News:


  • May 28, 2024, 07:10:24 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Why engineer when you can over-engineer?  (Read 2431 times)

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12823
Why engineer when you can over-engineer?
« on: August 13, 2014, 08:01:22 PM »
This is for a "quick and dirty" test pig.  Two machined pieces of aluminum, screwed & glued onto a phenolic bellcrank, with a shaft pressed through the middle.

Is there an over-engineers anonymous?
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Mark Scarborough

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5918
Re: Why engineer when you can over-engineer?
« Reply #1 on: August 13, 2014, 11:14:16 PM »
Tim,, if there is,, you should know being the president and all,,

of course Randy and Pat might argue I am vice pres ( though I have learned)
For years the rat race had me going around in circles, Now I do it for fun!
EXILED IN PULLMAN WA
AMA 842137

Offline FLOYD CARTER

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4462
    • owner
Re: Why engineer when you can over-engineer?
« Reply #2 on: August 14, 2014, 09:49:28 AM »
Doesn't look extreme to me.  A thin phenolic bellcrank doesn't have enough bearing surface to last very long.

I would have done the same.

F.C.
90 years, but still going (mostly)
AMA #796  SAM #188  LSF #020

Offline Randy Powell

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 10478
  • TreeTop Flyer
Re: Why engineer when you can over-engineer?
« Reply #3 on: August 14, 2014, 03:19:15 PM »
Hey, after losing a plane to a under-engineered bellcrank, I want one I can lift my car with.
Member in good standing of P.I.S.T
(Politically Incorrect Stunt Team)
AMA 67711
 Randy Powell

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12823
Re: Why engineer when you can over-engineer?
« Reply #4 on: August 14, 2014, 03:36:14 PM »
Doesn't look extreme to me.  A thin phenolic bellcrank doesn't have enough bearing surface to last very long.

I would have done the same.

F.C.

I was also trying to achieve a bellcrank that wouldn't rock.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Phil Krankowski

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 1031
Re: Why engineer when you can over-engineer?
« Reply #5 on: August 14, 2014, 05:58:18 PM »
Elegant actually, definitely not a brick outhouse.

Phil

Offline Steve Fitton

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2272
Re: Why engineer when you can over-engineer?
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2014, 09:38:28 PM »
For a disposable test plane, why not a top flite 3 inch nylon bellcrank?  The one you made looks ready for a Nats plane.
Steve

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12823
Re: Why engineer when you can over-engineer?
« Reply #7 on: August 25, 2014, 11:42:27 PM »
For a disposable test plane, why not a top flite 3 inch nylon bellcrank?  The one you made looks ready for a Nats plane.

I wanted a four inch.  I have several 3" ones -- but I wanted 4".
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Randy Powell

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 10478
  • TreeTop Flyer
Re: Why engineer when you can over-engineer?
« Reply #8 on: August 26, 2014, 10:35:12 AM »
Well, Tim, I have a grossly over-engineered carbon fiber bellcrank I make. I could send you one of those.
Member in good standing of P.I.S.T
(Politically Incorrect Stunt Team)
AMA 67711
 Randy Powell


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here