X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-PolluStop: No license found, only first 5 messages were scanned Return-Path: Received: from ms-smtp-03.southeast.rr.com ([24.25.9.102] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.1) with ESMTP id 1211834 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 07:31:32 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.102; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-024-074-111-186.carolina.res.rr.com [24.74.111.186]) by ms-smtp-03.southeast.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k5TBUkBG012737 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 07:30:47 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <002101c69b6f$796f4bd0$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: damage report Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 07:30:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001E_01C69B4D.F21D4770" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C69B4D.F21D4770 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Joe, from my memory banks, I believe Lynn Hanover suggested 3/16" = (0.1875) was the maximum of what might be considered an acceptable seal. = Personally, I would not put a rotor back into my engine that was very = near the limit. Had one experience with that already - not interested = in a repeat. Ed ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Joe Hull=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 12:47 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: damage report > Putting in the old seal by its end, the most play I can find is=20 >1/32" at the other end of the seal. =20 >Am I correct to assume that is good?=20 =20 I know someone here (Lynn?) gave this procedure as a good way to check = the apex seal slot tolerance. I've spent the last hour looking through = emails and can't find it. I can't remember the distance either. My slots = are more like .10" movement on the end. =20 Joe Hull Cozy Mk-IV #991 (In Phase1 Flight Test - 40.2 hrs flown)=20 Redmond (Seattle), Washington ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C69B4D.F21D4770 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Joe, from my memory banks, I believe Lynn = Hanover=20 suggested 3/16" (0.1875) was the maximum of what might be considered an=20 acceptable seal.  Personally, I would not put a rotor back into my = engine=20 that was very near the limit.  Had one experience with that = already -=20 not interested in a repeat.
 
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Joe Hull=20
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 = 12:47=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: damage = report

> Putting in the old seal by its end, the = most play=20 I can find is

>1/32" at the other end of the = seal. =20

>Am I correct to assume that is good?=20

 

I know someone here (Lynn?) gave this procedure as a = good way to=20 check the apex seal slot tolerance. I=92ve spent the last hour looking = through=20 emails and can=92t find it. I can=92t remember the distance either. My = slots are=20 more like .10=94 movement on the end.

 

Joe = Hull

Cozy Mk-IV #991 (In Phase1 = Flight Test=20 - 40.2 hrs flown)

Redmond (Seattle), Washington

------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C69B4D.F21D4770--