argoldman

I'm pretty sure it's not contamination but I won't rule it out. It would have to be practically snowing crud in the workshop. I'm pretty good about keeping bugs, spiderwebs, etc cleaned up as well.

 

My shop heater blows over the worktable so I'ts possible that's moving somethig around. I'll redirect the output so it's blowing off the table inseat of over. Wont hurt to eliminate another possiblity.

 

I think I do another practice piece where I slurry and wet out the glass and then peel ply 1/2 of the layup. Then look closely at the difference.

 

thanks

Hold it!!!!

Are you applying the slurry to the glass?????

A Big NONONONONO.

The Peel ply should have no real effect.

You can see the "covers" to those three front side holes in the photo. One big cover is sitting inside the fuse. The little one to the right.

Different.

Brake access I guess.

Mighty big holes!

This looks like a highly modified Aerocanard.

1 longer nose

2 possibly wider

3 possibly set up for stagger ez

4 F"0" large with access to feet/brakes and nose compartment from both

sides of the bulkhead (side hatches)

5 Top hatch reveals both feet and nose compartment

6 attachments for right side console (nothing for control bearings yet)

7 no side conduits (perhaps the center "spine" will serve the purpose)

8 Problem with the beautifully finished Cowl. The cowl is, during construction, in effect custom fitted to the firewall and the strakes which at the point of cowl fitting are bonded to the spar. The basic form of the cowl is fabricated in molds (top as part of the entire top including nose -separated during construction, and bottom cowl separately. the "wings" of the cowl are provided as 4 flat pieces of glass which are then appropriately fitted to the strakes and wing roots and then affixed to the preformed cowl

None of these necessary fitting parts is present and or put in place.

9 The strakes look like standard Aerocanard issue as per aerocanard plans the filler caps are installed.

What we may be looking at here is a situation in which multiple planes are being built and the cowl is from the other more constructally advanced project. If not, it will not fit!!!

If you want another technique to see if this is an issue, try hardshelling.

 

Apply your micro and let it cure. Sand it and proceed as you would.

I vacuum bag quite a bit but I still use this method even for the parts I don't bag.

If you band-aid now, you may do it on a later more important lay-up.

!!!!!!!!Find out why you are getting the bubbles!!!!!!!!!!!!

How about sending a good picture of the bubbles that you are getting.

When mixing micro for glass over foam, the thickness of the mixture is determined by the type of surface that the micro gives you. The more porous the surface, the thicker the micro. The purpose of the micro is to fill the surface voids, with a material lighter than pure epoxy.

It might be a good idea to go back to the instructions and try to produce a small piece (ie bookend) using the same material.

Bubbles can be caused by several factors, and without looking over your shoulder anything I say might be conjecture. But here goes:

If when you mix your epoxy, you incorporate bubbles (usually when mixing cold epoxy) these may stay after you incorporate the micro.

When you mix your micro, the mixed epoxy should be clear (color determined by the brand). The micro should then be incorporated in small increments.

Are you mixing the epoxy properly and for the right amount of time? Different epoxies require different mixing times.

Try making a pure epoxy layup of 2 layers of glass on a flat surface use plastic to keep it from sticking (no foam), using the exact same mixing technique as you used previously If you still get the bubbles, it is in you epoxy, either the mixing or the material.

On the other hand, the bubbles you are getting may be caused by your technique in squeegeeing the micro.

Try to find a builder near you and get some dual

Of course further flight is conditional upon passing the condition inspection:rolleyes:

I used Lexan for my strake windows. Over the years, theyve become scratched and dirty. I find that I can't buff out the scratches and now wish I had used regular plexiglass.

 

Any thoughts on this?

 

Waiter

Lexan, although stronger in some respects than plexiglass, in my understanding, is much more prone to scratches and harder to repair. Have you tried any of the commercially available windshield restorers??

You probably have to sand down to 800 grit, then graduate to finer and finer then use the polishing systems. Try that on some scrap lexan to see if it will work.

What thickness of plexi are people using for the strake window?

I am considering this modification, but in my plane, the rear seat will most of the time be occupied by baggage, air, or my 80 Lb. Goldendoodle (Grover).

Finally, after all of these years of building and flying, fame and fortune have shown their light on me, with the possible absence of both the fame and the fortune.

If you look at the issue of Kitplanes that just was sent out, with the catalog of all of the experimental aircraft that are available, my aerocanard SX appears as the picture at the aerocanard SX entry. Unfortunately, it is still at the "Jet" stage (no engine or prop)

Likewise. Yep!

 

I put tape on the tiny washers a pair at a time while on the table edge-to-edge. While the canard was upside down with the elevator in place and ready, I draped the two washers over the elevator brackets (plates? L-shaped things) to dangle them in place on each side lined up with the holes.

As John revolta and Olivia Newton John said---"try grease"

After 5 years I must still be an apprentice. : )

 

Actually, there's lots of good discussion on the subject. You can go to http://www.maddyhome.com/cozysrch/ or search this forum. For vertical layups I like to wet it out with a (mock credit card) sqeegee it on 3 - 4mil plastic then pick it up with the plastic. Slap it on then roll out the excess (important). Brushing on and stippling epoxy is great but man can you go through the brushes! I use them mostly when the need is best or big such as wing or canopy.

Still lobbying for the 1 mil variety. does not tear and conforms. does not show folds, easy to cut, etc etc.

Yes, All the above, depending on what your doing.

 

HOWEVER - You need to make sure its mixed completely before using it.

 

If I'm doing large flat surfaces, I'll pour it on and use a squegee to spread around.

 

The original Rutan video was a good primer for working with glass. Not sure where to find it!!!

 

Waiter

Ya, what he wrote.

One suggestion, however.

For many more years than I care to remember, I was a squeegee man, It's almost like it was attached to my hand (especially when falling asleep after a large layup) When I made my fuselage parts in Aerocad's molds (I think that I am the only one ever to be able to do that), Al, through Jeff's tutelage suggested that I use a 6" joint knife to do the goo spreading.

Having been a squeegeeophile, and understanding that there were none at Aerocad, I brought a selection of my own.

After trying the joint compound knife (use on flat surfaces mainly) I had an epiphany.

Mikey liked it!!!! (actually Rich liked it).

Since then, with what seems like miles of whetted fiberglass, I only use the knife. I don't think I even know where my beloved squeegees are any more.

If you are concerned about bent layups, go to a kitchen counter fabricator or home depot and buy a few kitchen counter sink cutouts (formica type).

After your layups and peelply AND PLASTIC (I still like 1 mil!!!!! ) put the cutout over the layup, formica side down and weight it down. Allow to cure, flip and do the other side.

When you get confident in this method, you can actually do both sides at once (assuming both sides are flat). Lay up one side, with 1/8-1/4" overhang, peel ply, plastic, then invert on a flat table , glass the other side, peel ply, plastic board and weight. When you arrive the next morning, you have a completed part which needs only a band saw or belt sander to be complete.

Try it, you will find it knife.

Rich:

 

I think he is talking about a fat Longeze not a CozyIV so Burt would be the one to quote and Marc runs a site for Cozy builders. I had a light Longeze in a previous life it was a joy to fly. The only thing I would have changed is swap the 0235 for an 0320 Still keeping it light is the best thing you can do for these planes. STeve build on

Don't know where I got the IV Idea. However the concept is the same. If the wings and canard are in the same relation. There might be some change due to the width of the fus , however I don't think it would change the CL much. (when I say I don't know, I don't know, but I doubt it )--except for the possible lift created by the increased width..

If it were me, I would still go by the book CG range (for the long if that is the basis) and make my first flight with the CG in the middle and expand the envelope outward. W&B concepts are the same be it a LSA or the A380. Only the numbers change. (when you go supersonic the CL changes and complexities set in------Don't fly your Cozys supersonic!!!

Rowan,

If you have not altered the wing/canard location (with respect to each other and the datum) and have kept the same datum, The center of lift will be in the same place, with respect to the datum as with an unmodified ship. The difference is that with the extended proboscis, you may put more weight ahead of the datum with more forward CG results. The proctological additions would, of course give you a more rearward shift of the CG possibility.

The CG range should be be kept pretty close to what Nat suggested.

I think that Marc posted a W&B spreadsheet, at one time, that might help.

If not, making your own should be a fairly easy task, if indeed you fully understand the concept of W&B, ---which you, and all pilots should.

Make the stations for the prop and all changes variables. The weight of each, of course should be a variable.

With these, you can originally estimate, and as more accurate figures come in, change them and see the results.

It's a balancing game. Stay balanced!!!

Another foam source is Dynamic Systems' Sunmate foam. (www.sunmatecushions.com/) It was developed by the same people that devoped Confor Foam. Here is a nice tutorial on building motorcycle saddles that goes into foam selection. Some of the techniques will transfer over into making the seats for your bird.

 

Oh, btw, if you are sliding around worrying about your nads and tree roots, you probably have problems way beyond what a foam is going to be able to handle.

 

Carl

Nuts and roots-- Sounds like a health-food salad.

Sunmate has similar characteristics to temperfoam. I believe, for whatever it is worth, it is not fire resistant.

If you are concerned about twiggage, why not incorporate an aluminum bottom in your seat cushion.

So Rich, I only want a 1-1/2 inch to 2" max deep cushion thickness.

What do I do then? What makes up my spine friendly, cruise friendly, temperfoam, red, blue, etc sandwich?

 

I found this really great black 1/2 inch foam at Orchard Supply that is pretty darn dense, but very comfortable, and was thinking to maybe use that under a 1" layer of temperfoam. I was hoping that was my solution.

 

I originally thought about just using 3 layers [1-1/2" total] of that Orchard stuff, it is so pleasant to sit on, yet firm. I was wondering though, if I contact cemented the layers together, I would probably have to do them in the aircarft while the cement cured, because they would take a better seat shape then. They also would also probably remain somewhat that seat shape when removed out of the plane, to upholster.

That Orchard foam is also very inexpensive for the quality feel of it.

Thoughts from you Rich, & other users?

I would stick to all temper-foam. I think it is available in various densities (at least 3 or 4) all differentiated by their color. It's not the density or softness that makes temper-foam safe, but, my understanding it is the way that it compresses and spreads the load when called upon to function that makes the difference.

Use the firmest that is comfortable for your top layer. This material is temperature sensitive so when you first sit on it, it feels firm. Shortly thereafter, it conforms. One drawback is that this conformation takes a little longer on cold days. (or shorter depending on what you had for lunch)

I think the best thing to do is to call the distributor. there is a guy who has sold that stuff at OSH for the last 25 years (in his booth, you throw a plaster egg on a pile of this stuff). Can't remember his name but you should be able to get it from EAA. He would probably be the best one to give you advce about which ones to use-- probably medium and soft, but perhaps hard and soft or hard and medium. He might even send you some samples that you can try.

If you can sculpt and build an ENTIRE PLANE out of foam...why in the world would you pay someone else to sculpt your seats out of foam.

 

Spray on contact cement (3M Super 77 ??) to hook the foam together. and an electric bread knife to carve it up. If you do it yourself you can make it fit your own ass. If you're me you can get your mother-in-law to sew the covers. (I'm very fortunate)

 

For the base layer you could use those kneeling mats they sell at Home Depot. The mattress topper foam could be the top layer, but its pretty soft. (I have 2 of these toppers) THe middle layer I don't know...but I have a foam and fabric store 5 minutes away and they will know.

 

I do know one thing from alot of hours on a motorcycle seat - ASSuming the seat fits your ass...harder foam will give you more support than softer foam will and you'll stay comfortable longer. Seems counterintuitive but its true.

The seat foam, in our craft, serves a further purpose than just to make our posteriors comfortable. In our planes, we are actually sitting on the top of the bottom of the fuselage. Our spine is reclined at about 45 degrees.

In a "normal" aircraft, the seats generally provide some cushioning in the event of a crash (just talking about the vertical force) and change the delta V in a positive (spelled less spinal damaging way). We don't have that option (cozy-Ezs etc I think Velo has other seats). IMVHO, the selection of foam for the seat area which supports the part that goes over the fence last and the setback area supporting the small of the back should have a mandatory viscoelastic (temper-foam type) requirement. This material, not only is comfortable but has great capacity to reduce spinal injuries. I am convinced, without statistical data--Marc-- that I would have rammed the metal rods that I have in my back (placed some years prior to my crash in my d-fly) through my eyeballs and would have, at this point been a paraplegic, were it not for the temperfoam seat cushions. As it turned out, I walked away from the crash, without a scratch or even increased pain of any kind.

Temperfoam or similar substitute definitely recommended. 4 canards up;) ;)

But then, you could lower the engine, run the shaft between your legs (wasn't there a war II bird that had a mid mounted engine and a shaft running in a similar manner?) and put the prop on the nose.

I would suggest shielding the shaft tunnel well in case the shaft decides to disintegrate. Could be a ball (or lack thereof).

A tractor prop would, in fact make takeoffs shorter, especially on soft fields.

With the proper gear box, you could have both a tractor and pusher prop from the same engine. And then.......... :confused:

Greetings Darrell,

As a past dragonflyer and a current cozy builder, I think I can help you with youur Wife situation.

The dragonfly is a real enjoyable aircraft, however it lacks one thing. That is a back seat.

Now I don't mean that you may ever use your back seat for passengers, but it does carry a lot of luggage, if you travel with the aircraft. With our D-fly, when we traveled anywhere (more than for the afternoon), we would find ourselves UPSing our luggage to our destination. If my wife wanted to bring more than the allotted 4.5 lbs of luggage:rolleyes: there would be battle royals. If she won, there would be a rear loading problem, and if I won, --- well we won't talk about the consequences.

I look at my Cozy (actually an aerocanard) as a two place plane with loads of luggage room and room for our 89# goldendoodle to travel with us.

Good luck on your convincing.

Back in your original 1st post, you mentioned about "more room" in an Aerocanard...but a Cozy might be fine.

You probably know, but the back seats is the only place that an Aerocanard has a bit more room. Go to Jerry's great website for a picture which compares the two firewalls in what you are getting back there as additional room. The front seats are same as a Cozy, no more room there. It has been my observation that the transition from front to back design-wise is a lot smoother in a Czoy[sorry for the Russian spelling] than the fatter bootied Aerocanard...but that's just my opinion. Maybe a guy really wants his bird to sport a fatter heiny. YMMV.

Hope you get to sit in one soon.

I put the modified strakes in my Aerocanard. The above is correct about the back seats having the additional room.

Do the modified strakes create more room???? Well, yes and No.

The longeron is in the same place and thus the width of the cockpit is set. The strake modification is below this.

For the pilot, perhaps the concept of additional room gives one the idea that you can put your elbow in the space and manipulate the stick in this position. Although I have little time in a cozy/aerocanard, I have much time in a dragonfly, and it seems canard planes fly the same. I found that I needed wrist support to keep from over controlling, and thus don't think that, unless on A/P, using the elbow in the strake is a good idea (for me).

Now "the rest of the story"

The strake modification makes the front seat elbow room SEEM huge. You are not stuck in a tube. This psychological effect, in my opinion, is, if for no other reason, a great plus. If I had to do it again, I would absolutely incorporate this modification.

5 CANARDS UP:cool:

Just a hint with takeoffs, especially free castering steering variants:

Start on the downwind edge of the runway (if possible) make your initial run diagonally as much into the wind as possible so as to minimize the braking necessary to keep on the runway. When the rudders take command do what ever you like (of course restricted by the width of the runway). This will reduce your ground run.

I'm looking at ordering a Fein tool, what "kit" do you recommend... is the "start" kit plenty for our use or is one of the more expensive kit better in the long run?

Greetings SAF,

Go minimalistic here.

The most that I have used, for the aircraft is the circular blade (offset,imho is not really necessary). The circular blade will last practically forever (if you don't step on it (brittle)) and somewhat expensive (get replacements over the web). The other must is the sander attachment. I believe that they are available in velcro-type and adhesive.

The velcro is adequate, although it is plastic and sanding creates a lot of heat and melts the device a little so that they need to be replaced frequently (depending on the amount that you use them) they are about 7$ per. I think that the adhesive is made out of aluminum and does not suffer the same fate. However you have do deal with the less convenient adhesive factor.

Whichever you choose, get a box of the 40grit pads. (again internet for best prices) Great for scuffing glass for further bonding.

If you Plan to use the device for home, the other attachments are great.

If you get the variable speed, you will find that you will only use the fast speed.

Don't get the battery powered one.

Have a Fein time

Welcome Skip,

I am located in a suburb of Chicago,

If you (or others) are interested in seeing your plane's big brother project (Aerocanard SX)_ give me a PM and we can get together.

Whereyagoingtokeepitwhenitsdone?

I think the references to the "Finer Screen" are what I installed originally in the strake, not finger strainers. When I built my strakes, I used a fine mesh (40 per inch???) screen instead of the "Window Screen". I would caution anyone else using the finer screen to make sure you supply plenty of screen area, to allow fuel passage through a partially plugged screen. Also mounting the screen at an angle will allow any sloshing of fuel to help clean the screen.

 

The Airflow Performnce system I installed during my retrofit has a very fine mesh "Filter" that should protect the injectors and servo.

 

Thoughts - If there is ever enough crap in the fuel to plug both strake sump screens, this amount of crap would have easily plugged the carb filter and fouled the carb venturi. (or, clogged the fuel filter and fouled the fuel injectors)

 

Waiter

When I refer to screen, with the exception of the initial course screen at the strake outlet, (I am using finger strainers since they can be cleaned )I am referring to the screen element in a fuel filter. These are actually folded metal screens albeit it perforated, probably by a laser, through which fuel is pumped (or sucked).

HUH????

 

How does pulling through a restriction differ than pushing through a restriction in terms of pump longevity????

QUOTE]

Let me try to explain this to you .. Did I say anything about pushing vs pulling had anything to do with pump longevity????? No. I know that the finger strainers trap only the biger chunks. What I said was that the replacement filter screen was a much finer mesh than the original that came with the unit. So much so that the screen itself created enough restriction to hamper fuel flow to the point that the mechanical engine driven fuel pump could not produce enough pressure to run the engine at cruise power. Maybe you would rather filter after the electric pump but I think I will follow recommended proceedures and filter before it reaches the pump where debris can trash the $400 + pump. No thanks!

 

 

I guess I misinterpreted your statement of "Your just asking for early pump failure doing something like that" I was assuming a proper pre pump filter as well as a post pump finer filter. So much for assumptions:(

 

Now the question comes, since you replaced one screen with one of a finer mesh, is the screen that is proper for protecting the pump, I assume that was what you had originally (which I agree is necessary), of fine enough mesh to protect the fuel injection regulators and injection nozzles? (why the availability of the finer mesh??).

Andair is aviation stuff. The pump/filter we put in the Cozy is Airflow Performance. Yes we put finger strainers in the tanks but we followed directions the installing recommendations by the mfg and placed the filter pre-pump. The point I am trying to make is that for whatever reason, the replacement filter cartridge was finer than the original,,,,,so must finer to the point that it interfered with the fuel flow enough that the engine mounted diaphram pump could not draw enough fuel to generate enough pressure. Under no circumstances would I place the fuel filter after the electric pump. Your just asking for early pump failure doing something like that

HUH????

How does pulling through a restriction differ than pushing through a restriction in terms of pump longevity????

In the real world of fluid stuff, the fuel pressure is a measure of the pressure due to the restriction of the fluid flow between the pump and the orifice in the carb or fuel injector unit. That's a lot of back pressure. In a carb that may be only a couple of PSI, but in a fule injector it may be in excess of 25-45 PSI. IN fact, the pump puts out more pressure than this and the overage is returned back to the tanks, either by a relief valve at the pump or by a relief valve at the fuel rail (in most EFIs) The fuel pressure is a measure of what the relief valve allows through to the system (set primarily by the relief valve).

The pumps are designed to handle that (check the specs of the pump)(or at least they should be) If there is enough crap in a down stream filter to significantly increase that pressure there is something wrong"er" with the system. The pre-pump filter is designed to keep out particulate matter that would harm the pump. The tank filter screen, or finger screen keeps out the big chunks, the concept of which has been described before. The finer mesh filter is designed to keep the tiny-tiny chunks that have the ability to clog the FI system, or the injector nozzles with their tiny orifi.

Filter is pre-pump per mfg directions. Apparently these HP fuel injection pumps can be easily trashed by debris. Same scenario with my Andair set up. The Andair filter screws right into the IN side of the pump.

Which begs the question, "What size of particle is detrimental to the pump and might a coarser filter before the pump and a finer one after do well? Is that Andair part aviation or other??

Another thought came to me as I was getting ready to leave my office.

On which side of the pump have you placed your filter.

Most pumps push better than they pull. Is your filter, by any chance, between the tank and the pump??