Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:26:54 -0600 From: "Joseph H. Hart IV" Subject: COZY: Fuselage Bottom 3rd Ply BID The Chapter 6 FAQ states that the specifics regarding the 3rd ply of BID on the fuselage bottom are still being researched. How have the rest of you done it? Does the layup go all the way to F-22 or does it end somewhere farther aft? What orientation is the BID? Can we conserve materials by aligning it at 90 degrees rather than the usual 45 degrees? Thank you in advance for you wisdom. -- Jody Hart New Orleans, LA Cozy Mark IV plans no. 648 Chapter 5, see latest progress at: home.gs.verio.net/~jodyhart/home.html N359JH (reserved) Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 08:15 -0600 (CST) From: Michael Pollock Subject: Re: COZY: Fuselage Bottom 3rd Ply BID Jody Hart wrote: >The Chapter 6 FAQ states that the specifics regarding the 3rd ply of >BID on the fuselage bottom >are still being researched. How have the rest of you done it? Does the >layup go all the way to F-22 or does it end somewhere farther aft? What >orientation is the BID? Can we conserve materials by aligning it at 90 Jody, I installed my 3rd layer of bid just in front of the front seat bulkhead where the weight will be concentrated when stepping into the fuselage and only up to the instrument panel. If this layer of bid is being used for strength of the fuselage bottom when stepping in, the oreintation of the bid for the last layer could be at 90 degrees to save materials. If another builder has done this differently, please let me know? Michael.Pollock@mci.com Flying Velocity N173DT Building Cozy MKIV #643 From: Fritzx2@aol.com Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 13:32:51 EST Subject: Re: COZY: Fuselage Bottom 3rd Ply BID Jody asks and Michael Pollock replies: >>The Chapter 6 FAQ states that the specifics regarding the 3rd ply of >>BID on the fuselage bottom >>are still being researched. How have the rest of you done it? Does the >>layup go all the way to F-22 or does it end somewhere farther aft? What >>orientation is the BID? Can we conserve materials by aligning it at 90 >Jody, >I installed my 3rd layer of bid just in front of the front seat bulkhead >where the weight will be concentrated when stepping into the fuselage >and only up to the instrument panel. If this layer of bid is being >used for strength of the fuselage bottom when stepping in, the >oreintation of the bid for the last layer could be at 90 degrees to >save materials. >If another builder has done this differently, please let me know? >Michael Pollock I placed the third layer of BID on the inside of the fuse bottom from the place where the front seatback joins the floor back to just aft of the front support of the back seat bottoms. I don't have the plans in front of me here but that was my interpretation of the plans/newsletters at the time. Before that, I made the Clark foam doubler over the air landing brake extent aft an inch or so further since the cutout of the brake makes for a thin foam core section by the time all is said and done. Just turn off the room lights and shine a bright light at the aft air brake cutout and you'll see. With builder tolerances, it was the aft end of the air brake foam doubler that could be too thin and not support the weight of someone standing in the back over this spot especially on one foot when entering or exiting. The front seat bottoms have two ribs each that distribute the weight so I didn't add any extra BID there. John Fritz fritzx2@aol.com Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 14:40:17 -0600 From: Terry Pierce Subject: Re: COZY: Fuselage Bottom 3rd Ply BID When stepping into the front seat you will step on to the front seat bottom. The extra ply of BID needs to be in place for someone stepping into the the back seat. I placed my extra ply behind the pilots seat where I thought someone would step climbing from the front seat to the rear seat. Remember that they will be staying too the left side of the aircraft because there won't be much headroom on the right side due to the canopy. -- Terry Pierce <>< mailto:tpierce@ghg.net Cozy Mark IV #600 Michael Pollock wrote: > > I installed my 3rd layer of bid just in front of the front seat bulkhead > where the weight will be concentrated when stepping into the fuselage > and only up to the instrument panel. If this layer of bid is being > used for strength of the fuselage bottom when stepping in, the > oreintation of the bid for the last layer could be at 90 degrees to > save materials. > > If another builder has done this differently, please let me know? > > > Michael.Pollock@mci.com > Flying Velocity N173DT > Building Cozy MKIV #643 Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 14:55 -0600 (CST) From: Michael Pollock Subject: Re: COZY: Fuselage Bottom 3rd Ply BID Since several different locations on installing the 3rd layer of bid have been used, I have sent Nat a note asking him what is correct. Michael.Pollock@mci.com Flying Velocity N173DT Building Cozy MKIV #643 Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 22:17:45 -0500 From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: Re: COZY: Fuselage Bottom 3rd Ply BID I hope I'm not too late on this thread. I had the same question about the 3rd ply of BID, so I asked Nat. He response was that the 3rd layer of BID was meant more to provide protection from people's feet rather than add strength. Yes, the 3rd layer adds strength, but two plies in good enough in the strength department. But scuff marks and abrasions from people's shoes when getting in and out could weaken the floor if the 3rd ply wasn't there. The third layer could be any size and direction just as long as it gets put where people will be stepping in and out of the back seat area. I had almost forgotten to add my 3rd ply, so I just rolled out the BID from left to right. So my 3rd ply is 38 inches from the forward landing gear bulkhead to just behind the seatback. Wayne Hicks Cozy IV #678 Chapter 9 Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 00:46:44 -0500 From: Bulent Aliev Subject: Re: COZY: Fuselage Bottom 3rd Ply BID How about in locations that can be subjected to this kind of crushing loads, (heels and elbows) using higher density foam. Some Divinicel foams are as hard as plywood. This way will avoid building up the area with glass and resin? cdenk@ix.netcom.com wrote: > I think the 3rd (or more) plys is for local concentrated (A heel or other small highly loaded) > loads. The same goes for for the strake tops, where if you have a front hinged canopy both sides are > needed. On the strake tops 3 plys is marginal. I have several slight 2 inch diameter depressions > from heel of the hand or something. With insufficient surface strength to spread the load, the foam > underneath simply crushes. From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 17:16:00 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: COZY: Fuselage Bottom 3rd Ply BID Bulent wrote <(heels and elbows) using higher density foam> Difficulty of matching thickness of different foams, more weight. There are only a few places where this type of loading occurs. From: "Oreste Muccilli" Subject: COZY: Ch 6, valve bracket Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 19:44:59 +0100
Hi everybody.
For reasons of job I'm 3 months that I don't have  worked to the construction. I have restarted from a few days. 
If someone have ended the chapter 6,  I desire to know, which is the purpose of the 4 holes of 5/16? (Ch6, page 4 fig. 17). 
I suppose that the holes are necessary to get retention in the flox. 
In archive I have not found the answer, therefore I suppose that my question is banal. 
Thanks for your patience. 
 
Oreste Muccilli 
    ITALY
 From ???@??? Sat Jan 16 17:56:14 1999 Return-Path: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@betaweb.com [206.43.209.18]) by acestes-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with ESMTP id PAA07079 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 15:28:12 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA24440 for cozy_builders-list; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 15:28:36 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f Received: from mta3-svc.virgin.net (mta3-gui.server.ntli.net [194.168.54.144]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA24433 for ; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 15:28:31 -0500 Received: from paulkunt ([212.250.194.20]) by mta3-svc.virgin.net (InterMail v4.00.03.01 201-229-104-101) with SMTP id <19990116202252.RDPO4107.mta3-svc@paulkunt>; Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:22:52 +0000 Message-ID: <36A0F4D7.77D6@virgin.net> Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:21:43 +0000 From: Paul Kuntz X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Oreste Muccilli CC: cozy_builders@canard.com Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6, valve bracket References: <003901be4180$82892d40$837946c1@net-point.net-point.it> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Paul Kuntz X-UIDL: c86aba36d66b03aa519be9ce0264ea07 Oreste Muccilli wrote: > If someone have ended the chapter 6, I desire to know, which is the > purpose of the 4 holes of 5/16? (Ch6, page 4 fig. 17). > I suppose that the holes are necessary to get retention in the flox. Oreste, Yes, the holes are there to ensure a strong attachment between the valve mounting bracket and the seat back bulkhead. Best wishes for success with your project. Paul Kuntz Cozy MKIV England From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: COZY: 3rd ply Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:05:22 -0600 Michael, The 3rd ply of BID added to the bottom forward of the front seat back is to provide additional strength where the weight is concentrated when someone stands on the front seat. I installed it from the seat back to the instrument panel. I have had many heavy (over 220 lbs) prospective builders climb in my airplane to date and the floor hasn't caved in yet, although I do hold my breath whenever someone that heavy asks to climb into my airplane. Nat Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 20:53:21 -0500 Subject: COZY: Ch 6 - hole pattern in bracket for Allen valve From: Dana Hill Dear Cozy gang, Would anyone be able to provide me with the hole pattern and drill hole diameters required for the fuel valve bracket to allow installation of the Allen valve as required in Ch 6? I am hoping to put off the purchase of the Allen valve so as to allow the purchase of other more currently needed Cozy stuff. If a sketch would be easier, please email attach it to dana.hill@state.ma.us. Thanks! _________________________________ Dana Hill CZ IV Ch 6 ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 09:15:36 -0800 From: "LCDR James D. Newman" Subject: COZY: Re: Ch 6 - hole pattern in bracket for Allen valve Hi Dana and All, > Dana Hill wrote: > Would anyone be able to provide me with the hole pattern and > drill hole diameters required for the fuel valve bracket to allow > installation of the Allen valve as required in Ch 6? I am hoping to put > off the purchase of the Allen valve so as to allow the purchase of other > more currently needed Cozy stuff. Check out AndAir's fuel valves, gascolators, one way check valves and their other products at: http://www.andair.co.uk . Infinity's Forever, JD From: "terren" Subject: COZY: Bid layup in C6 step1 Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 07:37:17 +0100 Hi all, In Chapter 6 step 1: After doing the layup of 6 UND after side of the forward centerspar bulkhead, We have to tape 2 plies of bid over the joint between the upper part of the bulkhead to the lower part. I did this layup only over the central part of the joint which wasn't covered with the UND not to have bumps (part of layup) over the main gear fixing holes. -Am I right ? -Must i go on and cover a big part of the UND with BID, not to have bumps in the hole area ? Thanks for your advice Guy Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 16:11:41 -0600 From: "Joseph H. Hart IV" Subject: COZY: How flat does bottom need to be? When I microed the 3/4" foam to the 3/8" foam for the bottom, I didn't end up using sufficient weight over the area from about halfway between the IP and the bottom of the front seat back to the fore side of the landing brake (where the hinge will be). As a result, I have a gap between the foam of about 3/16" that goes back about 6" - 8". I figured that I would just inject micro into the gap before I glass the bottom and it would be no big deal. Today, after finishing contouring both bottom corners of the fuselage, I realized that the gap has resulted in a depression in the fuselage bottom (again about halfway between the IP and the bottom of the front seat back to the fore side of the landing brake) that, at its midpoint, is approximately 1/4". Question: Does this matter aerodynamically? Should/can I ignore it? It seems as though such a gap would require too much filler at the end. If I have to fix it, any suggestions as to how to go about doing it. Note that I have found that the micro bond between layers of foam is overall good and that this is an isolated problem. Should I cut out this area of 3/8" foam, sand the mating surfaces and re-micro the piece in place? I'm a little afraid of the responses that I am going to get on this one as I really don't want to cut the foam out! Thanks for all of your guidance. -- Jody Hart, New Orleans, LA Cozy Mark IV plans no. 648, N359JH (reserved) Chapter 6, see latest progress at: Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 21:34:52 -0600 From: "Joseph H. Hart IV" Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6 - Fitting Bulkheads Dana Hill wrote: > I was somewhat dismayed to find that 2 of the bulkhead corners > were approx. an 1/8" short of the upper longeron in one case and the > lower longeron in the other.I wonder if filling with flox and using a > little bit wider BID tapes > would be acceptable? Dana: I wouldn't sweat 1/8". I'd have no reservations about filling it in with flox. Keep in mind, that I am not an engineer, I just play one in my hanger (living room)! -- Jody Hart, New Orleans, LA Cozy Mark IV plans no. 648, N359JH (reserved) Chapter 6, see latest progress at: From: alwick@juno.com Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 19:59:30 -0800 Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6 - Fitting Bulkheads Don't cut any holes or notches until needed upon assembly. Avoid layups over holes too. Layup quality much better, quicker if you don't have to deal with surface variations. This was suggested to me by builder before I started and worked very well. Don't worry about the gap at corners. When you tape the edges, these dissappear, and they are not significant structurally. Quite a different story if you were doing the rear bulkhead however. No gaps there. -al On Mon, 22 Feb 1999 21:31:12 -0500 Dana Hill writes: >Hi Group, > In fitting the ISP and seatback bulkheads to the sides this >past weekend I was somewhat dismayed to find that 2 of the bulkhead >corners were approx. an 1/8" short of the upper longeron in one case >and the lower longeron in the other. The bulkheads match up well with >the M dwgs. Either my sides are slightly off or this is typical >result. I checked the sides for dimensions, use of the proper size >spacer foam, etc. and all appears ok. I sure wish I had not trimmed >the corners of these two bulkheads in Ch 4. > >I wonder if filling with flox and using a little bit wider BID tapes >would be acceptable? Please tell me I don't have to glue more foam on >the edge, with the foam faced with the same amount of glass as the >blkhds :-( > >Well, regardless, I would be grateful to hear any suggestions. What a >great resource this group is!.....your responses always seem to help >my confidence factor. >________________________________________________- >Dana Hill, Ch6 >#676 > ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 08:12:08 -0600 From: "Mark D. Wunduke" Subject: COZY: seatback sides Hello everyone, my name is Mark Wunduke (builder #748) and I have a question concerning the seatback sides (not the top and bottom that are beveled at a 45 degreee angle, but the sides that are later joined to the fuselage sides). Are these "sides" glass over or are they left bare foam to be later floxed at the joining of the fuselage. I don't know if I am just not reading the directions right or what but I don't see where it says to glass the sides (when you do the front of the seatback or when doing the back). Any help will be greatly appreciated. Thank you Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 09:36:48 -0500 From: bil kleb Subject: Re: COZY: seatback sides "Mark D. Wunduke" wrote: > > Are these "sides" glass over or are they left bare foam > to be later floxed at the joining of the fuselage. 4.6 - Do you cover the cutout areas (notches) in the seat back with BID or leave them uncovered? There's no need to cover the notches or exposed foam. You'll apply flox to the exposed edges and 2-BID tape the entire seat back in place during fuselage assembly in Chapter 6. from our frequently answered queries (faq) document at http://cozy.canard.com/mail_list/cozy-faq.html also available through email via the venerable majordomo, e.g., mailto:majordomo@canard.com with get cozy_builders cozy-faq.txt end in the body of the message (subject line is irrelevant). -- bil From: Fritzx2@aol.com Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 13:11:39 EST Subject: Re: COZY: seatback sides Hi Mark D. Wunduke, > I don't know if I am just not reading the directions right or what but I don't see >where it says to glass the sides (when you do the front of the seatback >or when doing the back). Going from memory, you glass the front of the front seatback. Then you round the corner of the back of the seatback, remove foam for flox corners, and then layup the glass on the back side around and onto the side of the seatback that mates up with the fuse sides later. The bottom edge of the seatback also gets glassed when you glass the back of the seatback. The top edge of the seatback, on the other hand, gets glassed when you glass the front of the seatback. John Fritz From: "Chris Byrne" Subject: COZY: Chapter 6 Ldg Gear Blk Hds Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 10:46:49 +1100 Bulders This is similar to Danas question but I have not seen any thing in the archives that specifically answers it. I have floxed both the fwd and aft ldg gear bulk heads in place. However when doing it I had a gap of about 1/16th on both sides between the fuselage sides and the aft bulk head, this gap was 1/8th inch at the fwd gear bulk head. I checked all measurements. Width of ldg gear bulk heads were spot on. Width of fuse at seat back was spot on. The upper and lower longerons as they pass through the mock firewall were spot on. So I installed the gear bulkheads with the above gap, with flox. In hind sight I should have pulled the sides together as we did for the seat back. The gap was probably built in when I made up the sides in chapter 5 (jig slightly out) Is the 1/8th inch flox filled gap too large. At this stage I have only floxed it and put on the initial 2" BID tapes, so I could cut them out, pull in the sides and install again. This is not too difficult, but as I have already drilled the 1/4 in holes in the aft gear bulk head, putting it all back together in perfect alignment will be the big problem. Although this is a high load area I tend to think that it will be ok as it is. There seems to be plenty reinforcing glass in this area and the flox is reasonably strong (especially in compression). Any comments. Thanks Chris Byrne T From: Jim Hocut Subject: RE: COZY: Chapter 6 Ldg Gear Blk Hds Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 19:28:32 -0500 . > > I have floxed both the fwd and aft ldg gear bulk heads in place. > However when doing it I had a gap of about 1/16th on both sides > between the > fuselage sides and the aft bulk head, this gap was 1/8th inch at the > fwd > gear bulk head. > > Is the 1/8th inch flox filled gap too large. My vote says your just fine the way it is. Jim Hocut jhocut@mindspring.com Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 17:26:53 -0500 From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: Fwd: COZY: Chapter 6 Ldg Gear Blk Hds Chris Byrne asks; >However when doing it I had a gap of about 1/16th on both sides between the >fuselage sides and the aft bulk head, this gap was 1/8th inch at the fwd >gear bulk head. >Is the 1/8th inch flox filled gap too large. I would agree with Jim Hocut - you'll be fine. From a strength standpoint, this area gets lathered with tons of layups. The flox is also much stronger than the foam it replaces, and the glass layups have more than enough overlap to make up for the small gap. The only real issue is the fuselage shape, but I believe there's enough "play" later on in the process (canopy, strakes, etc.) to easily make up for this, probably without even knowing it. -- Marc J. Zeitlin marcz@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/ Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 20:17:20 -0500 Subject: COZY: Ch 6: Location of F-28 From: Dana Hill Hi Cozy Builders, What is the best (or ideal) location for the installation of the F-28 bulkhead?? At the plans specified 5.9" back from the fwd face of F-22, my upper longeron inside edges are 32.0" apart. The M drawing for F-28 specifies 32.5". Dimensions of all bulkheads were checked and are ok. F-22 top of tabs were installed exactly over the ends of the longerons- seems ok. I'd like to make the F-28 a 1/2 " smaller and keep on building but wanted to check with you guys. Thanks, Dana Hill #676 ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 20:03:25 -0600 From: "Joseph H. Hart" Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6: Location of F-28 Dana Hill wrote: > At the plans specified 5.9" back from the fwd face of F-22, my upper > longeron inside edges are 32.0" apart. The M drawing for F-28 specifies > 32.5". Dana: I didn't look for my F-28 template; however, I did measure the distance between the inside edges of my upper longerons and it was 32.0" so you should be fine. Are you sure that the extra .5" doesn't include the lip that fits under the longeron? Maybe you are trying to install your F-28 too high (too high of WL). Hope this helps. Jody Hart Cozy Mark IV plans 648, Chap. 7, progress at: http://members.home.net/jodyhart/index.html From: "John Slade" Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6: Location of F-28 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 21:39:13 -0500 Hi Dana & all, An extension to and comment on Dana's question... >At the plans specified 5.9" back from the fwd face of F-22, my upper >longeron inside edges are 32.0" apart. The M drawing for F-28 specifies >32.5". Fig 3 on Ch 6 page 1 shows the 5.9 is from aft face of f22 (end of longeron) to aft face of F28, not forward face of F22 as stated above. Perhaps the extra 1/4 inch will help the width. I happen to be at the exact same point in the plans (though I havent floxed the seat back in yet). I ran & checked my dimentions and find that I have 32.25. If I force F22 in, the instrument panel (currently nailed) moves to be about 1/8 away from the sides. If I flox the seat & panel in, will the sides bend to accomodate the 1/4 inch for F28? Also, I see that 5.9 leaves F28 only half on the doubler. I'm 0.2 short to get it on the doubler completely. I saw in the archives that you can "extend" the doubler, but should I do this for 0.2 inches? >Dimensions of all bulkheads were checked and are ok. F-22 top of tabs >were installed exactly over the ends of the longerons- seems ok. Same here I'll await maillist wisdom before proceeding. John Slade Cozy #757 From: "Nat Puffer" Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6: Location of F-28 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 19:03:19 -0600 Dear Dana (and builders), I don't remember anymore why I showed the 5.9 inch dimension, whether I had a reason, or whether I intended it to be the distance from the aft face of F-22 to the forward face of F-28. At any rate, the bulkhead designation is supposed to be the fuselage station in inches from the forward face of bulkhead F-0. On that basis, F-28 should be 6 inches farther aft than F-22. If you look at drawing M-11, you will see that F-28 is in fact 6 inches farther aft than F-22, and you need all of that distance to avoid interference with the trailing edge of the canard. So my apologies for causing all of this consternation. Regards, Nat ---------- > From: Dana Hill > To: cozy_builders@canard.com > Subject: COZY: Ch 6: Location of F-28 > Date: Tuesday, March 30, 1999 7:17 PM > > Hi Cozy Builders, > What is the best (or ideal) location for the installation of the > F-28 bulkhead?? > > At the plans specified 5.9" back from the fwd face of F-22, my upper > longeron inside edges are 32.0" apart. The M drawing for F-28 specifies > 32.5". > Dimensions of all bulkheads were checked and are ok. F-22 top of tabs > were installed exactly over the ends of the longerons- seems ok. I'd > like to make the F-28 a 1/2 " smaller and keep on building but wanted to > check with you guys. > Thanks, > Dana Hill > #676 > > ___________________________________________________________________ > You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. > Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html > or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 21:32:04 -0600 From: "Joseph H. Hart" Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6: Location of F-28 John Slade wrote: > Also, I see that 5.9 leaves F28 only half on the > doubler. I'm 0.2 short to get it on the doubler completely. I saw in the > archives that you can "extend" the doubler, but should I do this for 0.2 > inches? John: I'd "fudge" something like this, e.g. move F-28 forward .1 inch and loaded it up with flox aft of the doubler to make up for the other .1". I don't mean to sound complacent and I have tried to make my plane as "perfect" as possible; however, I learned early on, from my questions and answers from this group, that this minimal dimensional deviations don't matter, at least not at this stage of the game. Wings/canard, probably, but not fuselage bulkheads. You are a chapter away from realizing just how incredibly strong your fuselage bottom is going to be -- it's a tremendous confidence boost! Keep moving and enjoy. Jody Hart Cozy Mark IV plans 648, Chap. 7, progress at: http://members.home.net/jodyhart/index.html Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 23:07:57 -0500 Subject: COZY: F-28 - J. Slade From: Dana Hill John (& builders), I've been researching the F-28 placement issue and one thing I have discovered so far is--- don't move the F-28 forward at all. It seems that the 5.9 is a minimum dimension. Any forward movement can cause an interference with the canard. W. Hicks has info on this issue and perhaps he can chime in. Dana ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From: "John Slade" Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6: Location of F-28 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 23:06:26 -0500 >On that basis, F-28 should be 6 inches farther aft than F-22. >If you look at drawing M-11, you will see that F-28 is in fact 6 inches >farther aft than F-22, and you need all of that distance to avoid >interference with the trailing edge of the canard. So, for those of us who find that the 32.5 width of F28 is too wide at 5.9 (or 6) inches aft of F22. Should we move F28 aft a little (to say 6.25 or 6.5 aft of F22) so that it fits width wise without having to bend the sides? John Slade #757 From: "Bill Kastenholz" Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6: Location of F-28 Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 03:50:55 -0500 > >So, for those of us who find that the 32.5 width of F28 is too wide at 5.9 >(or 6) inches aft of F22. Should we move F28 aft a little (to say 6.25 or >6.5 aft of F22) so that it fits width wise without having to bend the sides? >John Slade #757 > To John and others struggling with F28, If you place F28 at the 5.9" dimension, you will end up with a very tight fit for the back of the canard. I had to add thickness to the front of F22 and trim the TE of the canard to fit . I would place F28 at 6.1" instead. You don't want to play with moving the canard position very much at all because of the change to flight characteristics. The pins through F28 simply hold the canard in correct alignment , and F28 provides a construction bulkhead for building the top of the fuselage. The 32.5" width comes into play when you install the torque tube and offsets to control the elevator. The center torque tube can be adjusted in size to account for the discrepancy in width here.> Good luck, Bill Kastenholz wkasty@ix.netcom.com From: "John Slade" Subject: Re: COZY: Chap 6 - F-28 - location Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 08:48:27 -0500 Dana, > I've been researching the F-28 placement issue and one thing I >have discovered so far is--- don't move the F-28 forward at all. It >seems that the 5.9 is a minimum dimension. Any forward movement can >cause an interference with the canard. I see that. Forward ain't my problem. M11 drawing and Ch 6 seem to show it 5.9 (aft of F22 to aft of F28). Lets call it 6 inches (per Nat). Any further forward and I can see how it would interfere with the trailing edge of the canard. Given that we dont have the 32.5 width between the fuselage sides at 6 inches we can either fudge a poor fit on the instrument panel (at least I can :), trim f28 (and in my case construct 1/4 inch of doubler), or move F28 back a bit. What worries me is that moving F28 back to, say 6.25 or 6.5 might weaken the canard support structure. In M11 and Ch. 12, F28 seems to form the aft part of a hardpoint for the canard alignment tab. BTW - are you sure you're measuring along the axis, not along the longerons? John Slade #757 From: "John Slade" Subject: Re: COZY: F-28 location Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 08:51:26 -0500 Nat just answered my question before it was posted. Pretty good service! Thanks Nat. John, >Lets go with 6 inches. If you wanted to make it greater, I would have to research it. >Nat Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 17:53:20 -0500 From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: COZY: Re: Cozy: Move F28 and bend sides? Should we move F28 aft a little (to say 6.25 or > 6.5 aft of F22) so that it fits width wise without having to bend the sides? > John Slade #757 ----> No. Move it to 6.25-6.30 and trim F28 to fit. Wayne Hicks Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 17:50:37 -0500 From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: Re: COZY: F-28 - J. Slade Dana Hill wrote: > > John (& builders), > I've been researching the F-28 placement issue and one thing I > have discovered so far is--- don't move the F-28 forward at all. W. Hicks has info on this issue > and perhaps he can chime in. ------> Yes, I volunteered to write the Chapter 12 FAQ. From the archives, F28 should be put at 6.25-6.30 inches from F22. This location should provide enough distance to adequately mount the canard (Chapter 12) without trimming its trailing edge or trimming the fuselage sides. The archives are a great source of info. Use them and use them often. Wayne Hicks Cozy IV #678 Chapter 11 Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 22:47:42 -0400 Subject: COZY: Ch 6: attaching bottom From: Dana Hill Hi Cozy Group, A construction question for anyone who has a minute please: Upon flipping the fuselage to begin prep. for bottom instl. I discovered that the seatback bulkhead protrudes below the lower longeron by 1/4" on one side and an 1/8" on the other. The way I was thinking to address this is to leave the seatback alone and just carve a corresponding groove out of the 3/4" white foam so that the bottom when installed will fit as it should, ie. directly on top of the bottom longeron. Cutting down the seatback would be a bit more work. What's the best way to go? Thanks in advance for your response. __________________________________ _ _ Dana Hill #676 From: "cliffordfamily" Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6: attaching bottom Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 03:06:28 -0400 Dana, we have 2 cozy mkIV under construction in unison. We are just now fitting the bottom to number 2. Both were slightly different and off somewhat. You will end up with the same result either way but it would be much easier to carve out some foam than to reshape the seatback. From: lschuler@cellular.uscc.com Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 08:26:23 -0600 Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6: attaching bottom Dana Hill wrote: >The way I was thinking to address this is to leave the seatback alone and >just carve a corresponding groove out of the 3/4" white foam so that the >bottom when installed will fit as it should, ie. directly on top of the >bottom longeron. Sounds like you may have a good idea. Should not interfere with the belly board. I'd be concerned about squareness of the fuselage though or maybe it was squareness of the seatback. Something must be a bit off to cause the diference from one side to the other. May not be significant at all, but I'd be inclined to figure out 'why' the difference; if for no other reason than peace of mind. Larry Schuler MK-IV plans #500 From: Fritzx2@aol.com Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 16:24:41 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6: attaching bottom Dana, >...discovered that the seatback bulkhead protrudes below the lower longeron >by 1/4" on one side and an 1/8" on the other... >The way I was thinking to address this is to leave the seatback alone and >just carve a corresponding groove out of the 3/4" white foam so that the >bottom when installed will fit as it should, ie. directly on top of the >bottom longeron. This is probably the best way to go. Just make sure that your new grove doesn't have any sharp corners so that the glass will lay down nicely when the time comes to glass the inside of the bottom. As you will find, by laying the BID at a 45 degree angle, there are going to be a LOT of bumps going across all the foam doublers from one side to the other even without your "new" depression which takes quite a bit of attention to get all the transitions bubble free. John Fritz fritzx2@aol.com From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 16:41:24 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Ch 6: attaching bottom On 05/03/99 22:47:42 you wrote: > >Hi Cozy Group, >A construction question for anyone who has a minute please: > Upon flipping the fuselage to begin prep. for bottom instl. I >discovered that the seatback bulkhead protrudes below the lower longeron >by 1/4" on one side and an 1/8" on the other. The way I was thinking to >address this is to leave the seatback alone and just carve a >corresponding groove out of the 3/4" white foam so that the bottom when >installed will fit as it should, ie. directly on top of the bottom >longeron. Cutting down the seatback would be a bit more work. > What's the best way to go? >Thanks in advance for your response. >__________________________________ _ _ >Dana Hill >#676 > > The inside face of the fuselage bottom fiberglass should run through in a straight line for structural reasons. Adjust the bottom of the seat back carefully to fit so you don't have to use excess flox filler which is heavy weight. We never hear of the opposite problem, just lots of flox filler. From: Militch@aol.com Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 12:33:25 EDT Subject: COZY: F28 location I floxed F28 in last night. Today I read on a builder's web page that it should be 6.25" back from F22, not 5.9". I got that thing in good and solid - am I going to have to find a way to pull it out? Much scroaning going on here (cross between a scream and a groan) Peter Militch #740 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 19:21:10 +0100 From: Paul Kuntz Subject: Re: COZY: F28 location Pete, I'm just gettin ready to mount my canard. I'd suggest you go ahead and move F28 back a quarter inch now. It's really no big deal to cut it loose, then re-install it with a bit of flox filler and bid corner tapes. You can use a fine saw like an Xacto hobby saw to cut it loose in a few minutes with almost no lost material. Regards, Paul Kuntz Cozy MKIV England From: Epplin John A Subject: RE: COZY: Fuel valve Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 11:42:25 -0500 All things considered, the plans valve is a good choice in my book. It has a delrin or some such plastic part for the brass balve to rotate and seal against, no sticking as the older brass on brass valves. At least that is what I am going with. John Epplin Mk4 #467, fillilng and sanding. > -----Original Message----- > From: Capital Steel Inc. [SMTP:capitalsteel@compusmart.ab.ca] > Sent: Friday, July 02, 1999 9:23 PM > To: cozy_builders@canard.com > Subject: COZY: Fuel valve > > I think Iread somewere that the fuel valve called in the plans although > economical is not the best for the job. Does anyone have experiences to > help me decide. > Joe Toop From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 11:57:34 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel valve On 07/02/99 20:23:13 you wrote: > >I think Iread somewere that the fuel valve called in the plans although >economical is not the best for the job. Does anyone have experiences to >help me decide. >Joe Toop > > > I have over 700 hours in 5.5 years on an Allen valve and am quite happy with it. THe detents are actually spring loaded ball bearing and have a nice feel. Would highly recommend! Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 11:04:42 -0400 From: Paul Krasa Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel valve mount You may be able to purchase 5052 locally. For non-critical parts, it is a substitute for 6061. paul At 08:25 7/2/99 -0500, Tom Brusehaver wrote: > >>Like many folks before me, I cracked the small piece of 2024 aluminum when >>bending up the fuel valve mount last night. I decided to bend first, then >>drill and file so I wouldn't have stress concentrators. I used a 3/8" drill >>as a mandrel to bend the tab, which seemed like a fairly good radius. Still, >>it cracked at both bends. So, I need to try again. What's the easiest way >>to buy a small strip of 2024? - they don't carry the stuff at the local >>hardware store, and I would prefer to avoid calling Wicks and asking them to >>rush me $1.00 worth of metal. > >I think like everyone else, I cracked mine too. Someone suggested >6061 instead of 2024. There isn't that much stress on the fuel valve, >2024 is overkill. > >Get something softer and easier to bend. > > Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 11:12:06 -0400 From: "L. Wayne Hicks" Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel valve mount Militch@aol.com wrote: > I cracked the small piece of 2024 aluminum when > bending up the fuel valve mount last night. What's the easiest way > to buy a small strip of 2024? -------> Remember your local hardware store! Any aluminum will do in this application. In fact, you can probably find a small piece of aluminum channel that's the perfect width. You won't have to bend anything. Wayne Hicks Cozy IV #678 Chapter 13, 18 http://www.geocities.com/yosemite/falls/2027 Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 11:21:07 -0500 From: Bulent Aliev Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel valve mount I made the same mistake until a RV builder told me about the grain in the aluminum sheet metal. The sheet metal has grain just like wood veneer. If you bend along the grain it will crack. You can see the direction of the grain with a naked eye. Bulent From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 20:30:02 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel valve mount The grain everyone is talking of is parallel to the rolling direction, when the metal is made thinner in the steel mill. After it is cooled sufficiently, frequently the material's specification (4130n, 2024-T3), and other quality control info is printed with paint with the printing parallel to the grain and rolling direction (the very long dimension before being cut). All bend should be perpendicular to the printing, rolling direction and grain. And of course not tighter than the minimum bend radius. Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 17:17:12 +0200 From: "Rego Burger" Subject: COZY: Re: Fuel valve mount I broke a few back 5 yrs ago when I was at that stage.... only learned after the second one that "grain" is important on alloys. The bend must follow the lines of the grain... not against it. Besides grain don't try to make too tight a bend / radius. If all else fails get some U channel the same size as the seat back-rest. If I did it again I would make a 12 ply bid layup and epoxy nutplates on a flat plate at the back. :-) Régo Burger RSA From: "Russ Fisher" Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Fuel valve mount Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 14:22:25 -0400 -----Original Message----- From: Rego Burger >I broke a few back 5 yrs ago when I was at that stage.... only learned after the second one that >"grain" is important on alloys. >The bend must follow the lines of the grain... not against it. Sorry Rego, but I have to call you on that. You must bend _against_ the grain. In other words, the bend must be perpendicular to the direction of the metal's grain. Bending along the grain line is inviting cracks. Russ Fisher From: SWrightFLY@aol.com Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 15:30:23 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: Re: Fuel valve mount In a message dated 7/2/99 1:26:07 PM Central Daylight Time, rfisher1@rochester.rr.com writes: << In other words, the bend must be perpendicular to the direction of the metal's grain. Bending along the grain line is inviting cracks. >> And............the radius must be the correct size for the bend.....go find an RV builder (they are everywhere) they understand metal, rivets, and such. I like the former idea of laying up about 6 to 10 plys of BID over a block of wood covered with duck tape. Whenever you can..... use glass with all it's advantages over metal. Steve Wright Wright Aircraft Works LLC: Electric Nose-Lift for EZEs From: cozy623@juno.com Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 09:59:18 -0700 Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel valve mount To bend this thing I just made the raduis of a 2x4 block a little bigger, clamped the AL between that block and another one in my vice and bent it over. No problem on the first try. Jeb ___________________________________________________________________ Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. Date: Tue, 06 Jul 1999 12:53:27 -0700 From: hrogers@slac.stanford.edu (Howard Rogers) Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel valve mount Tom Brusehaver wrote: >I think like everyone else, I cracked mine too. Someone suggested >6061 instead of 2024. There isn't that much stress on the fuel valve, >2024 is overkill. > >Get something softer and easier to bend. Good advice, but 6061 (usually T6 hardness) is harder, and therefore MORE difficult to bend than the 2024 T3. Yes, Grain is important, but save yourself a bunch of trouble and bend it out of 5052. It is softer, and a whole lot easier to bend. It should also be much easier to find than 2024, locally. --Howard Rogers, A&P 2005148 Date: Mon, 05 Jul 1999 09:23:37 +0200 From: "Rego Burger" Subject: COZY: Bending Sheet metal Thanks Russ Fisher: Ref: to bending and grain: >>Sorry Rego, but I have to call you on that. You must bend _against_ the grain. In other words, the bend must be perpendicular to the direction of the metal's grain. Bending along the grain line is inviting cracks.>> I will never get my command of english sorted out in this life-time.... I'm a graphic kind a guy... if the grain lines run like this (plan views) ========I==>===== ========I==>===== ========I==>===== ========I==>===== The bending action must "follow" the arrow heads or grain lines up or downward. If the grain line represents a force then I reckon the bend is against it.... :-) not like this one. =====^I===== =====^I===== =====^I===== =====^I===== The metal would tear along the "virtual" stress lines known as grain like breaking pieces of a chocolate slab if the bend was attempted in the direction of the arrows above. Cheap ascii sketches. The feel one gets from UNI cloth will illustrated it too. The MAIN fibres represent the grain and strength plane while the interconnecting cross weaves are weak and break easy. So I guess the perspective and language skills are lacking on my part. Regards. Régo Burger RSA From: Militch@aol.com Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 08:21:21 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: Fuel valve mount In a message dated 7/3/99 1:34:09 AM, cdenk@ix.netcom.com wrote: >All bend >should be perpendicular to the printing, rolling direction and grain. And of course >not tighter than the minimum bend radius I did bend the piece of 2024 that I broke across the grain. Reading Bingelis' book and also the table of bending radii in the A/C Spruce catalog shows that the minimum bend diameter for this material is about 0.5" - I bent it over a 3/16 drill - so that's why it broke. I took one poster's advice and made the bracket out of 12 layers of BID instead. Worked fine. Peter Militch #740 Chapter 6 Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 19:17:10 -0500 From: "Rob Mozer, Jr." Subject: COZY: Rear Gear Attach Bulkhead Hi group, I'm working in Chapt. 6 and getting ready to flox the Rear Gear Attach Bulkhead into place between the fuselage sides. I question what I should do about the gap I have between the bulkhead and the sides of the fuselage. Should I just fill the 1/4 inch gap (total gap which works out to be about 1/8" each side) with flox? Or should I try and trim the temporary firewall cutouts at LWY, upper and lower longerons and pull the sides in to meet the bulkhead? The dimensions for the bulkhead are as exact as I can get them and my inclination is to try and cut a little from the temporary firewall cutouts and pull the sides in to meet the bulkhead. Any help here will be appreciated. Rob Mozer, Fairhope, Alabama Cozy MK IV #355 From: Militch@aol.com Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 09:34:10 EDT Subject: Re: COZY: Rear Gear Attach Bulkhead In a message dated 7/12/99 12:18:27 AM, Skyhawk@in-city.com wrote: >I question what I >should do about the gap I have between the bulkhead and the sides of the >fuselage. Should I just fill the 1/4 inch gap (total gap which works >out to be about 1/8" each side) with flox? Gaps of only 1/8" seems pretty good to me. I used flox to fill the gaps on mine. I operate under the assumption that you want the various gaps between parts to be small because foam is a lot lighter than flox. Having laid in a nice flox fillet, it will be the BID tapes that provide the strength to tie things together. Peter Militch Cozy Mark IV #740 From: Militch@aol.com Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 08:07:46 EDT Subject: COZY: Landing gear bulkhead cover Can someone clarify the arrangement of the cover on the forward landing gear bulkhead for me? The drawings (M5) show a 3 layer cover of UNI on the forward face of the cover and the bulkhead, with a few more layers on the back later. I am guessing that the cover should be arranged so that it's forward / lower bevelled edge sits on top of the forward landing gear bulkhead. If I do that, the upper edges of this U-shaped item touch the forward edge of the top of the rear bulkhead, with just enough overlap so the cover ends flush with a line drawn on the back face of the rear bulkhead. If you view the following in a mono-spaced font like courier, it should be to scale. What I am trying to describe is this: * <--rear face of the U-shaped cover * ***** * * * <-- rear landing gear bulkhead * * * * * Is this what it's supposed to look like? Second, do I just use the UNI to join the cover and the bulkhead, and not (at this stage at least) tape, flox or otherwise join the cover to the fuselage side? Thanks in advance, Peter Militch Cozy Mark IV #740 From: "Oreste Muccilli" Subject: COZY: Ch 6 Final word on Location 3 rd ply on bottom fuselage question Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 18:01:59 +0200 Mr. Nat wrote me: Oreste, The plans say the first 2 layers of BID should be at 45 degrees. Don't know why you chose 22.5 degrees, although that probably will be okay. It also says that the 3rd layer should be where the load is concentrated when you climb in the back seat. If you look at drawings M-14 and M-15, you will see that it is from about F.S. 83 to F.S. 91. Covering a larger area is not necessary and just ads weight. Regards, Nat The purpose of this e-mail is to complete the FAQ of the Ch6 because for this question there is not answer. Oreste Muccilli Italy http://home.intekom.com/glen/italy.htm From: "Denis Thomassin" Subject: COZY: chap 6 backseat lenght Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 10:07:37 -0400 So far I have not been very active on this cozy list because up to now I had very little interrogation about "how to" or "what for" while doing chapter 4 and 5 and also my experience still does not worth two pennies. But chapter six give me some trouble and I realise how much critical mesurement of everything is. According to chapter 4 the back seat bulkhead must be 28.8 long. Once in position inside of the fuselage the bottom front must be a 40 inches and the top aft must be at 60" (I don`t understand why the mesurement are not taken from the same side of the composant). My mesurement look ok but the seat bulkhead is .3 inches short of reaching the bottom of the fuselage. What is the good to correct this ? Change the angle of the bulkhead so it will end flush with the bottom but at 41 inches or so of the front. Had a stript to the back seat. Make the bottom support a little bit ticker at this point so it come in contact with the bottom of the seat (this would be my choice). Any comment will be appreciated :) Denis Thomassin builder 705 Montreal, CanadaFrom ???@??? Mon Aug 16 10:10:30 1999 Return-Path: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@betaweb.com [206.43.209.18]) by acestes-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with ESMTP id UAA04022 for ; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 20:35:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA04026 for cozy_builders-list; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 15:43:09 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f Received: from ketch.iar.net (root@mail.iar.net [209.149.241.13]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA04021 for ; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 15:43:02 -0400 Received: from in-city.com (ppp034.iar.net [209.149.241.54]) by ketch.iar.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA02202 for ; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 15:13:14 -0400 Message-ID: <37B8A99C.80AADD7D@in-city.com> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 19:15:24 -0500 From: "Rob Mozer, Jr." X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "cozy_builders@canard.com" Subject: [Fwd: COZY: chap 6 backseat lenght] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------7265588AE3BAF77897621A27" Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Rob Mozer, Jr." X-UIDL: bffcde208954d5dac910c127c4cc3ae9 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Message-ID: <37B8A91E.937D6C51@in-city.com> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 19:13:18 -0500 From: "Rob Mozer, Jr." X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Denis Thomassin Subject: Re: COZY: chap 6 backseat lenght References: <003801bee7f0$b269d480$645164c0@chca.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Denis Thomassin wrote: > > According to chapter 4 the back seat bulkhead must be 28.8 long. > Once in position inside of the fuselage the bottom front must be a 40 > inches and the top aft must be at 60" (I don`t understand why the > mesurement are not taken from the same side of the composant). My > mesurement look ok but the seat bulkhead is .3 inches short of > reaching the bottom of the fuselage. > > What is the good to correct this ? I found the same thing with my construction. I queried Nat about this and was told it should be flush with both the top and bottom longerons. I had made the top flush when I put the sides together. I am working on the bottom now and had to add about 1/2 inch of foam and cover it with fiberglass to make it even with the bottom. I don't believe the measurement from the front to the top or from the front to the bottom of the seat back is so critical that you couldn't angle the back to make the top and bottom meet the longerons even. > Change the angle of the bulkhead so it will end flush with the > bottom but at 41inches or so of the front This is what I SHOULD have done. Just my recent experience (very recent) Rob Mozer, Fairhope, AL Cozy MKIV #355 From ???@??? Tue Aug 17 06:48:50 1999 Return-Path: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@betaweb.com [206.43.209.18]) by acestes-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with ESMTP id WAA23199 for ; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 22:47:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA05450 for cozy_builders-list; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 17:36:57 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f Received: from ligarius-fe0.ultra.net (ligarius-fe0.ultra.net [146.115.8.189]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA05443 for ; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 17:36:51 -0400 Received: from zeitlinhome ([146.115.235.235]) by ligarius-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with SMTP id WAA11588 for ; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 22:07:16 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.1.19990816064546.009a2dd0@pop.ultranet.com> Message-Id: <4.1.19990816064546.009a2dd0@pop.ultranet.com> X-Sender: marcz@pop.ultranet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 06:49:33 -0400 To: Cozy Builders Mailing List From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: COZY: chap 6 backseat lenght Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Marc J. Zeitlin" X-UIDL: 487f6d7ba82e3b4b5ded35e32d3f217f Denis Thomassin wrote; > 3) Make the bottom support a little bit ticker at this point so it come in > contact with the bottom of the seat (this would be my choice). I vote for this one. You get the right angle, the seatback is in the right place for all subsequent operations, and it does not hurt the positioning or strength of anything. P.S. - Denis, if you could set Outlook Express to send mail in TEXT only mode, it would be nicer for all of us reading your mail. Thanks. -- Marc J. Zeitlin mailto:marcz@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/ From: mfacchinelli@sogei.it Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:53:22 +0200 Canardians, My Cosy Classic kit (S.C.Aero) includes the premolded shell of the fuselage already done??It is supposed to have the same dimentions as per plans, but it is not?. Making a check starting from the firewall (aft edge of the spar), with Centersection Spar in place and the wings lined up with the strakes, the distance of the precutted Canard slot (consequently F22-F28 bulkheads) is ONE inch shorter than the plans (102? instead of 103?). I thought it was precalculated but following your discussion and Uli Wolter suggestion (same fuselage, same story), it seems mandatory that I must replace my Canard 1 inch forward to achieve the original distance?..is it right..?? PLEASE CONFIRM !! Anyway it seems very strange that every S.C.Aero fuselage could have the same error?.OF COURSE we must follow the plans as close as we can, but since no one built aircraft is ever identical, there must be an allowed tolerance????? Massimo Bonicelli Cosy Classic - ITALY Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 09:36:24 -0400 From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" Subject: COZY: Fwd: Massimo Bonicelli wrote: >...... the >distance of the precutted Canard slot (consequently F22-F28 bulkheads) is >ONE inch shorter than the plans (102? instead of 103?). I thought it was >precalculated but following your discussion and Uli Wolter suggestion (same >fuselage, same story), it seems mandatory that I must replace my Canard 1 >inch forward to achieve the original distance?..is it right..?? PLEASE >CONFIRM !! I'm not familiar with the Cozy Classic (don't know if it has the same dimensions as the MKIV), but I'll take a crack at it. I think that modifying the fuselage to have the CORRECT dimensions (verified in the Cozy Classic plans that I assume you have) would be the right thing to do. While I'm sure it would be possible to mount the canard one inch to the rear, recompute and verify the new CG position, and end up with a safe plane, I think it would be less work and less risk to move the bulkheads to the correct position. >Anyway it seems very strange that every S.C.Aero fuselage could have the >same error?.OF COURSE we must follow the plans as close as we can, but >since no one built aircraft is ever identical, there must be an allowed >tolerance????? You are correct - there are tolerances. The problem with plans built aircraft is that no one knows what they are :-). And no one's telling us, either :-). I can pretty much guarantee, however, that a 1" displacement of the canard is NOT within whatever tolerance band there is - that's a pretty substantial modification. If I were you, I'd contact S.C. Aero (whoever they may be) and try to get THEM to fix the problem, by either getting you an new fuselage with the correct dimensions, or refunding some of your money for the time you have to spend correcting their mistakes. Good luck! -- Marc J. Zeitlin mailto:marcz@ultranet.com http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/ Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 21:38:44 -0500 From: David Domeier Subject: COZY: Re: COZY Tolerances.. Marc, re "I can pretty much guarantee, however, that a 1" displacement of the canard is NOT within whatever tolerance band there is - that's a pretty substantial modification." I agree. Nat does give one tolerance relative the wing and canard and it is plus or minus .54". The basic reference of the airplane is 113.9" at the wing leading edge/strake junction. The canard L E must be at 18.6 +/- 0.54" relative to it. See page 38 of the flight hand book. A bulkhead off by an inch is no big deal but the wing/canard relationship is. The problem is, if the bulkheads (F22 and firewall) are off an inch and the center section spar is glued in, it is difficult to move the wing. Same goes for F22. So those 2 bulkheads must be reasonably accurate. dd Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:39:59 -0400 From: Jim Sower Subject: Re: COZY: Fwd: I would guess that the canard provides about 40% of the lift. It shouldn't be hard to get a precise number. Nat and Burt should know it off the top of their head. Anyway, whatever the exact number is (40% for the sake of argument), then moving the canard aft 1.0" should move the Aerodynamic Center or Center of Pressure (which drives CG location) back 40% of 1.0" or 0.4". With the CP located 0.4" aft of the plans airplane, you can reasonably expect your CG box should be about 0.4" aft of the recommended box. That makes you just a tad more nose-heavy than the vanilla calculations would suggest (and a tad farther from 'deep stall' than the standard calculations suggest). Relocating the structure that supports 40% of your lift, on the other hand, sounds like begging for BIG trouble. Sounds to me like 0.4" migration of CP/CG is pretty trivial, and relocating the canard is positively life-threatening. Just a theory; Jim S. From ???@??? Fri Nov 19 19:33:13 1999 Return-Path: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Received: from twc2.betaweb.com (majordomo@betaweb.com [206.43.209.18]) by acestes-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult/n20340/mtc.v2) with ESMTP id MAA29844 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 1999 12:06:53 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA03009 for cozy_builders-list; Thu, 18 Nov 1999 11:31:24 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: twc2.betaweb.com: majordomo set sender to owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com using -f Received: from dns1.mks.net ([207.253.30.2]) by twc2.betaweb.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA03004 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 1999 11:31:19 -0500 Received: from denis01 (www.chca.ca [207.253.32.82]) by dns1.mks.net (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA31941 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 1999 11:35:24 -0500 From: "Denis Thomassin" To: "'Cozy_builders'" Subject: COZY: Chapter 6 bottom layup Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 11:27:54 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-reply-to: <000f01bf31cf$25861a00$4c9b23a6@mpollock.mcit.com> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-cozy_builders@betaweb.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Denis Thomassin" X-UIDL: d1d131a85bd86d018bd0152f8f692c22 For those of you who has read my previous post you already know to my english knowlodge is somewhat limited. Normally I have no problem interpreting the plan but something puzzle me in chapter six. "After cure, (the spacer on the fuselage bottom).... Cheack for smooth transition to longerons, etc...." then "The top edge should be radiused, so the glass cloth will conform." What is exactly the top edge ? If the top edge mean the angle form by the side and the top of the spacer, it is already at 30 degrees doest it nead an additional sloope ? Thank you all Denis Thomassin Montreal, Canada 705 Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 11:13:08 -0500 From: Phillip Subject: COZY: Chapter 6 Ldg bulkheads..... I just finished floxing in the upper half of the fwd ldg gear bulkhead .....my next step is Chapter 6, page 3 paragraph 4...."install the 3 -ply layup of UND, right and left sides, shown on drawing M-5. The way I read that drawing is to layup the UND on the upper half of the fwd landing gear bulkhead and overlapping the lower fwd ldg gear bulkhead to the bottom of the hard points.....left and right side(not the center sections of the bulkheads). Am I reading the drawing correctly?? Thanks, Phillip Sill, #707 Chapter 6 From: "Paul Kuntz" Subject: Re: COZY: Chapter 6 Ldg bulkheads..... Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 21:21:17 -0800 The layups go from the top of the upper half of the bulkhead and overlap the lower forward bulkhead, extending past the hard points all the way to the bottom. The uni layup does not cover the center section. There you just use bid tape over the joint between the upper and lower bulkheads. Paul Kuntz >The way I read that drawing is to layup the UND on the upper half of the >fwd landing gear bulkhead and overlapping the lower fwd ldg gear bulkhead >to the bottom of the hard points.....left and right side(not the center >sections of the bulkheads). From: Militch@aol.com Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 12:52:03 EST Subject: Re: COZY: Chapter 6 Ldg bulkheads..... In a message dated 11/23/99 4:25:38 PM, LUV2AV8@compuserve.com wrote: >The way I read that drawing is to layup the UND on the upper half of the > >fwd landing gear bulkhead and overlapping the lower fwd ldg gear bulkhead > >to the bottom of the hard points.....left and right side(not the center > >sections of the bulkheads). > Yes, the layups are tetrahedrons (not rectangular because they are narrower at the top than the bottom). I think I did it just as you describe. Certainly, the center part of the lower bulkhead is not covered. Regards