Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Spherical rod ends in the rotor control system.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    gyrojake, maybe Heim and Aurora should save themselves the trouble of mfg. and just buy theirs from QS Components?

    As I've said before; " I am not saying they are the best thing to use on your machine, or any other, I like them and have performed well for me over the years."
    I could give a rats ass about what companies should do, but hey use what you feel is best for you.
    Another thing you must understand about me, I do not justify my reasoning to anyone, because I am the one who has to be satisfied with what I fly, MAIN reason I do not own an R.A.F.
    Hahahahaha !! I'm sure Chuck and Vance understand way more than you could conceive and yet you wanna teach them. Hahahahaha !! Damn, my side hurts from laughing Ouch.
    In reality you should be learning not debating.
    There is always room for understanding, such as, my Volkswagen does the same thing as my Benz, (with a bit less style).
    I could own four Volkswagens for the price of the Benz, but the Volkswagen gets the job done.
    Kolibri, why don't you test every type of rod end and give us your evaluation so we could use the RIGHT product, Thank you in advance, we would appreciate that service.
    Life,The leading cause of Death

    Live and Learn--OR--Die and be an example

    321.252.7705

    Comment


    • #47
      Here's a site I just discovered yesterday that is a goldmine for new builders. Covers a lot of ground with hundreds of instructional videos. Very nicely done. Among them are a few segments on Rod End installation that goes into using large area washers, material deformation, etc. Just enter Rod End into the search box. My list of bookmarked sites is growing exponentially.
      When you're riveting on your aircraft there's probably going to come a time when you get a rivet that doesn't quite set the way you want it. Joe Norris, EAA's flight training manager, demonstrates the proper way to drill out an offending rivet.

      Comment


      • #48
        Radial-Axial_Load_Ratings.pdf

        Might be of value.
        Attached Files
        Jay Gunderson

        "Wise men talk because they have something to say;
        fools talk because they have to say something."

        Plato

        Comment


        • #49
          Good morning Jay,
          the link didn't work for me.
          Regards, Vance Breese Gyroplane CFI http://www.breeseaircraft.com/

          Comment


          • #50
            Vance, if you click on the lower attached files, you can open file to see.
            Jay Gunderson

            "Wise men talk because they have something to say;
            fools talk because they have to say something."

            Plato

            Comment


            • #51
              Thank you Jay. That is nicely expressed.
              Regards, Vance Breese Gyroplane CFI http://www.breeseaircraft.com/

              Comment


              • #52
                By the way, QA1, great web site for rod ends, etc.
                Jay Gunderson

                "Wise men talk because they have something to say;
                fools talk because they have to say something."

                Plato

                Comment


                • #53
                  First, they are made of quality material
                  gyrojake, such as what exactly? (As if Heims/Auroras is not?)
                  Also, you've not quoted any strength data, radial or axial.
                  And, you've not mentioned any coating for corrosion resistance.


                  They do not have a plastic lined race, nor do they have a pressed insert.
                  The lip clearance is very tight but still free to move which lets the lip clean dirt and grime from the ball.
                  They forge the outside race to match the ball so it is like a one piece construction.
                  Nothing unique about any of that.

                  The head is also narrow and allows more movement before binding from misalignment.
                  So are Heims and Auroras, if one wants more than the typical 6-8deg. Auroras offer up to 22deg.

                  Since I am uneducated, a quality component can make up for my ignorance.
                  A $3.85 rod end for use in a gyro control system is your notion of a "quality component"?
                  What is to you a sucky component?


                  Kolibri, why don't you test every type of rod end and give us your evaluation so we could use the RIGHT product,
                  Thank you in advance, we would appreciate that service.
                  What would be the point?
                  The <$4 rod end crowd wouldn't pay more, and those who insist on aircraft-grade parts won't stoop for a "bargain".



                  _____________
                  Vance's friend example of an aircraft grade control rod end failing (and so soon after installation) is quite the exception
                  amongst RAFs flying with such parts. In fact, it's the only time I've heard of any such failure. Obviously, the owner allowed
                  even the new rod end (I wonder where it was) to suffer past misalignment/binding, and it broke. (And who can say, the guy
                  could have installed the new rod end even more poorly than the merely bent RAF rod end had been?)


                  He showed me the RAF spherical rod end that he replaced and it showed signs of bending.
                  In my opinion if it had been an aviation quality spherical rod end it would have broken before bending that much.
                  Perhaps. Perhaps not. Without an engineering test-to-destruction (something Vance rhetorically demanded of me to corroborate
                  my "junk" claim), we'll never really know. Only one instance of "
                  the RAF rod end merely bent, but the aircraft quality part replacement broke"
                  is not compelling, and it's certainly insufficient to counter the opinion of many/most RAF owners who believe in Heims.

                  Regarding the breakability vs. bendability aspect of AN hardware, in the wreckage of RAF2000 N5002E I saw several AN bolts
                  which were grossly bent yet didn't break. Anecdotal evidence often goes both ways.

                  What can be said with assurance is that RAF owners who have correctly installed non-binding Heims and Auroras
                  control rod ends don't suffer parts breakage. We'd have heard about such long ago if they did.


                  I won't try to answer a question about something you made up.
                  Actually, Vance, it's you who has conjured up a new qualitative category for control rod ends, i.e., something "good" (or "quality") yet
                  not actually aircraft-grade (which is roughly SAE Grade 5) because it will break more easily than softer steel.

                  You've previously intoned that if you had an RAF you'd replace its OEM rod ends. Well, with what?
                  What is this "Goldilocks-not-too-soft-and-not-too-hard" material?


                  I have been unsuccessful at communicating with you
                  No, I understand you perfectly. I just don't agree with you about using less-than-aircraft-grade control rod ends.
                  I never urged that people buy "the most expensive" rods ends, but those of higher quality than $2 <Grade 0.

                  You've not even shown the intellectual honesty to concur with what many RAF owners have learned since at least 2004,
                  what multiple metallurgical tests have shown: that the old RAF rod ends are indeed junk which have broken even within
                  their range of misalignment angle. Jim Mayfield broke one by simply loosening the jam nut.

                  When I challenged you about this, on
                  02-08-2018, 11:02 AM:

                  In short, Vance, I question your commitment to engineering excellence and quality maintenance in gyros.
                  You don't take unequivocal stands against lousy parts or design, while berating me for doing so.
                  You could have at least blandly agreed with me about eddie's control rod ends.
                  In this regard, I think you set a poor example to your students and the forum's readers.
                  . . . you began this new thread within 3 hours (
                  02-08-2018, 01:55 PM), continuing to needlessly muddy the waters about control rod end quality.
                  Besides echoing your 3-year-old advice on non-binding installation, you offer nothing actionable about rod end choice, and refuse to condemn the OEM RAF parts.


                  _______
                  Regarding rod end installation, I like a minimum of 1.5-2 diameters of length threaded into the piece, and no more than .5 diameter
                  of shank exposed above the jam nut. Do not overtorque the jam nut, as its main purpose is to secure the rod end at a desired
                  rotational position vs. provide massive clamping force.

                  At the <horrors!> risk of being yet again accused of "
                  religious histrionics" I will reiterate the wisdom of RAF owners with OEM rod ends
                  removing at least the bottom three for careful inspection. They will likely find internal shank corrosion, something a preflight (or even
                  an annual) inspection cannot see. (If anyone actually spots a cracked rod end, I'll happily accept a case of Sam Adams as thanks, lol.)

                  While you're there, have a keen look at the lower control yoke arms/tubes for any cracks. I replaced all my AN4 hardware (<$20),
                  as much is riding on those 1/4" bolts. They're all drilled/cotter pinned.


                  ______
                  Lastly, this thread and others have clarified for me something philosophically interesting within the gyro community.
                  eddie has repeatedly alluded to it, his latest iteration being "
                  the most expensive is not always the fix".
                  Many gyronauts seem to almost revel in getting by for the lowest price, and they point to their undead selves as "proof" that such economy works.

                  Coming into gyros from the certified FW world, I'm not accustomed to such thinking. With such an egocentric notion of quality,
                  hence my surprise that my RAF gyro was so poorly designed and made, and brokered by a CFI so apathetic and unscrupulous that his
                  very next sale actually killed two people. In my world, such a deplorable cast of characters would have had a "blanket party" many years ago.

                  I haven't excessive time or desire to combat a philosophy averse to inherent quality. Taco Bell patrons smirk at organic health food stores.

                  eddie's jeering reminds me of that guy driving on a nearly flat tire, and when you try to pantomime him a warning he flips you the bird.

                  E-AB is a fine libertarian notion, and I'm all for wise experimentation and tinkering. While there are occasionally quality parts at near-bargain prices,
                  such is not generally how Life works. Although higher expense does not always betoken higher quality, that's usually the way to bet.

                  My gyro community experience is recent and limited, but so far I've met only one mfg. with the ethos and dedication I expect, who uses
                  4130 and 6061-T6 and aircraft-grade parts. I look forward to owning one of his new machines this year. I feel fortunate and blessed to have
                  survived my learning curve, and if my subsequent championing of robust gyros annoys anyone, oh, well.

                  I'd wager that many more gyro crashes have occurred from sloppy maintenance and cheap-ass parts than what is known, simply because a
                  wrecked and incinerated tangle cannot be easily analyzed.

                  Quality In -- Quality Out.
                  Garbage In -- Garbage Out.

                  Certainly, there's a continuum involved, and Pareto's Law comes into play, but in aviation you don't want to be on the wrong side of the quality:price curve.
                  I do think that many would benefit from some very sober reflection on this matter.

                  "
                  Let those with ears, hear."

                  Safe flying,
                  Kolibri

                  PP - ASEL complex (Piper 180, C206, RV-7A), SP - Gyro (Calidus, RAF, SC2), soloed in gliders; checkride soon

                  Wasn't happy with my RAF's pitch instability, so I installed a Boyer H-Stab to my great satisfaction!

                  "
                  When an honest but mistaken man learns of his error, he either ceases to be mistaken -- or he ceases to be honest."

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Kolibri View Post
                    gyrojake, such as what exactly? (As if Heims/Auroras is not?)
                    Also, you've not quoted any strength data, radial or axial.
                    And, you've not mentioned any coating for corrosion resistance.



                    Nothing unique about any of that.


                    So are Heims and Auroras, if one wants more than the typical 6-8deg. Auroras offer up to 22deg.


                    A $3.85 rod end for use in a gyro control system is your notion of a "quality component"?
                    What is to you a sucky component?



                    What would be the point?
                    The <$4 rod end crowd wouldn't pay more, and those who insist on aircraft-grade parts won't stoop for a "bargain".



                    _____________
                    Vance's friend example of an aircraft grade control rod end failing (and so soon after installation) is quite the exception
                    amongst RAFs flying with such parts. In fact, it's the only time I've heard of any such failure. Obviously, the owner allowed
                    even the new rod end (I wonder where it was) to suffer past misalignment/binding, and it broke. (And who can say, the guy
                    could have installed the new rod end even more poorly than the merely bent RAF rod end had been?)


                    Perhaps. Perhaps not. Without an engineering test-to-destruction (something Vance rhetorically demanded of me to corroborate
                    my "junk" claim), we'll never really know. Only one instance of "
                    the RAF rod end merely bent, but the aircraft quality part replacement broke"
                    is not compelling, and it's certainly insufficient to counter the opinion of many/most RAF owners who believe in Heims.

                    Regarding the breakability vs. bendability aspect of AN hardware, in the wreckage of RAF2000 N5002E I saw several AN bolts
                    which were grossly bent yet didn't break. Anecdotal evidence often goes both ways.

                    What can be said with assurance is that RAF owners who have correctly installed non-binding Heims and Auroras
                    control rod ends don't suffer parts breakage. We'd have heard about such long ago if they did.


                    Actually, Vance, it's you who has conjured up a new qualitative category for control rod ends, i.e., something "good" (or "quality") yet
                    not actually aircraft-grade (which is roughly SAE Grade 5) because it will break more easily than softer steel.

                    You've previously intoned that if you had an RAF you'd replace its OEM rod ends. Well, with what?
                    What is this "Goldilocks-not-too-soft-and-not-too-hard" material?


                    No, I understand you perfectly. I just don't agree with you about using less-than-aircraft-grade control rod ends.
                    I never urged that people buy "the most expensive" rods ends, but those of higher quality than $2 <Grade 0.

                    You've not even shown the intellectual honesty to concur with what many RAF owners have learned since at least 2004,
                    what multiple metallurgical tests have shown: that the old RAF rod ends are indeed junk which have broken even within
                    their range of misalignment angle. Jim Mayfield broke one by simply loosening the jam nut.

                    When I challenged you about this, on
                    02-08-2018, 11:02 AM:



                    . . . you began this new thread within 3 hours (
                    02-08-2018, 01:55 PM), continuing to needlessly muddy the waters about control rod end quality.
                    Besides echoing your 3-year-old advice on non-binding installation, you offer nothing actionable about rod end choice, and refuse to condemn the OEM RAF parts.


                    _______
                    Regarding rod end installation, I like a minimum of 1.5-2 diameters of length threaded into the piece, and no more than .5 diameter
                    of shank exposed above the jam nut. Do not overtorque the jam nut, as its main purpose is to secure the rod end at a desired
                    rotational position vs. provide massive clamping force.

                    At the <horrors!> risk of being yet again accused of "
                    religious histrionics" I will reiterate the wisdom of RAF owners with OEM rod ends
                    removing at least the bottom three for careful inspection. They will likely find internal shank corrosion, something a preflight (or even
                    an annual) inspection cannot see. (If anyone actually spots a cracked rod end, I'll happily accept a case of Sam Adams as thanks, lol.)

                    While you're there, have a keen look at the lower control yoke arms/tubes for any cracks. I replaced all my AN4 hardware (<$20),
                    as much is riding on those 1/4" bolts. They're all drilled/cotter pinned.


                    ______
                    Lastly, this thread and others have clarified for me something philosophically interesting within the gyro community.
                    eddie has repeatedly alluded to it, his latest iteration being "
                    the most expensive is not always the fix".
                    Many gyronauts seem to almost revel in getting by for the lowest price, and they point to their undead selves as "proof" that such economy works.

                    Coming into gyros from the certified FW world, I'm not accustomed to such thinking. With such an egocentric notion of quality,
                    hence my surprise that my RAF gyro was so poorly designed and made, and brokered by a CFI so apathetic and unscrupulous that his
                    very next sale actually killed two people. In my world, such a deplorable cast of characters would have had a "blanket party" many years ago.

                    I haven't excessive time or desire to combat a philosophy averse to inherent quality. Taco Bell patrons smirk at organic health food stores.

                    eddie's jeering reminds me of that guy driving on a nearly flat tire, and when you try to pantomime him a warning he flips you the bird.

                    E-AB is a fine libertarian notion, and I'm all for wise experimentation and tinkering. While there are occasionally quality parts at near-bargain prices,
                    such is not generally how Life works. Although higher expense does not always betoken higher quality, that's usually the way to bet.

                    My gyro community experience is recent and limited, but so far I've met only one mfg. with the ethos and dedication I expect, who uses
                    4130 and 6061-T6 and aircraft-grade parts. I look forward to owning one of his new machines this year. I feel fortunate and blessed to have
                    survived my learning curve, and if my subsequent championing of robust gyros annoys anyone, oh, well.

                    I'd wager that many more gyro crashes have occurred from sloppy maintenance and cheap-ass parts than what is known, simply because a
                    wrecked and incinerated tangle cannot be easily analyzed.

                    Quality In -- Quality Out.
                    Garbage In -- Garbage Out.

                    Certainly, there's a continuum involved, and Pareto's Law comes into play, but in aviation you don't want to be on the wrong side of the quality:price curve.
                    I do think that many would benefit from some very sober reflection on this matter.

                    "
                    Let those with ears, hear."

                    Safe flying,
                    Kolibri
                    Why is it that you ask a question and then try to belittle people with a come back.
                    I'll tell you why.
                    Because your SOFA KING STUPID, so stupid you don't understand.
                    I will never engage with your post or questions.
                    Life is to short to waist on idiots.
                    Safe flying and good luck in the future
                    Life,The leading cause of Death

                    Live and Learn--OR--Die and be an example

                    321.252.7705

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Because your SOFA KING STUPID, so stupid you don't understand.
                      Life is to short to waist on idiots.
                      I install aircraft-grade parts, and spell correctly, yet am nonetheless "stupid".
                      OK, got it.


                      Click image for larger version

Name:	GrammarMugs.png
Views:	1
Size:	130.0 KB
ID:	1131143


                      PP - ASEL complex (Piper 180, C206, RV-7A), SP - Gyro (Calidus, RAF, SC2), soloed in gliders; checkride soon

                      Wasn't happy with my RAF's pitch instability, so I installed a Boyer H-Stab to my great satisfaction!

                      "
                      When an honest but mistaken man learns of his error, he either ceases to be mistaken -- or he ceases to be honest."

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Jake, the hummingbird is a TROLL, just ignore him.

                        Best Regards,
                        Eddie Sigman,Polvadera,nm
                        (575) 835-4921

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by eddie View Post
                          Jake, the hummingbird is a TROLL, just ignore him.
                          Roger that :)
                          Life,The leading cause of Death

                          Live and Learn--OR--Die and be an example

                          321.252.7705

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Earlier this week I ran my RAF cyclic through its full range of motion, carefully inspecting for any binding all
                            control rod ends (especially the lower pair on the control yoke). At all "4 corners" of the cyclic (especially aft-right and aft-left),
                            all 4 push tubes must have some swiveling freedom available. If they do not, then they're binding up and you should readjust
                            them before flight. (Every pre-flight inspection should confirm this, and a singleton pilot can do so on his own.)

                            All was in order, but I do have some supplementary comments.



                            the upper pair on the gimbal arm:
                            currently: Aurora CM-6 (22 -- 5,068 lbs -- $9.33).
                            With the Sport Copter arm, the previous Heim HM-6M housings were too wide, so I had to replace them during my Jan 2016 installation.
                            The Aurora CM-6 are their "Economy" class part, but it was at the time all I could immediately acquire and Jim Vanek deemed them acceptable.
                            I consider the CM-6 the best overall bargain value for a mere $9, and without any significantly risky tradeoff of quality/strength for the price.

                            However, I will feel more comfortable replacing them for stronger rod ends, such as the Aurora CAM-6 (22 -- 9,088 lbs -- $13.11),
                            and relegating the CM-6 to the middle at the scissors.



                            the middle two pair on the mast scissors:
                            currently: Heim HM-6M (6 -- 4,000 lbs -- $30).
                            These positions have the least misalignment required, but one must nonetheless washer them away from the scissors (requiring a longer bolt).
                            One washer per side of the spherical ball will provide about .040" of housing-scissor clearance from side-to-side. This is sufficient, though not generous, so I will be relocating the upper Aurora CM-6 pair to the middle. (The Heims will be swap out OEM RAF landing axle rod ends.)

                            While you're at the scissors, remove/inspect the AN6-57 bolt for galling and corrosion. Inspect the scissors for any cracking.
                            Replace any worn nylon washers. Relube the stack with anti-seize paste. The bolt should be mounted with the nut on the rear of the mast, not in front.



                            the lower pair on the control yoke:
                            currently: Heim HM-6M (6 -- 4,000 lbs -- $30).
                            For the RAF lower pairs, I now believe it prudent to choose greater-than 6 of misalignment angle for extra mechanical margin.
                            (While 6 will suffice there, they must be very carefully adjusted to prevent binding at extreme cyclic angles.) Although the
                            12 Aurora AM-6 is probably an adequate improvement, there are many 22 Aurora choices of at least 5,000 lbs radial static strength.
                            It would be difficult to maladjust a 22 control rod end, even for a newbie. The $9 Aurora CM-6 is OK, but their $13 CAM-6 is nearly twice as strong.

                            The Aurora XAM and HXAM rod ends are strongest of all, but have a 7/16-20 shank which is not applicable to RAF OEM push tubes.
                            Those who wish to install more robust tubes of .120" wall 6061-T6 could have new inserts made for the XAM/HXAM rod ends.

                            Below is a screenshot from my revised pdf on RAF control rod end choices.

                            Click image for larger version  Name:	RAF .375_ rod ends.png Views:	1 Size:	77.9 KB ID:	1131172





                            INSTALLATION TIPS:
                            When swapping out rod ends, before removing the old ones you should mic out the distance between the eye-centers
                            and the push tube. Notate the values with a Sharpie on the tube ends.

                            Sparingly lube the spherical ball with something light, such as TriLube or a very thin grease.

                            Steel shank rod ends used in aluminum threaded push-tube inserts require some anti-seize paste to prevent galling.
                            Remove any paste from the exposed shank where the jam nut will go.

                            When seeking the proper rotational position of each rod end, use full aft-left/right cyclic to indicate where the misalignment boundaries are.
                            Remember, each pair of a tube's rod ends are adjusted in relationship to each other, throughout the entire cyclic range. When tightening the jam nut,
                            simultaneously retain the rod end, and do not overtorque.

                            Balance each tube's pair of shank insertions so that exposed threads are roughly equal and not in excess of .5 diameters.



                            CONCLUSIONS:
                            What I like about the Heim HM-6M is the quality and magnetic particle inspection, but I wish they had a higher misalignment angle
                            than just 6. They are sufficiently strong at 4,000 lbs., but not hugely so. They can be adjusted to fit reliably in the RAF control system,
                            but there is admittedly little margin. Thus, they're probably not the ideal lower control rod ends for the RAF newbie.

                            If RAF owners merely swapped out OEM junk 3/8 rod ends for eight Aurora CM-6 (a mere $74), they would have new and stronger parts
                            with zero binding risk (assuming a non-idiotic installation). However, for another $4@, they could have nearly twice the strength with the CAM-6 rod ends.

                            I consider any of these Auroras, when competently installed and diligently maintained, to be RAF-lifetime parts.
                            I see no reason to routinely replace them at RAF's designated 250 hours (which, however, was relevant for their junk OEM rod ends).

                            Regards, Kolibri
                            Last edited by Kolibri; 03-08-2018, 02:59 PM.
                            PP - ASEL complex (Piper 180, C206, RV-7A), SP - Gyro (Calidus, RAF, SC2), soloed in gliders; checkride soon

                            Wasn't happy with my RAF's pitch instability, so I installed a Boyer H-Stab to my great satisfaction!

                            "
                            When an honest but mistaken man learns of his error, he either ceases to be mistaken -- or he ceases to be honest."

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X