X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao104.cox.net ([68.230.241.42] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.4) with ESMTP id 4180817 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:13:15 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.42; envelope-from=alventures@cox.net Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao104.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.00.01.00 201-2244-105-20090324) with ESMTP id <20100327151239.XXXD29534.fed1rmmtao104.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net> for ; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:12:39 -0400 Received: from BigAl ([72.192.128.205]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id yFCf1d0044S1t5C03FCfW6; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 11:12:39 -0400 X-VR-Score: 0.00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=9X1BeRvGVdXikaVgI7mHUqmIOlosh/BCISq12UegNM8= c=1 sm=1 a=XbAoGkqbTjAA:10 a=Vegc0WxVmH5BHtpNDyThtA==:17 a=U9mX82Jrg_e77RPqUoYA:9 a=5j95xQcM9uMscu4cgDMA:7 a=AzmiRZLIP5vsOCjE78RdK7Xbu4kA:4 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=wU3FO22n72YZaqPmrLQA:9 a=56g1MI4dlUaf91zRMOkA:7 a=pCuS04Ml2Krn0K2FAmsaoQGwhMgA:4 a=Vegc0WxVmH5BHtpNDyThtA==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 From: "Al Gietzen" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Adaptor plate rivets - Al' 20B Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 08:12:31 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001D_01CACD85.3FCB6840" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6856 Importance: Normal Thread-Index: AcrNlTlhtrwcFbeaR1aYtYhyO/mZUQAMc0cg In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01CACD85.3FCB6840 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 Good report Al. It is interesting that there are streaks from only the = back side. Is it possible that you have cleaned the front side but due to accessibility, didn't clean the back side?=20 No; never did any cleaning of the plate. =20 I received my close tolerance bolts and swapped out the AN-6A bolts. = The close tolerance bolts were definitely snugger in the holes, but all = could be installed by hand without needing to be tapped or driven in with a = hammer. That's true; certainly not a press fit - but I don't think it matters. = With the 20 bolts torqued to about 20 in-lbs - beyond the torque needed to = turn the lock nuts - (I think that's about the right number for these bolts; = I'd have to double check) the clamping force between the flange and the = plate is so high as to eliminate much in the way of shear forces on the bolts. = If you're concerned, a thin film of JB weld on the bolts before putting = them in would eliminate any clearance - and make it impossible to ever remove = them. =20 Al=20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01CACD85.3FCB6840 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Good report Al. It is interesting that = there are streaks from only the back side. Is it possible that you have = cleaned the front side but due to accessibility, didn't clean the back side? =

No; never did any cleaning of the = plate.

I received my close tolerance bolts and = swapped out the AN-6A bolts. The close tolerance bolts were definitely snugger = in the holes, but all could be installed by hand without needing to be tapped = or driven in with a hammer.

That’s true; certainly not = a press fit – but I don’t think it matters. With the 20 bolts = torqued to about 20 in-lbs – beyond the torque needed to turn the lock = nuts – (I think that’s about the right number for these bolts; I’d = have to double check) the clamping force between the flange and the plate is so = high as to eliminate much in the way of shear forces on the bolts. If = you’re concerned, a thin film of JB weld on the bolts before putting them in = would eliminate any clearance – and make it impossible to ever remove them.

Al

------=_NextPart_000_001D_01CACD85.3FCB6840--