compromising the strength of the bottom layups.
My pip pin holes are non standard being circular 4cm in diameter and
consequently the base has a much greater area in contact with TP6. This has
turned out to be an unintentional advantage over the standard design - and
comply with the minimum dimensions in PFA FSB 006.
Carl
G-LABS
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Iddon" <riddon@sent.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 9:28 PM
Subject: RE: Europa-List: Longer Pip Pins
>
> Actually Carl, there are four layers of bid at the point where the pip
> pin exits, two small 1" square reinforcing patches then the two large
> pieces. Also mine had two layers of bid in the top recess and I don't
> want to disturb these as I think they provide extra retention for the
> pins in case the TP6 disbonds. My pins are not quite long enough now.
>
> Richard Iddon G-RIXS
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl
> Pattinson
> Sent: 19 July 2007 20:31
> To: europa-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Europa-List: Longer Pip Pins
>
> <carl@flyers.freeserve.co.uk>
>
> One thing that has been puzzling me over the last couple of days is why
> Mod
> 73 should require longer pip pins than those originally supplied - 1.75"
>
> My aircraft hasnt undergone the mod as yet and at present there is
> between
> 2-3mm play when you tug on the pip pins. My understanding is that mod 73
>
> requires two plies of bid over the top of the TP6 sleeve and this should
> add
> no more than 1.5mm to the overall diameter so my pins should still fit.
>
>
> 18/07/2007 15:30
>
>
>
|