R22 Corner
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where blade construction employs a bonding agent any strong washing solution can degrade the bonding material. This was a serious problem on Entrom F28 blades when cleaned by chemical cleaners.
Soap and water has always been the reccommended method.
And remember that clean rotor blades (main and tail) are necessary to obtain performance as given in the flight manual.
Soap and water has always been the reccommended method.
And remember that clean rotor blades (main and tail) are necessary to obtain performance as given in the flight manual.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Queensland Australia
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA42
The concept of solar degrading of blades and cleaning agents causing debonding has been discussed on another thread ages ago with the Lu batting for the pro-degradation team.
My response was that we have hundreds of R22s and lots of R44s here in the hot dry Oz outback and there have been no rash of R22s dropping their wings off and only one R44 machine delaminating it's blades. Its a bit hard to blame an all pervading event as a cause for a problem in one machine.
The concern about cleaning agents is a bit harder to be sure of but some types of cleaner are commonly used and also have not been associated with widespread delamination.
Frinstance - Despite Lu's concern about good ol' WD 40 causing blades to fall apart left right and centre there were no actual reports of it ever being a cause. I actually have a letter from Patrick Cox (Robinson's cheif something or other (forget exactly what) saying WD 40 was fine to use except on the teflon parts of the stops and pitch rods. The letter is posted on my website if anyone wants to read it.
http://helipics.homestead.com and follow the technical links
The concept of solar degrading of blades and cleaning agents causing debonding has been discussed on another thread ages ago with the Lu batting for the pro-degradation team.
My response was that we have hundreds of R22s and lots of R44s here in the hot dry Oz outback and there have been no rash of R22s dropping their wings off and only one R44 machine delaminating it's blades. Its a bit hard to blame an all pervading event as a cause for a problem in one machine.
The concern about cleaning agents is a bit harder to be sure of but some types of cleaner are commonly used and also have not been associated with widespread delamination.
Frinstance - Despite Lu's concern about good ol' WD 40 causing blades to fall apart left right and centre there were no actual reports of it ever being a cause. I actually have a letter from Patrick Cox (Robinson's cheif something or other (forget exactly what) saying WD 40 was fine to use except on the teflon parts of the stops and pitch rods. The letter is posted on my website if anyone wants to read it.
http://helipics.homestead.com and follow the technical links
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The home of Dudley Dooright-Where the lead dog is the only one that gets a change of scenery.
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my own defense.
To: RobboRider
In my post regarding solar radiation I was responding to a post by Gaseous where he had commented about solar radiation and its' effect on Enstrom blades. I further expanded on that point telling about solar radiation and elastomeric parts on rotorheads. I was not specifically addressing Robinson blades.
In past posts I commented about the effects of certain detergents and how the alkaline elements in the detergent could cause hydrogen embrittlement. I also commented about the petroleum distillates in some waxes and its' effect on bonding agents. I further expanded on the use of WD-40 ® and the effects of the petroleum distillates on bonding agents.
I really don't care if Pat Cox authorized the use of WD-40 ® on Robinson blades because the manufacturers of WD-40 ® told me that they have not given any approval for its' use on any type of aircraft. This means that if something happens as a result of its' use your ass is left to hang out to dry.
WD-40 ® was developed as a water dispersal agent and not a rotorblade surface protector or a lubricant. Over the years it has been used for many applications due to its' ability to penetrate into very small openings. This could mean it can loosen a rusted bolt or in the case of a rotorblade it could penetrate into areas that could result in damage to the bonding materials.
WD-40 ® on blades can also attract and hold dust and dirt, which can effect the aerodynamic efficiency of the blades.
In making the above comments I am speaking as a Reliability engineer and addressing the above points relative to the ultimate safety of the equipment. I have been working in this capacity since 1968 so in making the above comments I am not shooting from the hip.
The concept of solar degrading of blades and cleaning agents causing debonding has been discussed on another thread ages ago with the Lu batting for the pro-degradation team.
In past posts I commented about the effects of certain detergents and how the alkaline elements in the detergent could cause hydrogen embrittlement. I also commented about the petroleum distillates in some waxes and its' effect on bonding agents. I further expanded on the use of WD-40 ® and the effects of the petroleum distillates on bonding agents.
I really don't care if Pat Cox authorized the use of WD-40 ® on Robinson blades because the manufacturers of WD-40 ® told me that they have not given any approval for its' use on any type of aircraft. This means that if something happens as a result of its' use your ass is left to hang out to dry.
WD-40 ® was developed as a water dispersal agent and not a rotorblade surface protector or a lubricant. Over the years it has been used for many applications due to its' ability to penetrate into very small openings. This could mean it can loosen a rusted bolt or in the case of a rotorblade it could penetrate into areas that could result in damage to the bonding materials.
WD-40 ® on blades can also attract and hold dust and dirt, which can effect the aerodynamic efficiency of the blades.
In making the above comments I am speaking as a Reliability engineer and addressing the above points relative to the ultimate safety of the equipment. I have been working in this capacity since 1968 so in making the above comments I am not shooting from the hip.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
100% corect Lu...
WD 40 is a water dispersant agent and yes it does attract dirt and degrade the aerodynamic efficiency of blades and is a possible cause of other maladays.
From years of experience I have found that WD 40 is OVERUSED and it is not the 'most wonderful stuff that will cure all ills'
Use it sparingly and clean off old WD 40 before applying a new.
I have found that after some time the WD 40 absorbs water and becomes sticky, so in small close fitteings it can gum up the works.
It's superb when fresh.
WD 40 is a water dispersant agent and yes it does attract dirt and degrade the aerodynamic efficiency of blades and is a possible cause of other maladays.
From years of experience I have found that WD 40 is OVERUSED and it is not the 'most wonderful stuff that will cure all ills'
Use it sparingly and clean off old WD 40 before applying a new.
I have found that after some time the WD 40 absorbs water and becomes sticky, so in small close fitteings it can gum up the works.
It's superb when fresh.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ON A HILL
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robinson tail boom.
Do Robinson fit the tail rotor shaft bearing (the one on the damper), before riveting the boom together, or do they have workers with four foot long arms.?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: AZ
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I watched our mechanics fit one in with the tailboom already assembled. It was quite a chore using two mechanics, one spying through an inspection hole and knocking the (socket I believe) into the right location, and the other one at the end with the long pole. They have lock nuts on them which makes it much easier....that being said I am guessing the factory does it before riviting.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Numerous Robinson technical threads merged to create a central source of information.
For link to Robinson Certification thread which includes Frank Robinson's response to Lu (30 November 2000) click here
Heliport
For link to Robinson Certification thread which includes Frank Robinson's response to Lu (30 November 2000) click here
Heliport
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robinson R22
Well after reading the entire forum regarding the Robinson R22 i am exhuasted LOL WoW!!
As an experienced Helicopter Pilot and having extensive experience on the R22 and R44 i just wonder if what Lu is telling us is True..!!!
I'm not an engineer, i'm that not clever, so i became a helicopter Pilot instead LOL, But i just can't help thinking Lu is correct and this has been a massive cover up from Robinson..
No wonder he has his money locked away off shore!
I was once told that Robinson is self insured.. what a joke! if you win you lose anyway!!
I once crashed in a R22, it bloody well hurts, The machine was a right off and according to BASI i am lucky to be alive! In fact shouldnt be!!
Before you ask, basi said it was Pilot error! I say it was LTE.
The aircarft would not recover and i crashed. ouch,,
Iv'e mustered in R22's and had them snapp at me and remind me who's boss, but i am still here.
But if Lu is correct in his theory and facts then this is a major cover up and should be exposed..
Safe Flying..what ever you fly!
As an experienced Helicopter Pilot and having extensive experience on the R22 and R44 i just wonder if what Lu is telling us is True..!!!
I'm not an engineer, i'm that not clever, so i became a helicopter Pilot instead LOL, But i just can't help thinking Lu is correct and this has been a massive cover up from Robinson..
No wonder he has his money locked away off shore!
I was once told that Robinson is self insured.. what a joke! if you win you lose anyway!!
I once crashed in a R22, it bloody well hurts, The machine was a right off and according to BASI i am lucky to be alive! In fact shouldnt be!!
Before you ask, basi said it was Pilot error! I say it was LTE.
The aircarft would not recover and i crashed. ouch,,
Iv'e mustered in R22's and had them snapp at me and remind me who's boss, but i am still here.
But if Lu is correct in his theory and facts then this is a major cover up and should be exposed..
Safe Flying..what ever you fly!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rotaryman: It's very unlikely that you suffered LTE in a Robinson. The tail rotor of the R22, and even more so the R44, is exceedingly strong.
Don't get too worked up about what Lu says. He's nutty as a fruit cake. Toot toot!
Don't get too worked up about what Lu says. He's nutty as a fruit cake. Toot toot!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Selfish:
Be not afraidish.
The two most sensible suggestions that have been made in this entire debate come from Mr Nick Lappos, who was Sikorsky's lead test pilot on the S76, who now runs the S92 program, who is a lecturer in Newtonian Physics and an internationally-renowned consumer of Jim Beam.
These were that Lu Zuckerman should a) learn to fly, so that he might realise that helicopters do not do what he theorizes they will do when you wiggle the sticks, and b) that he should get some helicopter design qualification or experience, so that he might more closely understand some of the terminology he has picked up.
Lu's main claim to fame, that he once parked Arthur Young's car for him, doesn't fit the bill.
Be not afraidish.
The two most sensible suggestions that have been made in this entire debate come from Mr Nick Lappos, who was Sikorsky's lead test pilot on the S76, who now runs the S92 program, who is a lecturer in Newtonian Physics and an internationally-renowned consumer of Jim Beam.
These were that Lu Zuckerman should a) learn to fly, so that he might realise that helicopters do not do what he theorizes they will do when you wiggle the sticks, and b) that he should get some helicopter design qualification or experience, so that he might more closely understand some of the terminology he has picked up.
Lu's main claim to fame, that he once parked Arthur Young's car for him, doesn't fit the bill.
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The home of Dudley Dooright-Where the lead dog is the only one that gets a change of scenery.
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Making comments about someone you don't know is very bad form.
To: Pat Malone
Like they say, I’ll show you mine if you show me yours:
1) Maintained helicopters in the USCG
2) Attended six factory schools at Sikorsky
3) Attended 13 familiarization courses on other helicopters
4) Senior R&M engineer on the Cheyenne helicopter
5) Set up the Maintainability program on the Apache. Senior design for maintainability Engineer
6) Consultant on the integration of helicopters on ships
7) Maintenance manager for Bell Helicopter International
8) Set up and managed the R&M program for the Agusta A-129 and the EH-101
9) Consultant to the Director of Agusta regarding the integration of the Reliability and the Product support functions into the engineering process
10) Consultant on the V-22 program performing assessment of the maintenance activities on the structure.
This is just for helicopters. Do you want me to discuss the other programs I have worked on?
Regarding Arthur Young I never met the man nor, did I park his car as you so sarcastically noted. However I have an even bigger claim to fame. I knocked Igor Sikorsky on his ass at the old South Avenue plant.
Regarding your comment about me being nutty as a fruitcake I along with the other members of this forum would like to know what personal knowledge your comment was based on.
Did you talk to my wife?
Oh yes, I completely forgot the fourteen month training program at Sikorsky which consisted of classroom studies and shop floor assembly of helicopters.
b) that he should get some helicopter design qualification or experience, so that he might more closely understand some of the terminology he has picked up.
1) Maintained helicopters in the USCG
2) Attended six factory schools at Sikorsky
3) Attended 13 familiarization courses on other helicopters
4) Senior R&M engineer on the Cheyenne helicopter
5) Set up the Maintainability program on the Apache. Senior design for maintainability Engineer
6) Consultant on the integration of helicopters on ships
7) Maintenance manager for Bell Helicopter International
8) Set up and managed the R&M program for the Agusta A-129 and the EH-101
9) Consultant to the Director of Agusta regarding the integration of the Reliability and the Product support functions into the engineering process
10) Consultant on the V-22 program performing assessment of the maintenance activities on the structure.
This is just for helicopters. Do you want me to discuss the other programs I have worked on?
Regarding Arthur Young I never met the man nor, did I park his car as you so sarcastically noted. However I have an even bigger claim to fame. I knocked Igor Sikorsky on his ass at the old South Avenue plant.
Regarding your comment about me being nutty as a fruitcake I along with the other members of this forum would like to know what personal knowledge your comment was based on.
Did you talk to my wife?
Oh yes, I completely forgot the fourteen month training program at Sikorsky which consisted of classroom studies and shop floor assembly of helicopters.
Last edited by Lu Zuckerman; 15th Apr 2004 at 15:20.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Selfish
Frank Robinson's post in the certification thread was on the 30 November 2000.
I gave the date, rather than the page, because page numbers vary depending upon how we set up our user options.
Frank Robinson's post in the certification thread was on the 30 November 2000.
I gave the date, rather than the page, because page numbers vary depending upon how we set up our user options.
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The home of Dudley Dooright-Where the lead dog is the only one that gets a change of scenery.
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once agasin into the breech.
To: Pat Malone (Is pat short for Pastie?)
Lu: That must be about the tenth time you've posted your CV.[/QUOTE]
I have probably posted my abbreviated CV more than ten times. Each time I do it is in response to some idiotic statement by someone like yourself that I am uneducated in the ways of real pilots. That I have no understanding of the engineering that goes into the design of a helicopter and as a result I am in your words “Nutty as a fruitcake”. As far as my ability to fly helicopters or for that matter fixed wing aircraft my military experience include almost 300 hours at the controls of a helicopter and over twice that on fixed wing aircraft. I wasn’t trained to pilot standards but I could keep it in the air and I could land it if necessary.
It is obvious that you have no understanding of the function of a RMS engineer because if you did you would realize a RMS engineer is deeply involved in the design process. Whether the engineering department accepts the RMS engineers input is another story.
Now that I have shown you mine let's see yours. If you want to discuss Newtonian physics that is beyond my capability but if you want to discuss helicopters in general please do so.
Lu: That must be about the tenth time you've posted your CV.[/QUOTE]
1. Learn to fly.
2. Get some design experience or qualification.
3. Come back and discuss it.
It is obvious that you have no understanding of the function of a RMS engineer because if you did you would realize a RMS engineer is deeply involved in the design process. Whether the engineering department accepts the RMS engineers input is another story.
Now that I have shown you mine let's see yours. If you want to discuss Newtonian physics that is beyond my capability but if you want to discuss helicopters in general please do so.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AMAZING..
I really find it amazing that people who claim to be Knowledgable, and shall we say, Inteligent!, HA!
Find it funny to verbally abuse a fellow PPrune member, LU is entitled to his oppinions, therories etc like the next guy!
I for one, would like to see some direct answers from Frank Robinson to Lu's Questions? instead of dancing around the Questions like he did.
I'm not an engineer as i have said before, But hey i'm a pilot and i think i understand helicopters etc, I have an open mind, i think! wow what if this guy is correct!
or are you so nieve to think there could never be any kind of cover up!! nah surley not!
Find it funny to verbally abuse a fellow PPrune member, LU is entitled to his oppinions, therories etc like the next guy!
I for one, would like to see some direct answers from Frank Robinson to Lu's Questions? instead of dancing around the Questions like he did.
I'm not an engineer as i have said before, But hey i'm a pilot and i think i understand helicopters etc, I have an open mind, i think! wow what if this guy is correct!
or are you so nieve to think there could never be any kind of cover up!! nah surley not!
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The home of Dudley Dooright-Where the lead dog is the only one that gets a change of scenery.
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading it is not the same thing as understanding it.
To: CRAN
Re-read the part where he said he had considered a 90-degree phase angle but decided on the 72-degree phase angle. In order to have a 90-degree phase angle he would have to use a rotorhead like a Bell. However his whole design was predicated on the rotorhead that he had patented which had cone hinges. The use of this type or rotorhead eliminates the possibility of ever considering the application of a 90-degree phase angle. If he used a 90-degree pitch horn like on a Bell the helicopter would be uncontrollable.
My theory about the 18-degree offset was poo-pooed or downright ridiculed however I want you to consider the following: The aerodynamic theory of helicopter flight is that the blades will reach their maximum flap 90-degrees after the maximum pitch input. This is the way the flight controls are set up. Then there is phase angle shift, which means that due to outside influences the blades will not flap exactly at 90-degrees and the pilot will make cyclic corrections to compensate for this shift. The Robinson has according to everyone but me on this forum to include Frank Robinson a 72-degree phase angle.
Since the Robinson rotor system is rigged so that the blades do not receive maximum pitch input until the advancing blade is 18-degrees ahead of the lateral axis it must flap down over the nose in 72-degrees of rotation if it in fact has a 72-degree phase angle.
As an engineer you can diagram this action showing the tip path plane and the flapping of the advancing blade and by definition the retreating blade. If in flying in a helicopter you will note that the tip path is one continuous line interrupted periodically a blade flapping out of the tip path due to gusting and within one rotation it is back in the tip path. If the Robinson in fact has a 72-degree phase angle the tip path will not be one continuous line but it will show distinct deviation from the tip path plane and I would assume a lot of attendant vibration.
But what do I know as I am as nutty as a fruitcake.
I've re-read Frank Robinsons post and it is very clear and accurate.
My theory about the 18-degree offset was poo-pooed or downright ridiculed however I want you to consider the following: The aerodynamic theory of helicopter flight is that the blades will reach their maximum flap 90-degrees after the maximum pitch input. This is the way the flight controls are set up. Then there is phase angle shift, which means that due to outside influences the blades will not flap exactly at 90-degrees and the pilot will make cyclic corrections to compensate for this shift. The Robinson has according to everyone but me on this forum to include Frank Robinson a 72-degree phase angle.
Since the Robinson rotor system is rigged so that the blades do not receive maximum pitch input until the advancing blade is 18-degrees ahead of the lateral axis it must flap down over the nose in 72-degrees of rotation if it in fact has a 72-degree phase angle.
As an engineer you can diagram this action showing the tip path plane and the flapping of the advancing blade and by definition the retreating blade. If in flying in a helicopter you will note that the tip path is one continuous line interrupted periodically a blade flapping out of the tip path due to gusting and within one rotation it is back in the tip path. If the Robinson in fact has a 72-degree phase angle the tip path will not be one continuous line but it will show distinct deviation from the tip path plane and I would assume a lot of attendant vibration.
But what do I know as I am as nutty as a fruitcake.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Midlands, UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Understanding indeed
Lu,
Can you explain why you think a 90 degree phase angle would make the helicopter 'uncontrollable'.
Would it not just make it suffer from wee-wa and require the application of lateral cyclic as forward speed increases?
DC
Can you explain why you think a 90 degree phase angle would make the helicopter 'uncontrollable'.
Would it not just make it suffer from wee-wa and require the application of lateral cyclic as forward speed increases?
DC