Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 12:01:22 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail.starflight1.com ([216.90.14.161] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b9) with ESMTP id 1805172 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 11:53:28 -0400 Received: from valinhawk [24.167.64.91] by mail.starflight1.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.00) id AA535EC300DC; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 11:01:23 -0500 From: "Valin & Allyson Thorn" X-Original-To: "'Jim Thomas'" , "'New Mail List Lancair'" Subject: RE: [LML] Legacy Canopy Hinge/Gas Strut Evaluation X-Original-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 10:51:40 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <000001c27399$96af5a20$0100a8c0@valinhawk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20021014144223.85073.qmail@web20415.mail.yahoo.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Hi Jim, I've been thinking most of the flex was with the canopy frame rather than the hinges -- but, after hearing the results of other builder's experimentation/modifications I'm not so sure. I suppose we could just make some reference marks on a hinge and measure the distance between them with the gas spring struts installed and without... Once its deformation was known we could assume the rest is the canopy itself. I don't know about the gas spring struts cylinder up/down position affecting the canopy's alignment -- but it does affect the dampening at full extension. I would like to make sure every Legacy builder knows that the manual is incorrect in the orientation of the gas spring strut cylinder. I learned this from Leighton Mangels at the Lancair Fly-In. I've been meaning to send a notice to the LML but keep forgeting. The design of our gas spring struts (made by Suspa) provides for dampening at full extension. But it requires the the cylinder part (larger black portion) of the gas strut be attached at the hinge. Apparently there is some kind of orifice and oil dampening system that has to be higher than the rest of the strut to work. I originally had mine opposite this, the way the manual specifies it, and the canopy would just slam to the top. I switched it after Leighton's advice and now it comes to a nice cushioned stop. Thanks again Leighton! He says he's told Lancair several times but it still hasn't shown up in the manual. I know those guys are trying to do a lot with just a few people... Don Barnes had a post this morning that says Lancair has a new more effective modification. I'm looking forward to learning more about it. I'd like to put it in the math model and see how it looks. By the way, my canopy hinge/strut analysis math model was built in Microsoft Excel. If anyone wants a copy to play/experiment around with just let me know and I'll send it on. Valin Thorn Legacy 173 ------------------------------------------------ Jim Thomas wrote: [...If I read your post correctly, you feel the problem is with the bending of the hinge in the closed position and not deformation of the canopy stiffener itself. Is that correct? .... I installed the thick AN washers on my canopy and noted a vast improvement in the fit. ... I would like to see someone measure the deformation of the canopy hinge under the various conditions; original design, modified strut geometry, and AN washers installed. ]