Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Mod 73 alternative

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Europa-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

kheindl(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 4:57 pm Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

My original plan was to replace both TP5 and TP6 with a single tube.

After removing the TP5 I realized that there was no point at all in removing 

the TP6. It is only necessary to ensure that it cannot move inboard, which 

would then allow the TP12 to disconnect from the tailplane etc. etc.

I simply replaced the TP5 with a longer alu tube from ACS, part number 

03-37900. This butts right up against the TP6, and there is no way this can 

ever move inboard. The tube is made of 6061 T6 aluminum.

Advantages:

A straightforward mod.

No cutting into the tailplane.

No misalignment problem with TP5 and TP6.

A permanent solution. ( assuming that there was a problem in the first 

place.)

If anyone is interested I can give more details on how I did it.



Cheers,



Karl



_________________________________________________________________

The next generation of Hotmail is here!  http://www.newhotmail.co.uk

bill.sue(at)orcon.net.nz
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:57 pm Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

Yes I would be interested as I have not done mine yet .



Mono XS

ZK CHV

914 Airmaster



Rgds



Sue & Bill



Karl Heindl wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   



 My original plan was to replace both TP5 and TP6 with a single tube.

 After removing the TP5 I realized that there was no point at all in 

 removing the TP6. It is only necessary to ensure that it cannot move 

 inboard, which would then allow the TP12 to disconnect from the 

 tailplane etc. etc.

 I simply replaced the TP5 with a longer alu tube from ACS, part number 

 03-37900. This butts right up against the TP6, and there is no way 

 this can ever move inboard. The tube is made of 6061 T6 aluminum.

 Advantages:

 A straightforward mod.

 No cutting into the tailplane.

 No misalignment problem with TP5 and TP6.

 A permanent solution. ( assuming that there was a problem in the first 

 place.)

 If anyone is interested I can give more details on how I did it.



 Cheers,



 Karl



 _________________________________________________________________

 The next generation of Hotmail is here!  http://www.newhotmail.co.uk

 __________ NOD32 2607 (20071022) Information __________

craigb(at)onthenet.com.au
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 2:45 am Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

I did simmilar at the build stage, replaced the whole lot with alloy tube

and ran it

about another 100mm into the outer foam past where tp6 would finish. weight

increase

over the tp5 and tp6 was about 300 grams, but the tp5 replacement option

looks like

a good one instead of all that cutting glassing foam, more glassing etc.



--

peterz(at)zutrasoft.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 3:11 am Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

Hi Karl,

  

 The only concern I would have is dissimilar metal corrosion on the torque tube. Not sure how to prevent it between the alu and the torque tube plating besides lots of grease.  I suspect that the grease will not be enough however. With the sliding on/off and then sitting in one spot, I would expect some metal on metal contact with the grease being wiped off.  Hope I'm wrong, but I've seen too much dissimilar metal corrosion  in a variety of situations. 

  

 Cheers,

 Pete



 

 On 10/22/07, Karl Heindl <kheindl(at)msn.com (kheindl(at)msn.com)> wrote: [quote]--> Europa-List message posted by: "Karl Heindl" <kheindl(at)msn.com  (kheindl(at)msn.com)>



My original plan was to replace both TP5 and TP6 with a single tube.

After removing the TP5 I realized that there was no point at all in removing

the TP6. It is only necessary to ensure that it cannot move inboard, which 

would then allow the TP12 to disconnect from the tailplane etc. etc.

I simply replaced the TP5 with a longer alu tube from ACS, part number

03-37900. This butts right up against the TP6, and there is no way this can 

ever move inboard. The tube is made of 6061 T6 aluminum.

Advantages:

A straightforward mod.

No cutting into the tailplane.

No misalignment problem with TP5 and TP6.

A permanent solution. ( assuming that there was a problem in the first 

place.)

If anyone is interested I can give more details on how I did it.



Cheers,



Karl



_________________________________________________________________

The next generation of Hotmail is here!    [quote][b]

craigb(at)onthenet.com.au
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 3:51 am Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

A  couple of sacrificial annodes would resolve the issue of corrosion I think, same  as on outboard motors for boats

 but it  is a good point, or if you had the clearance, maybe powder coating the torque  tube, or caster oil, only problem

 with  caster oil is it remains tacky, as all the data i have seen on caster oil  suggests the only way to remove it completely from a  metalic

 surface is to machine about 1mm off the surface

  

 you  could simulate an accelerated situation by putting the old bush (tp5) and a  piece of the alloy tube in a salt water bath for a week

 and  see what happens, ideally in the same relation as in the aircraft ie one inside  the other.

  

 just  had another thought, maybe a teflon treatment might do the trick on the torque  tube or both if you have done the mod yet

 it  would make the tube real easy to get on and off too.

 [quote]   --

rob(at)hyperion-ef.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:45 am Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

You are on the right track Craig, but you missed the obvious – aluminum is a sacrificial anode relative to the nickel plated tube.  

   

     

Best regards,  

   

Rob Housman  

Irvine, California  

Europa XS Tri-Gear  

S/N A070  

Airframe complete  

  

       

From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of craig bastin

 Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 4:52 AM

 To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: RE: Mod 73 alternative  

  

  

     

A couple of sacrificial annodes would resolve the issue of corrosion I think, same as on outboard motors for boats  

    

but it is a good point, or if you had the clearance, maybe powder coating the torque tube, or caster oil, only problem  

    

with caster oil is it remains tacky, as all the data i have seen on caster oil suggests the only way to remove it completely from a metalic  

    

surface is to machine about 1mm off the surface  

    

   

    

you could simulate an accelerated situation by putting the old bush (tp5) and a piece of the alloy tube in a salt water bath for a week  

    

and see what happens, ideally in the same relation as in the aircraft ie one inside the other.  

    

   

    

just had another thought, maybe a teflon treatment might do the trick on the torque tube or both if you have done the mod yet  

    

it would make the tube real easy to get on and off too.  

  [quote]  

--

kheindl(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 10:58 am Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

Hi Bill and Sue,

Some builders pointed out a potential corrosion problem with my choice of 

aluminum. There are other choices. George Powell obtained a steel tube from 

a builder in Germany, and whoever supplies the TP5/TP6 to Europa would 

obviously also be able to supply a longer cut.

I like the idea of a Teflon coat on the TP4, but wouldn't have a clue on how 

to apply it.

I am not really concerned about the corrosion issue. The torque tube is 

prone to corrosion anyway, when moisture is present. I have seen the 

corrosion on the exterior of other Europas, and if the exterior corrodes 

then you can be sure that the tube's interior is corroded as well, unless 

the necessary steps were taken before assembly .

I always apply a good coat of lithium grease, and the tailplanes should be 

pulled off at least twice a year for a n inspection. I never had a problem 

in that area.

Removal of TP5:

I tried it the hard way by making a micro oven inside an aluminum tube, 

using a 20W halogen bulb and an oven thermometer with a remote probe for 

accurate temperature control. The thermometer had an upper display limit of 

200 degrees, and that was not hot enough to soften the redux I had used as 

an adhesive. I have now seen another oven thermometer with a much higher 

limit, but I have discarded that technique, unless I wanted to remove the 

TP6.

Using the same tube, and with the inside opening sealed with a heatresistent 

material (felt chair glides), I applied a good dose of heat with a 

blowtorch. The tailplane is in an upright position, so that no heat finds 

its way into the foam area. Using a narrow kitchen knife I probed the 

adhesive on the outside of the TP5.  When the redux had softened enough I 

removed the heat and cut around the TP5 with the same knife, which had a 

serrated edge and I was using it like a saw.

For the removal of the tube you need a locking pair of longnose pliers. Lock 

it onto the edge and slowly remove the thing with a turning motion. You may 

have to cut away a tiny bit of the plywood rib (2 x 5mm) to make room for 

the pliers.

Now having said all that, I suggest you ignore the two techniques above. 

Next time I would simply use the knife  and heat it with a blowtorch before 

cutting into the adhesive.

I didn't do any damage to the foam.

Installing the new TP5:

You need a small flashlight so you can see exactly what is inside the 

tailplane.

Do a trial fit of the new tube and see if it butts right up against the TP6. 

If there is any adhesive on the edge of the TP6, then don't disturb it, but 

grind a piece out of the edge of the long tube.

I had to do that on both sides.

Once you have a satisfactory fit, mark the tube where it needs to be cut 

off. I used a hacksaw and belt sander to do the necessary trimming.

Now take the tailplane and do a trial dry fit on the aircraft.

Remove the new TP5.

Use a narrow long spatula to apply floxed epoxy to the foam walls and over 

the old adhesive. The flox should be fairly wet, and you need only coat the 

first two thirds of the hole.

Put a liberal coat of neat epoxy on the tube exterior and insert it slowly 

with a turning motion.

The tailplane is in the horizontalposition, and at the halfway mark remove 

the surplus flox which has been pushed ahead of the tube. Remove more flox 

again when the tube is fully inserted.

Now take some time to remove alltrace of adhesive inside the tubes. I used 

rags dampened with acetone, on a long stick. I believe that vinegar can also 

be used, if you are concerned about foam damage.

That is about it. Mount the tailplane on the torque tube to ensure perfect 

alignment of the two tubes. If the alignment is not perfect, then adjust by 

applying pressure at the tailplane tip in different directions until the TP4 

slides in all the way. Make sure also that it was well greased.

After 4-5 hours of curing pull the tailplanes off again, just to make sure 

that there is no bonding going on in case some more epoxy has seeped out of 

the gap onto the TP4.

Then push it back on and leave overnight.

Hope that helps,

Karl

 	  Quote: 	
		  From: Bill and Sue <bill.sue(at)orcon.net.nz>

Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Mod 73 alternative

Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:55:56 +1300

Yes I would be interested as I have not done mine yet .

Mono XS

ZK CHV

914 Airmaster

Rgds

Sue & Bill

Karl Heindl wrote:

>

>

>My original plan was to replace both TP5 and TP6 with a single tube.

>After removing the TP5 I realized that there was no point at all in 

>removing the TP6. It is only necessary to ensure that it cannot move 

>inboard, which would then allow the TP12 to disconnect from the tailplane 

>etc. etc.

>I simply replaced the TP5 with a longer alu tube from ACS, part number 

>03-37900. This butts right up against the TP6, and there is no way this 

>can ever move inboard. The tube is made of 6061 T6 aluminum.

>Advantages:

>A straightforward mod.

>No cutting into the tailplane.

>No misalignment problem with TP5 and TP6.

>A permanent solution. ( assuming that there was a problem in the first 

>place.)

>If anyone is interested I can give more details on how I did it.

>

>Cheers,

>

>Karl

>

>_________________________________________________________________

>The next generation of Hotmail is here!  http://www.newhotmail.co.uk

>__________ NOD32 2607 (20071022) Information __________

>

>

_________________________________________________________________

Climb to the top of the charts! Play the word scramble challenge with star 

power. 

http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_hotmailtextlink2_oct

rob(at)hyperion-ef.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 11:49 am Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

In re: Teflon (tm)



Do an advanced search in Google for all of the word "electroless nickel

teflon" and you will get many hits for shops that can deposit electroless

nickel with particles of Teflon(tm).  This coating will be the most

compatible with the nickel plated torque tube and have the best lubricity.



Best regards,



Rob Housman

Irvine, California

Europa XS Tri-Gear

S/N A070

Airframe complete



--

kheindl(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 12:50 pm Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

Rob,



You seem to know a lot about this. But would it be possible to apply to an 

installed torque tube, i.e. would the platers be able to work with my 

fuselage on a trailer ?



Regards,



Karl





[quote]From: "Rob Housman" <rob(at)hyperion-ef.com>

Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

To: <europa-list(at)matronics.com>

Subject: RE: Mod 73 alternative

Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 12:48:46 -0700






In re: Teflon (tm)



Do an advanced search in Google for all of the word "electroless nickel

teflon" and you will get many hits for shops that can deposit electroless

nickel with particles of Teflon(tm).  This coating will be the most

compatible with the nickel plated torque tube and have the best lubricity.



Best regards,



Rob Housman

Irvine, California

Europa XS Tri-Gear

S/N A070

Airframe complete



--

grahamsingleton(at)btinte
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 3:19 pm Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

Colin Smallwood has an easier way. He made an oval washer, long axis 

just more than OD of TP5, on a length of screwed rod, which would pass 

down the inside of the TP5 tilted then lock onto the inner end when 

straightened. A piece of tube just larger than TP5 rests on the root rib 

with a washer and nut on the outer end. Tighten the nut and the TP5 is 

pulled out. No heat required.

Graham

Karl Heindl wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   


	


 	  Quote: 	
		   

 Using the same tube, and with the inside opening sealed with a 

 heatresistent material (felt chair glides), I applied a good dose of 

 heat with a blowtorch. The tailplane is in an upright position, so that 

 no heat finds its way into the foam area. Using a narrow kitchen knife I 

 probed the adhesive on the outside of the TP5.  When the redux had 

 softened enough I removed the heat and cut around the TP5 with the same 

 knife, which had a serrated edge and I was using it like a saw.

 For the removal of the tube you need a locking pair of longnose pliers. 

 Lock it onto the edge and slowly remove the thing with a turning motion. 

 You may have to cut away a tiny bit of the plywood rib (2 x 5mm) to make 

 room for the pliers.

rob(at)hyperion-ef.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 3:58 pm Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

Karl, sorry about not being sufficiently specific in my suggestion.  I was

suggesting that the add on aluminum tube could be electroless nickel plated

in order to have the new tube and the original TP4 (which is already nickel

plated, but not with Teflon(tm)added) have similar material on the mating

surfaces.  Unlike electrodeposited nickel which would be tricky to plate

inside a tube, the electroless stuff can be applied to the ID of a tube.



To more directly answer your question about in situ plating....no, it would

not be easy to deposit electroless nickel (with or without the slippery

stuff) to the torque tube already installed, primarily because the process

requires the temperature to be close to the boiling point of the solution in

order to work.



Best regards,



Rob Housman

Irvine, California

Europa XS Tri-Gear

S/N A070

Airframe complete

--

craigb(at)onthenet.com.au
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 4:00 am Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

yes  true, but I believe that the annodes used on outboard motors are zinc, being  more reactive than the alloy

 thus  the alloy and the nickle should both become cathodes and therefore not corrode.  The annodes are consumed

 moderately quickly, but it works quite well.

  

 As to  the teflon i see most people in favour of, you may be able to do it yourself, by  using the teflon engine treatments

 and  boil the parts in the solution for an hour or so. they work well in your engine  too, I used one (NULON brand) in a car

 I was  having overheating issues in (bigger engine than standard, no room for bigger  radiator) and one treatment dropped the

 running temp by around 20c. I use it in all my motors now, even though i  normally run a fully synth race oil as well. 

 [quote]   --

kheindl(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 4:58 am Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

Now you tell us. I have been trying to think of a pulling tool but couldn't 

come up with a solution.

Anyway, the final outcome was the same.



Karl





 	  Quote: 	
		  From: Graham Singleton <grahamsingleton(at)btinternet.com>

Reply-To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Mod 73 alternative

Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 00:17:21 +0100




<grahamsingleton(at)btinternet.com>



Colin Smallwood has an easier way. He made an oval washer, long axis just 

more than OD of TP5, on a length of screwed rod, which would pass down the 

inside of the TP5 tilted then lock onto the inner end when straightened. A 

piece of tube just larger than TP5 rests on the root rib with a washer and 

nut on the outer end. Tighten the nut and the TP5 is pulled out. No heat 

required.

Graham

Karl Heindl wrote:

>



>

>Using the same tube, and with the inside opening sealed with a 

>heatresistent material (felt chair glides), I applied a good dose of heat 

>with a blowtorch. The tailplane is in an upright position, so that no heat 

>finds its way into the foam area. Using a narrow kitchen knife I probed 

>the adhesive on the outside of the TP5.  When the redux had softened 

>enough I removed the heat and cut around the TP5 with the same knife, 

>which had a serrated edge and I was using it like a saw.

>For the removal of the tube you need a locking pair of longnose pliers. 

>Lock it onto the edge and slowly remove the thing with a turning motion. 

>You may have to cut away a tiny bit of the plywood rib (2 x 5mm) to make 

>room for the pliers.






	


_________________________________________________________________

The next generation of Hotmail is here!  http://www.newhotmail.co.uk

rob(at)hyperion-ef.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:09 am Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

Craig, it’s time for a chemistry lesson.  In the electromotive series zinc is between aluminum and nickel (and iron as well) thus making the aluminum in your suggestion the anode that protects the zinc.  I suspect that that is not exactly what you intend.   

   

Zinc is cheaper than aluminum and sufficiently anodic to steel to be very effective in preventing corrosion whether as a sacrificial anode (a lump of zinc) or a galvanized coating (steel parts dipped in molten zinc or electroplated with zinc).  The disadvantage to anodic protection is the fact that the process relies on the consumption of the anode, so when the anode is fully “sacrificed” the corrosion protection ceases.  

   

Another important chemistry lesson: Teflon in motor oil is so effective (at clogging oil filters, that is) that DuPont (the developer of the product and owner of the trade name Teflon) refused to sell the stuff to motor oil manufacturers and its reason according to DuPont's Fluoropolymers Division Product Specialist, J.F. Imbalzano is that "Teflon is not useful as an ingredient in oil additives or oils used for internal combustion engines."  The only reason that DuPont does provide Teflon for use as a motor oil additive is that the company was sued for “restraint of trade” and lost.  Teflon is known as a slippery material to which nothing seems to stick, but that is the proverbial two way street – getting teflon to stick to anything is very difficult and requires a perfectly clean surface, elevated temperature and a vacuum, so “using the teflon engine treatments and boil(ing) the parts in the solution for an hour or so” will make the parts oily but nothing more.  

   

     

Best regards,  

   

Rob Housman  

Irvine, California  

Europa XS Tri-Gear  

S/N A070  

Airframe complete  

  

       

From: owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-europa-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of craig bastin

 Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 5:02 AM

 To: europa-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: RE: Mod 73 alternative  

  

  

     

yes true, but I believe that the annodes used on outboard motors are zinc, being more reactive than the alloy  

    

thus the alloy and the nickle should both become cathodes and therefore not corrode. The annodes are consumed  

    

moderately quickly, but it works quite well.  

    

   

    

As to the teflon i see most people in favour of, you may be able to do it yourself, by using the teflon engine treatments  

    

and boil the parts in the solution for an hour or so. they work well in your engine too, I used one (NULON brand) in a car  

    

I was having overheating issues in (bigger engine than standard, no room for bigger radiator) and one treatment dropped the  

    

running temp by around 20c. I use it in all my motors now, even though i normally run a fully synth race oil as well.   

  [quote]  

--

grahamsingleton(at)btinte
Guest

Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:54 am Post subject: Mod 73 alternative

sorry I was too late for you Karl!

Graham



Karl Heindl wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 

 Now you tell us. I have been trying to think of a pulling tool but 

 couldn't come up with a solution.

 Anyway, the final outcome was the same.

 

 Karl

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Europa-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum