Return-Path: Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.202.55] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2) with ESMTP id 377897 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 13:12:33 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=204.127.202.55; envelope-from=n3773@comcast.net Received: from rv8 (c-24-21-140-241.client.comcast.net[24.21.140.241]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with SMTP id <2004082517120301100d9hb9e> (Authid: n3773@comcast.net); Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:12:03 +0000 Message-ID: <052001c48ac6$a12c28c0$f18c1518@rv8> Reply-To: "kevin lane" From: "kevin lane" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: more myths questioned! Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:01:42 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_04E0_01C48A8A.85736A30" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_04E0_01C48A8A.85736A30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MessageOK, without stirring up a hornets nest-- could I safely run a = rigid oil line to the redrive and back if both ends were rigidly engine = mounted? I would make sure there are bends in it for flex and well = supported. I have rigid brake lines on my -6a, with a 360 degree loop = at the end, although admittedly, had one end crack, but I believe that = was from a combination of multiple removals and later learning that my = hangar partner's flange tool was actually automotive, not aviation. I've = had no problems on my Lycoming otherwise with rigid lines. I know some = guys run flex lines everywhere, which seems heavy and expensive. Kevin Lane Portland, OR e-mail-> n3773@comcast.net web-> http://home.comcast.net/~n3773 (browse w/ internet explorer) ----- Original Message -----=20 From: paul=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 9:26 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Sorry Rusty - no bind ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Russell Duffy=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 9:31 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Sorry Rusty - no bind please don't take this as being critical, I'm just asking - is it = true or not that engine fittings should be steel, not aluminum? or is = that just a myth? does aluminum fatigue faster than steel? what do = certified piston planes use? Kevin Lane Portland, OR =20 This is sort of a controversial subject. There is probably an = official FAA rule, or at least rule of thumb about only using steel = fittings when there's relative motion on the two ends of a hose. Of = course screwing steel fittings, into an aluminum gear drive would also = violate some dissimilar metal rules, so damned if you do, damned if you = don't. =20 Since I was schooled at the Van's Aircraft institute, I follow the = more common sense rules. If it's a small fitting, that isn't very = strong, it's best to use steel. If it's a fairly large fitting, then = aluminum is plenty strong. AN-6 is about the dividing line, and it = comes down to whether there's much motion. In the case of the drain = fitting you see in the pic, there's no relative motion, so I feel = aluminum is fine. =20 Cheers, Rusty (not an A&P, and don't even play one on TV) =20 This topic was recently discussed on the canard aviator's = website....seems that Lycoming is sending their brand new engines with = aluminum fittings. I agree, however that there is comfort in using = steel for the smaller (-4) sizes. I have -16 aluminum AN fittings for = my radiator hoses, and it would take a sledgehammer to damage one of = those aluminum fittings. The general consensus on the canard site was = similar....steel for the smaller fittings, but aluminum was fine for -6 = sizes and larger. I guess they figure that if Lycoming can supply a = certified engine with aluminum fittings, it's OK on our experimentals. = FWIW. Paul Conner ------=_NextPart_000_04E0_01C48A8A.85736A30 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
OK, without stirring up a = hornets nest--=20 could I safely run a rigid oil line to the redrive and back if both ends = were=20 rigidly engine mounted?  I would make sure there are bends in it = for flex=20 and well supported.  I have rigid brake lines on my -6a, with a 360 = degree=20 loop at the end, although admittedly, had one end crack, but I believe = that was=20 from a combination of multiple removals and later learning that my = hangar=20 partner's flange tool was actually automotive, not aviation. I've had no = problems on my Lycoming otherwise with rigid lines.  I know some = guys run=20 flex lines everywhere, which seems heavy and expensive.
Kevin Lane  Portland, = OR
e-mail-> n3773@comcast.net
web-> http://home.comcast.net/~n3773
(browse=20 w/ internet explorer)
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 paul=20
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, = 2004 9:26=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Sorry = Rusty - no=20 bind

 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Russell=20 Duffy
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft=20
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 = 9:31=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Sorry Rusty -=20 no bind

please=20 don't take this as being critical, I'm just asking - is it true or = not that=20 engine fittings should be steel, not aluminum?  or is that just = a myth?=20 does aluminum fatigue faster than steel?  what do certified = piston=20 planes use?
Kevin Lane  Portland, OR
 
 
This=20 is sort of a controversial subject.  There is probably an = official=20 FAA rule, or at least rule of thumb about only using steel = fittings=20 when there's relative motion on the two ends of a=20 hose.  Of course screwing steel fittings, into = an=20 aluminum gear drive would also violate some dissimilar metal rules, = so=20 damned if you do, damned if you don't. 
 
Since=20 I was schooled at the Van's Aircraft institute, I follow = the more=20 common sense rules.  If it's a small fitting, that isn't very = strong,=20 it's best to use steel.  If it's a fairly large fitting, = then=20 aluminum is plenty strong.  AN-6 is about the dividing line, = and it=20 comes down to whether there's much motion.  In the case of the = drain=20 fitting you see in the pic, there's no relative motion, so I feel = aluminum=20 is fine.  
 
Cheers,
Rusty=20 (not an A&P, and don't even play one on=20 TV)  
 
This topic was=20 recently discussed on the canard aviator's website....seems that = Lycoming is=20 sending their brand new engines with aluminum fittings.  I = agree,=20 however that there is comfort in using steel for the smaller (-4)=20 sizes.  I have -16 aluminum AN fittings for my radiator hoses, = and it=20 would take a sledgehammer to damage one of those aluminum fittings. = The=20 general consensus on the canard site was similar....steel for the = smaller=20 fittings, but aluminum was fine for -6 sizes and larger.  I = guess they=20 figure that if Lycoming can supply a certified engine with aluminum=20 fittings, it's OK on our experimentals.  FWIW.  Paul=20 Conner
------=_NextPart_000_04E0_01C48A8A.85736A30--