X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [24.25.9.102] (HELO ms-smtp-03-eri0.southeast.rr.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.6) with ESMTP id 620609 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 15:04:16 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.102; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-065-188-083-049.carolina.res.rr.com [65.188.83.49]) by ms-smtp-03-eri0.southeast.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with SMTP id j6VJ3SY5021992 for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 15:03:30 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <001b01c59602$8d4fb7c0$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Incorrect Brake Parts Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 15:03:34 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01C595E1.05F1CC80" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C595E1.05F1CC80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Looks line they would both function, Todd. However, I understand your concern. When I replaced my failed brake = line with a stainless steel braided hose (from Van's aircraft) it turned = out to be a -4 line whereas my other gear has a -3 brake line. Both = brakes function and stop the aircraft, however, there is a distinctive = difference in the feel of the two brakes. The -3 side has almost a = rock-solid feel, the -4 side has a slight bit of give upon initial = depression - actually you have to go down on the toe just a bit more on = that side. My guess is that the greatly increased volume of the -4 line over the -3 = line causes more pedal movement on the -4 side to build up the same = amount of brake line pressure. I really don't like the two different = feels and have a new -3 line to replace the -4 line. My guess is your two different parts would probably push on the pad with = the same force - however, from what I have seen I would think that the = one with the recessed top would be likely to accumulate more crude that = the other one. On the other hand, there could be a good technical = reason for the recess - like perhaps less surface area to transmit heat = from pad to hydraulic fluid - now that's one I could relate to. That's = the only reasons I can think of why the difference. IN any case, I think I would prefer to have both the same - probably = doesn't matter which on you go with. Ed A ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Todd Bartrim=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2005 2:32 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Incorrect Brake Parts WARNING - non rotary question, but since the discussion on Ed's brakes = I figure some of you may know the answer. As some of you may remember, I had a brake fire a few months ago. I = ordered new parts but have been unable to find the time to install them. = The text below in blue is an excerpt from the e-mail I just sent to ACS. = The reason I'm asking the list is that I won't likely get a response = from ACS for a few days, but I have a few spare hours today in which I = was planning to go install these. When I first received the parts I opened the package to confirm the = correct contents. Most of the contents were in clear plastic bags = enabling me to see the contents, however the 2 brake pistons = (#062-00300) were in paper envelopes so I opened one to confirm the = correct part but didn't open the other until today. What I found is not = the same part even though the envelope is labelled with the correct #.=20 The attached picture shows the correct part on the right with the = incorrect part on the left. The incorrect part has all of the same = dimensions so will fit in the calliper however the recessed face on the = contact surface has less surface area in which to apply pressure to the = brake pad. Is this a new design for this part or simply an incorrect part? If = it is simply a redesign of an existing part then I'll use it however I'd = prefer to have the same for both sides. If it is an incorrect part then = please send me the correct part. Please advise. If anybody on this list has any knowledge that this part is = acceptable for use or not, I'd like to hear it as I likely won't have = another opportunity to go to the airport to do these repairs for another = few weeks, but I also don't want to waste any time doing this repair if = I would have to change it again later as I still have way too much work = around here. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks. Todd Bartrim RV9Endurance 13B Turbo Rotary C-FSTB http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm "The world will always have a place for those that bring = hard work and determination to the things they do." -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C595E1.05F1CC80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Looks line they would both function, = Todd.
 
However, I understand your concern.  When I = replaced=20 my failed brake line with a stainless steel braided hose (from Van's = aircraft)=20 it turned out to be a -4 line whereas my other gear has a -3 brake = line. =20 Both brakes function and stop the aircraft, however, there is a = distinctive=20 difference in the feel of the two brakes.  The -3 side has almost a = rock-solid feel, the -4 side has a slight bit of give upon initial = depression -=20 actually you have to go down on the toe just a bit more on that=20 side.
 
My guess is that the greatly increased volume of = the -4=20 line over the -3 line causes more pedal movement on the -4 side to build = up the=20 same amount of brake line pressure.  I really don't like the two = different=20 feels and have a new -3 line to replace the -4 line.
 
My guess is your two different parts would = probably push=20 on the pad with the same force - however, from what I have seen I would = think=20 that the one with the recessed top would be likely to accumulate more = crude that=20 the other one.   On the other hand, there could be a good = technical=20 reason for the recess - like perhaps less surface area to transmit = heat=20 from pad to hydraulic fluid - now that's one I could relate = to. =20 That's the only reasons I can think of why the difference.
 
IN any case, I think I would prefer to have both = the same=20 - probably doesn't matter which on you go with.
 
Ed A
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Todd = Bartrim=20
Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2005 = 2:32 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Incorrect = Brake=20 Parts

WARNING - non rotary question, but since = the=20 discussion on Ed's brakes I figure some of you may know the=20 answer.
As some of you may remember, I had a brake = fire a few=20 months ago. I ordered new parts but have been unable to find the time = to=20 install them. The text below in blue is an excerpt from the e-mail I = just sent=20 to ACS. The reason I'm asking the list is that I won't likely get a = response=20 from ACS for a few days, but I have a few spare hours today in which I = was=20 planning to go install these.
 
 When I first received the parts I opened the package = to confirm=20 the correct contents. Most of the contents were in clear plastic bags = enabling=20 me to see the contents, however the 2 brake pistons (#062-00300) were = in paper=20 envelopes so I opened one to confirm the correct part but didn't open = the=20 other until today. What I found is not the same part even though the = envelope=20 is labelled with the correct #.
    The attached picture shows the correct = part on the=20 right with the incorrect part on the left. The incorrect part has all = of the=20 same dimensions so will fit in the calliper however the recessed face = on the=20 contact surface has less surface area in which to apply pressure to = the brake=20 pad.
   =20 Is this a new design for this part or = simply an=20 incorrect part? If it is simply a redesign of an existing part then = I'll use=20 it however I'd prefer to have the same for both sides. If it is an = incorrect=20 part then please send me the correct part. Please=20 advise.
 
   =20 If anybody on this list has any knowledge that this part is acceptable = for use=20 or not, I'd like to hear it as I likely won't have another opportunity = to go=20 to the airport to do these repairs for another few weeks, but I also = don't=20 want to waste any time doing this repair if I would have to change it = again=20 later as I still have way too much work around = here.
   =20 Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks.
 
Todd Bartrim
 
RV9Endurance
13B Turbo Rotary
C-FSTB
http://www3.telus.= net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
 
          &nbs= p; =20 "The world will always have a place for those that bring hard work and = determination to the things they do."
 

>>  Homepage: =20 http://www.flyrotary.com/
>>  Archive:  =20 = http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C595E1.05F1CC80--