News:


  • May 13, 2024, 07:05:55 PM

Login with username, password and session length

« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Tautening vs. Non tautening Butyrate  (Read 2223 times)

Offline Brian Massey

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1016
    • California Car Clubs
Tautening vs. Non tautening Butyrate
« on: March 09, 2011, 02:47:51 PM »
I've always used what I think of as "regular" butyrate, that is the tautening variety. But I got to thinking, is that a waste when doing the bare wood? Is there any advantage or disadvantage to using non-taut on the wood, then tautening only on the open bays to shrink the silk?

Any thoughts/advise is appreciated.

Brian
Logged
While flying the pattern, my incompetence always exceeds my expectations.

AMA 55421
Madera, CA

Offline Randy Powell

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 10478
  • TreeTop Flyer
Re: Tautening vs. Non tautening Butyrate
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2011, 03:38:54 PM »
Brian,

I use the full strength stuff only over open bays and only one coat at that. Everything else gets non-taunting. I also find that things stay in better alignment that way. The full strength taunting stuff can pull pretty hard.
Logged
Member in good standing of P.I.S.T
(Politically Incorrect Stunt Team)
AMA 67711
 Randy Powell

Offline Neville Legg

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 593
Re: Tautening vs. Non tautening Butyrate
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2011, 03:41:27 PM »
Brian, I've started using sanding sealer only on the bare wood, lots of thin coats. Even use it to stick the tissue on now. It doesn't shrink I know that!


Cheers
Logged
"I think, therefore I have problems"

(not) Descartes

Offline Brian Massey

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1016
    • California Car Clubs
Re: Tautening vs. Non tautening Butyrate
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2011, 05:07:41 PM »
Quote from: Randy Powell on March 09, 2011, 03:38:54 PM
Brian,

I use the full strength stuff only over open bays and only one coat at that. Everything else gets non-taunting. I also find that things stay in better alignment that way. The full strength taunting stuff can pull pretty hard.
Randy; does that mean the non-taut goes over the "full strength" dope ok?

Brian
Logged
While flying the pattern, my incompetence always exceeds my expectations.

AMA 55421
Madera, CA

Offline wwwarbird

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 7983
  • Welcome to the Stunt Hanger.
Re: Tautening vs. Non tautening Butyrate
« Reply #4 on: March 09, 2011, 11:04:38 PM »
 Brian,

 It'll take a little sifting out, but the subject was hashed out pretty thoroughly right here...

 http://stunthanger.com/smf/index.php?topic=19162.0
Logged
Narrowly averting disaster since 1964! 

Wayne Willey
Albert Lea, MN U.S.A. IC C/L Aircraft Modeler, Ex AMA member

Offline Neville Legg

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 593
Re: Tautening vs. Non tautening Butyrate
« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2011, 03:01:31 AM »
Non-shrinking goes over shrinking dope absolutely fine! Just finished 2 little models (30" span) for my grandson, covered in silk scarves, 2 coats of shrinking nitrate (thinned) the rest was non-shrinking butyrate, (well thinned) no problems at all. I don't have to fuel-proof them as I'm using diesel engines!

Cheers
Logged
"I think, therefore I have problems"

(not) Descartes

Offline Randy Powell

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 10478
  • TreeTop Flyer
Re: Tautening vs. Non tautening Butyrate
« Reply #6 on: March 10, 2011, 09:45:13 AM »
Brian,

yea, as said above, the non-taunting goes over the taunting stuff fine. I don't use nitrate dope, though others do successfully. I use butyrate from the balsa up.

I've been talking to someone else about doing mixed finishes (in this case using lacquer and urethane). Compatibility becomes an issue mostly when you are using non-homogeneous material. There are ways to do it (like intercoats and seal coats between incompatible elements), but you always run a risk when using stuff that isn't made to work together.
Logged
Member in good standing of P.I.S.T
(Politically Incorrect Stunt Team)
AMA 67711
 Randy Powell

Offline Brian Massey

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1016
    • California Car Clubs
Re: Tautening vs. Non tautening Butyrate
« Reply #7 on: March 10, 2011, 09:51:58 AM »
Quote from: wwwarbird on March 09, 2011, 11:04:38 PM
Brian,

 It'll take a little sifting out, but the subject was hashed out pretty thoroughly right here...

 http://stunthanger.com/smf/index.php?topic=19162.0
Thanks All for the feedback; and the link above; it was very helpful.

Brian
Logged
While flying the pattern, my incompetence always exceeds my expectations.

AMA 55421
Madera, CA

Offline Neville Legg

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 593
Re: Tautening vs. Non tautening Butyrate
« Reply #8 on: March 12, 2011, 01:03:40 AM »
The reason I used nitrate for the first few coats is, because it sticks better, personal experience as shown that! ;D As of the last couple of models, I've used sanding sealer, not home made, to stick the silk down and seal the bare wood. It doesn't lift fillets either. Clear dope is only used only on the open loose silk.

Cheers
Logged
"I think, therefore I have problems"

(not) Descartes

Offline Bill Little

  • 2017
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12671
  • Second in COMMAND
Re: Tautening vs. Non tautening Butyrate
« Reply #9 on: March 13, 2011, 01:02:09 PM »
Quote from: Neville Legg on March 12, 2011, 01:03:40 AM
The reason I used nitrate for the first few coats is, because it sticks better, personal experience as shown that! ;D As of the last couple of models, I've used sanding sealer, not home made, to stick the silk down and seal the bare wood. It doesn't lift fillets either. Clear dope is only used only on the open loose silk.

Cheers

HI Neville,

Over the past close to 50 years, I have seemed to finally fall into a system I like and works, too.  I used to only use Testors and Randolph dopes, because they were all that was available "locally".  All were "butyrate".  I did do a plane or two with Aero Gloss which I got on the rare trip to the hobby shop over 30 miles away.  It wasn't "compatible" with the others at the time.  As time has passed, I have taken tips from some of the best guys in the business: Windy, Bob Hunt, Billy Werwage, etc..  Bobby told me about Randolph's "Tinted Non-tautening Nitrate" years ago.  He said to use it as a substrate, up to attaching the paper.  I did and have done so ever since.  I do like Randy P. and use Sig Supercoat (or some other high shrink butyrate) to shrink the open bays.  Randy goes tend to use more full strength dope than I do, I thin everything, never using full strength (it will hardly ever "brush out" for me).  I have then put dope, automotive lacquer, basecoat/clearcoat, urethanes, etc., over that.  Final clear is either Sig Lite Cote, or urethane, depending on the plane.  I no longer use ANY retarder. 

I will say that you cannot use dope over a clearcoat/basecoat paint base color, it eats it alive.  And never put nitrate over butyrate. ;D  (but you can repair an automotive urethane clear finish with clear butyrate dope on open bays)

Big Bear
Logged
Big Bear <><

Aberdeen, NC

James Hylton Motorsports/NASCAR/ARCA

AMA 95351 (got one of my old numbers back! ;D )

Trying to get by

Offline PJ Rowland

  • AUS - 29541 AMA - 809970
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 2058
  • Melbourne - AUSTRALIA
Re: Tautening vs. Non tautening Butyrate
« Reply #10 on: April 10, 2011, 07:21:29 PM »
Non Taut dope is a must... Even with carbon veil, which shrinks less than Silkspan, balsa isnt that strong without is. The issues are that with regual taut dope and silkspan is can " suck in " or warp the wood underneath. I have used moulded balsa shells for along time, and have used normal Taut dope to seal everything. Its IMPOSSIBLE.. read - IMPOSSIBLE, not to get some element of Suckdown over a shell. I have ( in the past ) resorted to laying down carbon fiber inside the shell, with more balsa doublers for a top block, yet still have the suckdown effect. - Which to fix results in more filler, more carbon, more work, more WEIGHT.

I finally gave up a few planes ago and went to Non - taut and carbon veil and the ship stays the way I finish it in wood, no suckdown no dips or gaps. No more fill.

I will even use a 50 / 50 mix of non-taut over the open bay to lay it down, - Starting with just putting it around the edges 1st, let it dry, then lay it over the bay - let that dry then put full strength over that - with no ill effects, no warping. If doing a fin for example, I would lay .02 carbon veil over that to aid in the finish and strength.

Any other way ( IMOH ) is a waste of time.
Logged
If you always put limit on everything you do, physical or anything else. It will spread into your work and into your life. There are no limits. There are only plateaus, and you must not stay there, you must go beyond them.” - Bruce Lee.

...
 I Yearn for a world where chickens can cross the road without having their motives questioned.

Advertise Here
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 


Advertise Here