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

Exact measurement

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

darrellhaas(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 9:08 pm Post subject: Exact measurement

Wow! When I started this I knew they wanted things to be exact. I was cutting out the template for the firewall and one of the measurement was 243.8. Now that's tough to do when the lead on my pencil measures .7

   

 Darrell Haas

 601 XL Fuse

  [quote][b]

Jugle

Joined: 04 Aug 2007
Posts: 47
Location: Victoria, Australia

Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 9:36 pm Post subject: Re: Exact measurement

Hi Darrell,



 	  darrellhaas(at)gmail.com wrote: 	
		  Wow! When I started this I knew they wanted things to be exact. I was cutting out the template for the firewall and one of the measurement was 243.8. Now that's tough to do when the lead on my pencil measures .7

	




I had the same question when I started plotting my form blocks. Here is what Nick from Zenith had to say:

"Please refer to the CS for tolerances.  Please understand that we had to increase the precision  on some parts in the drawings to meet the diligent expectation of builder who have access to CAD software. It is not necessary that parts be cut on a CNC machine."



The tightest tolerance is 0.5mm on wing rib heights, everything else is 1 to 2 mm as I recall.



Glenn.

_________________
Glenn Andressen
601XL- Rudder, Stabiliser parts completed, Wing ribs, nose ribs done, 70% Fuselage parts made.

ashontz

Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 723

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 8:29 am Post subject: Re: Exact measurement

 	  Jugle wrote: 	
		  

The tightest tolerance is 0.5mm on wing rib heights, everything else is 1 to 2 mm as I recall.



Glenn. 	




I guess I should start over then. I think my ribs are about 1mm under.

Rick.Beckman(at)atk.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:16 am Post subject: Exact measurement

I guess I should start over then. I think my ribs are about 1mm under.

	Just a silly little millimeter under......... Sorry...couldn't

resist

	Definitely...DO NOT ARCHIVE!

larry(at)macsmachine.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:22 am Post subject: Exact measurement

Andy,

If your ribs are consistently 1mm under, they should be fine. It's when 

you have variance both ways

that might cause your wings to look uneven.  And, if it's only one rib 

or so, you can shim to even the

surface out. I'd get things clecoed and then decide if specific ribs 

need leveling adjustments.

Larry McFarland  601HDS at www.macsmachine.com

do not archive

 	  Quote: 	
		   Jugle wrote:

> The tightest tolerance is 0.5mm on wing rib heights, everything else is 1 to 2 mm as I recall.

>

> Glenn.

>     

 I guess I should start over then. I think my ribs are about 1mm under.

 --------

 Andy Shontz

 CH601XL - Corvair

 www.mykitlog.com/ashontz

ashontz

Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 723

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:25 am Post subject: Re: Exact measurement

LOL



I already compared notes with Scott Laughlin on this. He has a bit of a gap too and he's flying.



On another note, when you're super careful, it's amazing how accurately the pieces can be made, even more amazing when it's a large piece. For instance, bending my flaps and ailerons, after the third bend was complete and I rechecked the numbers of what I had versus the plans, the length of my ailerons and flaps was within half a mm. I was impressed, not so much with myself as with the fact that if you make an accurate measurement, put it in the bender and bend it and keep doing that, that it all added up to half a mm. Just in theory alone, it could potentially add up to 1.5 mm off, even while being careful.



 	  Rick.Beckman(at)atk.com wrote: 	
		  I guess I should start over then. I think my ribs are about 1mm under.

	Just a silly little millimeter under......... Sorry...couldn't

resist

	Definitely...DO NOT ARCHIVE!

ashontz

Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 723

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 9:29 am Post subject: Re: Exact measurement

The undersize appearance would really only be apparent where the part meets another part too. I think .5mm tolerance is a bit too picky. If it's 3mm or more out of whack, than you have some problems because you could start changing the flight characteristics or strength if things really don't fit well.

The only tolerance I remember reading in the Zenith literature was "strive for no more than 2 - 3mm", or something to that affect, which, once you get some experience building, isn't really that difficult to stick to.

 	  larry(at)macsmachine.com wrote: 	
		  Andy,

If your ribs are consistently 1mm under, they should be fine. It's when 

you have variance both ways

that might cause your wings to look uneven.  And, if it's only one rib 

or so, you can shim to even the

surface out. I'd get things clecoed and then decide if specific ribs 

need leveling adjustments.

Larry McFarland  601HDS at www.macsmachine.com

do not archive

 	  Quote: 	
		   Jugle wrote:

> The tightest tolerance is 0.5mm on wing rib heights, everything else is 1 to 2 mm as I recall.

>

> Glenn.

>     

 I guess I should start over then. I think my ribs are about 1mm under.

 --------

 Andy Shontz

 CH601XL - Corvair

 www.mykitlog.com/ashontz

Jeyoung65(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:44 am Post subject: Exact measurement

The old 601HD Construction Manual Dated Jan 1995  "try to achieve an  accuracy of +1/16" (.5mm) on spar and rib heights". Then under "Outboard wing  panels"  it states "the ribs which have been made to fit the center section  spar height are slightly too large for the outboard spar: simply hammer lightly  the upper and lower rib flange down until they fit the spar."  Looks to me  like they are not too tight on tolerance except height which can be lightly  hammer to fit.   Jerry of Ga.

  

  In a message dated 2/14/2008 12:33:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  ashontz(at)nbme.org writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    Zenith-List message posted by: "ashontz" <ashontz(at)nbme.org>



The    undersize appearance would really only be apparent where the part meets    another part too. I think .5mm tolerance is a bit too picky. If it's 3mm or    more out of whack, than you have some problems because you could start    changing the flight characteristics or strength if things really don't fit    well.



The only tolerance I remember reading in the Zenith literature    was "strive for no more than 2 - 3mm", or something to that affect, which,    once you get some experience building, isn't really that difficult to stick    to.

	




The year's hottest artists on the red carpet at the Grammy Awards.  AOL Music takes you there.

  [quote][b]

ashontz

Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 723

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:46 am Post subject: Re: Exact measurement

1/16th of an inch is 25.4mm/16 = 1.5875mm.



I wouldn't worry about it too much, as long as you don't have some obviously huge gaping hole somewhere that requires a vice grip really clamped down to hold things in position while you put a rivet in with a shear force anywhere near approaching the force you're already clamping down hard with, that is, things should fit snug enough to be fairly lightly clamped together while you riviet. If the stuff doesn't fall nicely in place with a couple of clecoes or there's huge humps or bumps or irregular gaps that really don't look right, you got problems.



do not archive



[quote="Jeyoung65(at)aol.com"]The old 601HD Construction Manual Dated Jan 1995  "try to achieve an  accuracy of +1/16" (.5mm) on spar and rib heights". Then under "Outboard wing  panels"  it states "the ribs which have been made to fit the center section  spar height are slightly too large for the outboard spar: simply hammer lightly  the upper and lower rib flange down until they fit the spar."  Looks to me  like they are not too tight on tolerance except height which can be lightly  hammer to fit.   Jerry of Ga.

  

  In a message dated 2/14/2008 12:33:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  ashontz(at)nbme.org writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    Zenith-List message posted by: "ashontz" <ashontz>



The    undersize appearance would really only be apparent where the part meets    another part too. I think .5mm tolerance is a bit too picky. If it's 3mm or    more out of whack, than you have some problems because you could start    changing the flight characteristics or strength if things really don't fit    well.



The only tolerance I remember reading in the Zenith literature    was "strive for no more than 2 - 3mm", or something to that affect, which,    once you get some experience building, isn't really that difficult to stick    to.

	




The year's hottest artists on the red carpet at the Grammy Awards.  AOL Music takes you there.

   	  Quote: 	
		  [b]

PatrickW

Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 380
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:10 am Post subject: Re: Exact measurement

All this talk of sub-mm tolerances makes me wonder how so many planes in WWII made it home at all, with tail sections half shot off, and holes from flak, combat, etc.



Somewhat of a rhetorical question, but I would sure like to know how the performance of an "average 601XL" done by an "average first time builder" compares with the performance of a theoretically "perfect 601XL".



I bet there isn't a whole lot of difference.



Has anyone seen any out there that were really bad...?  Any experiences to share...?  



Patrick

XL/Corvair

ashontz

Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 723

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:28 am Post subject: Re: Exact measurement

I often think of the same thing. Even when you look at them rolling off the production line, in pictures with bad lighting, there's nothing but lumps and bumps all over the plane.



 	  PatrickW wrote: 	
		  All this talk of sub-mm tolerances makes me wonder how so many planes in WWII made it home at all, with tail sections half shot off, and holes from flak, combat, etc.



Somewhat of a rhetorical question, but I would sure like to know how the performance of an "average 601XL" done by an "average first time builder" compares with the performance of a theoretically "perfect 601XL".



I bet there isn't a whole lot of difference.



Has anyone seen any out there that were really bad...?  Any experiences to share...?  



Patrick

XL/Corvair

notsew_evets(at)frontiern
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:47 pm Post subject: Exact measurement

Huh ?

---

Terry Phillips

Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 346
Location: Corvallis, MT

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 2:21 pm Post subject: Exact measurement

Interesting topic.

All of the examples of German WWII planes I have seen in museums look 

positively crude in comparison to the US Planes.

But, if you really want to see crude, check out the Russian T-34 tank. It 

is really rough. But they whipped the Germans with them on the eastern 

front. They have one on display in the foreign ordnance field at Aberdeen 

Proving Ground. If you're in the neighborhood, it's definitely worth a visit.

Terry

do not archive

At 11:28 AM 2/14/2008 -0800, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  I often think of the same thing. Even when you look at them rolling off 

the production line, in pictures with bad lighting, there's nothing but 

lumps and bumps all over the plane.

PatrickW wrote:

 > All this talk of sub-mm tolerances makes me wonder how so many planes 

 in WWII made it home at all, with tail sections half shot off, and holes 

 from flak, combat, etc.

 >

 > Somewhat of a rhetorical question, but I would sure like to know how 

 the performance of an "average 601XL" done by an "average first time 

 builder" compares with the performance of a theoretically "perfect 601XL".

 >

 > I bet there isn't a whole lot of difference.

 >

 > Has anyone seen any out there that were really bad...?  Any experiences 

 to share...?

 >

 > Patrick

 > XL/Corvair

Terry Phillips

ttp44~at~rkymtn.net

Corvallis MT

601XL/Jab 3300 s .. l .. o .. o .. w build kit - Tail, flaps, & ailerons 

are done; working on the wings

http://www.mykitlog.com/N47TP/

_________________
Terry Phillips
Corvallis, MT
ttp44<at>rkymtn.net
Zenith 601XL/Jab 3300 slow build kit - Tail feathers done; working on the wings.

planecrazydld(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 5:27 pm Post subject: Exact measurement

1/16" = 1.5 mm



Jeyoung65(at)aol.com wrote:[quote]     The old 601HD Construction Manual Dated Jan 1995  "try to achieve an  accuracy of +1/16" (.5mm) on spar and rib heights". Then under "Outboard wing  panels"  it states "the ribs which have been made to fit the center section  spar height are slightly too large for the outboard spar: simply hammer lightly  the upper and lower rib flange down until they fit the spar."  Looks to me  like they are not too tight on tolerance except height which can be lightly  hammer to fit.   Jerry of Ga.

  

  In a message dated 2/14/2008 12:33:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,   ashontz(at)nbme.org writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    Zenith-List message posted by: "ashontz" <ashontz(at)nbme.org>



The    undersize appearance would really only be apparent where the part meets    another part too. I think .5mm tolerance is a bit too picky. If it's 3mm or    more out of whack, than you have some problems because you could start    changing the flight characteristics or strength if things really don't fit    well.



The only tolerance I remember reading in the Zenith literature    was "strive for no more than 2 - 3mm", or something to that affect, which,    once you get some experience building, isn't really that difficult to stick    to.

rlalonde

Joined: 20 Nov 2006
Posts: 43

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 7:34 am Post subject: Exact measurement

Hi Larry

  Everyone on the list seem to be talking about rib height, and there seems to be quite a concern. Is there any one point where the measurement could be taken to measure this to be certain?

 I realize that the there can be no variance in the spar...but it is more or less a "solid" structure.

 (I am not quite at the point in the building process, but am curious to see what this fuss is all about!)_

 Ron

 601XL. Plan 6520

 Debert, NS, Canada

 > Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:05:45 -0600

 	  Quote: 	
		   From: larry(at)macsmachine.com

 To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Exact measurement

 --> Zenith-List message posted by: LarryMcFarland <larry(at)macsmachine.com>

 Andy,

 If your ribs are consistently 1mm under, they should be fine. It's when 

 you have variance both ways

 that might cause your wings to look uneven. And, if it's only one rib 

 or so, you can shim to even the

 surface out. I'd get things clecoed and then decide if specific ribs 

 need leveling adjustments.

 Larry McFarland 601HDS at www.macsmachine.com

 do not archive

 > Jugle wrote:

 > 

 >> The tightest tolerance is 0.5mm on wing rib heights, everything else is 1 to 2 mm as I recall.

 >>

 >> Glenn.

 >> 

 >

 >

 > I guess I should start over then. I think my ribs are about 1mm under.

 >

 > --------

 > Andy Shontz

 > CH601XL - Corvair

 > www.mykitlog.com/ashontz

 &g========

   [quote][b]

Jeyoung65(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 8:32 am Post subject: Exact measurement

Sorry for the typo, "+1/16 (.5mm)" should have been "1/64 (.5mm)"   Jerry of Ga

  

  In a message dated 2/14/2008 8:28:35 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  planecrazydld(at)yahoo.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  1/16" =    1.5 mm



Jeyoung65(at)aol.com wrote:     	  Quote: 	
		            The old 601HD Construction Manual Dated Jan 1995  "try to achieve      an accuracy of +1/16" (.5mm) on spar and rib heights". Then under "Outboard      wing panels"  it states "the ribs which have been made to fit the      center section spar height are slightly too large for the outboard spar:      simply hammer lightly the upper and lower rib flange down until they fit the      spar."  Looks to me like they are not too tight on tolerance except      height which can be lightly hammer to fit.   Jerry of Ga.

      

          In a message dated 2/14/2008 12:33:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,      ashontz(at)nbme.org writes:



      

	
	




The year's hottest artists on the red carpet at the Grammy Awards.  AOL Music takes you there.

  [quote][b]

planecrazydld(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 9:05 am Post subject: Exact measurement

1/64" = 0.015625" = 0.396875 mm = 0.4 mm



Jeyoung65(at)aol.com wrote:[quote]     Sorry for the typo, "+1/16 (.5mm)" should have been "1/64 (.5mm)"   Jerry of Ga

  

  In a message dated 2/14/2008 8:28:35 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  planecrazydld(at)yahoo.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  1/16" =    1.5 mm



Jeyoung65(at)aol.com wrote:     	  Quote: 	
		            The old 601HD Construction Manual Dated Jan 1995  "try to achieve      an accuracy of +1/16" (.5mm) on spar and rib heights". Then under "Outboard      wing panels"  it states "the ribs which have been made to fit the      center section spar height are slightly too large for the outboard spar:      simply hammer lightly the upper and lower rib flange down until they fit the      spar."  Looks to me like they are not too tight on tolerance except      height which can be lightly hammer to fit.   Jerry of Ga.

      

          In a message dated 2/14/2008 12:33:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,      ashontz(at)nbme.org writes:



      

	
	




Be a better friend, newshound, and  [quote][b]

larry(at)macsmachine.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 5:54 pm Post subject: Exact measurement

Hi Ron,

The developed max vertical ordinate for the ribs is probably it.  I'd 

like to think that consistency in dimension is the real issue. Harder 

for a taper wing, to be sure, but

if you have taken reasonable means to stay close to the required 

dimensions, you're going to be o.k.  Often, people get overworked about 

small details like this and become

obsessive about getting it exactly right.  Few ever achieve exactly this 

and so it's best to read the guidelines from Zenith in accomplishing the 

task and memorizing the fundamental and basic methods for holding the 

rib dimensions.  They can be adjusted and if necessary, shimmed. I have 

several shims on the top inboard ribs that were

finely tapered and riveted in with the wing skin and rib flanges that 

leveled the surfaces.  Even with perfect ribs, you have to jig them for 

accurate match up with the spar

and it only takes time.  Keep a straightedge nearby to check things as 

you get the wings clecoed and by that time you'll certainly know what to do.

http://www.macsmachine.com/images/completion/full/viewwingrivets.jpg

Best regards,



Larry McFarland



Ron Lalonde wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Hi Larry

  Everyone on the list seem to be talking about rib height, and there 

 seems to be quite a concern. Is there any one point where the 

 measurement could be taken to measure this to be certain?

 I realize that the there can be no variance in the spar...but it is 

 more or less a "solid" structure.

  

 (I am not quite at the point in the building process, but am curious 

 to see what this fuss is all about!)_

  

 Ron

 601XL. Plan 6520

 Debert, NS, Canada

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-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