Date   

Re: Replacement Foams

Sam Hoskins
 

I just uploaded a follow-up video. Here is the way you would not want to cut across the front of the canard. https://youtu.be/EqWz7049aSI

On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 12:29 PM Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins@...> wrote:
The canard I removed in the video was going to be scrapped. Since the canard is floxed and taped to the firewall, cutting along the front of the canard, fron underneath the airframe,  will destroy it.  What you can do is to cut along the firewall, just below the lower engine mounts, and will remove the canard with that piece of the FW still attached to the canard.  Then, when you reattach it you only need to use a couple of BID tapes rejoining the pieces of the firewall.  Clear as mud?  If you actually get this far I can help you out. It just might be easier to remove the canard, repair it properly, then reinstall it.

Here's how to start the nasty work.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14Li0ZTpdbg&t=38s

At any rate, your canard is bad news in it's current shape.

Sam

On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 12:03 PM 'Jay Scheevel SGT' jay@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Hi Shaun,

 

Just took a closer look at these. The first two repairs look trivial (MW outboard, and fuselage belly). The canard looks a little concerning. Don’t think it is a delam per-se. The fracture pattern leads me to believe that the outer wing section has sheared aft relative to the center section. Also, the view looking in from the front seems to show the flat portion of the canard that is supposed to be bonded to the firewall with flox and multiple BID tapes. It appears to be painted and free-standing. That may be the source of your problem. Suggest it would be a good idea to cut the fuselage shell above the top surface of the canard, remove the canard, sand it down and do a proper repair, then re-mount it. Sam Hoskins has done this before and is a great source for how to do this.

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel, N8WQ

 


Re: Replacement Foams

Sam Hoskins
 

The canard I removed in the video was going to be scrapped. Since the canard is floxed and taped to the firewall, cutting along the front of the canard, fron underneath the airframe,  will destroy it.  What you can do is to cut along the firewall, just below the lower engine mounts, and will remove the canard with that piece of the FW still attached to the canard.  Then, when you reattach it you only need to use a couple of BID tapes rejoining the pieces of the firewall.  Clear as mud?  If you actually get this far I can help you out. It just might be easier to remove the canard, repair it properly, then reinstall it.

Here's how to start the nasty work.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14Li0ZTpdbg&t=38s

At any rate, your canard is bad news in it's current shape.

Sam


On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 12:03 PM 'Jay Scheevel SGT' jay@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Hi Shaun,

 

Just took a closer look at these. The first two repairs look trivial (MW outboard, and fuselage belly). The canard looks a little concerning. Don’t think it is a delam per-se. The fracture pattern leads me to believe that the outer wing section has sheared aft relative to the center section. Also, the view looking in from the front seems to show the flat portion of the canard that is supposed to be bonded to the firewall with flox and multiple BID tapes. It appears to be painted and free-standing. That may be the source of your problem. Suggest it would be a good idea to cut the fuselage shell above the top surface of the canard, remove the canard, sand it down and do a proper repair, then re-mount it. Sam Hoskins has done this before and is a great source for how to do this.

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel, N8WQ

 


Re: Replacement Foams

Jay Scheevel
 

Hi Shaun,

 

Just took a closer look at these. The first two repairs look trivial (MW outboard, and fuselage belly). The canard looks a little concerning. Don’t think it is a delam per-se. The fracture pattern leads me to believe that the outer wing section has sheared aft relative to the center section. Also, the view looking in from the front seems to show the flat portion of the canard that is supposed to be bonded to the firewall with flox and multiple BID tapes. It appears to be painted and free-standing. That may be the source of your problem. Suggest it would be a good idea to cut the fuselage shell above the top surface of the canard, remove the canard, sand it down and do a proper repair, then re-mount it. Sam Hoskins has done this before and is a great source for how to do this.

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel, N8WQ

 


Re: FOD - Alan Home Safe!

Jon Finley
 

Very well done Alan!!  I'm proud of ya for splitting that VERY long trip up into very manageable chunks. It was great to fly with you - even if only in a mostly straight line. :-)

Congrats!!


Re: Replacement Foams

Frankenbird Vern
 

 

 It is a good time for discourse on this. After seeing in person, and amazed at wing the deflection at Boeing Everett on the 787 during ultimate fail testing, the wing being a carbon fiber matrix system; I am sure you are correct Charlie. It was frightening to see the 787 wing bending to much farther angles than we imagined it would do...and it did not fail as early as when predicted.      
 Delam of the glass to the open cell foam is going to occur prior to a correctly constructed carbon fiber tubular spar failure. With foam crushing over time there is little or no load transfer possible to the lower skin which must remain in shear. Compression failure as we see in Shauns' Canard is just around the corner. Just after that will likely be surface separation with little to no warning, hopefully at a landing and not during flight turbulence. Jim also pointed out stress risers were introduced at RAF during manufacture so that is no comfort either.      

There is something that can be done and that is to reduce the modulus (amount of "shock" bending.. in simpler terms.. stop the canard from being forced to act as a large flat spring).  This may be easier to do than first thought. 

 You guys know...how many have had reported the Q2 MK1 configuration is known for loading the canard during landing to the point it acts as a diving board? What is the history of the MKII Dragonfly, a similar configuration but different Canard and gear construction in this respect? What has the related history been of the Q1 in this respect?  I do not remember any such reports on D-fly MkII or Q1, however the same cannot be said about the D-fly Mk1 which predated the Q2 design. Lots of broken canards on the D-fly Mk1.

Moving the main gear inboard reduces the high peak loading of the canard on landing.  I am not comfortable with the stubs for gear on the MKII D-Fly canard and that is why I decided to remove them and revise the design to the Wittman engine mount system including the gear legs as used on the W8/W10 Tailwinds. The angle on the ramp will be nearly the same as Q2..but the intent is the flight surfaces will only be subjected to flight loads.    

 This is a copy/paste from a related article on this subject that caught my eye:

    

Now back to the design talk. The Dragonfly had problems with its Mk I version.

Owen Strawn gives me this remark:

"The only reason I know for putting the wheels on the ends of the canard is that the original Quickie was a very marginally powered design, and this configuration reduced the total weight and the dragof the airplane. This didn't work as well for the Dragonfly, because the canard span is so much greater and the airplane so much heavier that the "springiness" is a much more significant concern. Many MK I Dragonflies ended up with broken canards because of bouncing, which is why the inboard gear was designed (MK II). The Q2/200 has a somewhat smaller canard span and has not had as much problems with this issue."

In the old days the plans and so of the Dragonfly are sold by Slip Stream Industries. Their site is non-active. Who sells that material now?

Specifications of Dragonfly according to Slip Stream Industries

OVERALL


 It is true the 22 foot wide span of the Dragonfly compared to the 18 foot of the Q2 aggravates the condition, but the resolution was the same.  It is also true that Viking Aircraft revised the Spar ply schedule of the D-fly to increase the loading capacity of the Canard due to builders increasing payloads and speeds. Revised D-fly Canards are rated by Stress to 1300lbs total.

 What I am getting at is recognize Charlie is correct and this is a design issue based on material actions with proven evidence, and a MKII Q2 configuration is appropriate. 

 It seemed to me the less intrusive way to accomplish this to both the wallet and effectively for the aircraft is with the hoop gear or as mentioned, the Wittman engine mount main gear design. 

 I'd be the first one to say that the MK1 is definitely an attractive appearing design but design functionality over the lifetime of the airframe is critical.    


From: Q-LIST@... on behalf of Charlie oneskydog@... [Q-LIST]
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 9:41 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 

Vern,


I have been intrigued by the Q-200 wing structure for a while. It seems that they are susceptible to top skin de-lamination in the transverse tensile loading of the foam. The spar often does not break but the top wing skin pulls off of the foam.

I have a hypothesis about this. I have not and will not run numbers to prove it. I used to work for a couple of companies where we had golf shaft projects. Basically scaled down tubular carbon spars. The amount of deflection during testing is incredible and they do not break.

So I believe the spar is capable of deflecting further than foam filled glass airfoil shape. The spar deflects during a hard landing and the top glass skin goes in compression. It either buckles in like Sams outboard of the fuselage and crushes the foam or buckles out when the foam fails in tension inside of the fuselage and is mistaken for heel damage.

I have seen a few composite projects over the years and this appears to be a design oversight (material modulus) times (section moment of inertia ) mismatch between the carbon spar and the wing skin. Another clue the problem is design is that it is not isolated to one aircraft and the defects are in similar locations on different aircraft.

My thoughts and worth what you paid for it..

Regards,

Charlie Johnson


On Sep 25, 2018, at 1:04 PM, Vern Lehman smeshno1@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

  I'm really interested in this and will dig into the investigation cause I'm a bit of a geek, even here at my job.

Used to drive my parents crazy with the "why" questions. Doing a repair of that magnitude inside that area

would have been a test of any mechanics endurance! Not my idea of a fun task.       




From: Q-LIST@... <Q-LIST@...> on behalf of logistics_engineering@msn..com [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 6:20 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 

Hi Vern,

Take a look at my carbon spar failure in the files section.

Each spar was load tested at the Quickie factory in Mojave according to Scott Swing (who was doing the load testing). I was told they used a two piece aluminum fixture that bolted the spar in place while a sandbagged load was placed on the end. If the load didn't cause the spar to drop past a certain minimum for a certain amount of time, it passed. The only problem was the fixture wasn't radiused enough and sometimes caused a stress riser at about 10" out from the large end. He said several failed and in fact he used some of the failed and then repaired spars for his own Q200.

My problem was a little different in that I had to do the repair in a very small space (newly painted plane) with the plane sitting on it's gear.

Regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP - Q200 


FOD - Alan Home Safe!

millenniumflier@...
 

Hey Everybody,

Alan checking in, just a few hours ago, I put the LongEZ back in my hangar at Livermore, after an amazing trip to Enid and back! Hats off to Bruce and “Honey Lamb” for hosting such an amazing event for all of us, with old friends we haven’t seen for years, and the best part is that I actually flew my plane to be with you all, so it was a banner event.  I had told Terry that for the first time in 22 years, it was kinda strange with me now needing a ride to the hotel and back, since I actually flew myself in after taking commercial all these years and finally not needing a rental car!  😊

My return home was welcomingly uneventful, when compared with my trip out to Enid… thanks again to Matthew Curcio for letting me follow him from Tehachapi in California out to Enid through what the FAA told me was the remnants of Tropical Depression 19, which is what Jerry is now dealing with farther East; it was an extremely extensive  weather formation.  Sunday morning, Jon Finley offered to fly with me westward, thanks again, Jon!  We stopped at Tucumcari, where I overnighted, while Jon then continued on his way  back home.  Marc Zeitlin had told me about this really cool hotel in Tucumcari, so I stayed there, an amazing  60s vintage motel right on Route 66, he told me that they will pick you up at the airport, and they sure did, and in a Model A, no kidding!  That, along with the hotel itself, was a blast from the past. Monday morning real early, they brought me back to the airport in a 51 Pontiac, so definitely a lot of history at that place. Took off for Laughlin again, which I had planned for, knowing that I would need a break, and landed there, with  clear skies, though  with a high cloud deck around Albuquerque and bumpy, but nothing like that wall of rainthat had forced me to turn back last week.  I had purposely wanted to break it up into three legs for my first real long cross-country, and it worked out.  One reason being to add a cushion in case of weather…. Good thing I did that out-bound.  I learned a lot about the plane, and about myself as a pilot, and both were just what the doctor ordered, for more long flights in the future.

Sorry for the delay in getting this sent out, but I wanted to make sure that I was actually home safe and sound before sending a note.  Again, all my thanks to Bruce and Honey Lamb for being the gracious and superlative hosts that they were, and equally to everyone who was able to make it…. This one weekend each year pegs the “fun meter” for me with humor, advice shared, and inspiration for moving forward with our planes.  It wouldn't be a fly-in without all of us attending. The Lord is good!

Still basking in it all…

Fly safely, everybody, and sure hope to see you all again next year, if not before!

All the very best,

Alan

 


Re: Replacement Foams

Jay Scheevel
 

Hi Shaun,

 

Just took a closer look at these. The first two repairs look trivial (MW outboard, and fuselage belly). The canard looks a little concerning. Don’t think it is a delam per-se. The fracture pattern leads me to believe that the outer wing section has sheared aft relative to the center section. Also, the view looking in from the front seems to show the flat portion of the canard that is supposed to be bonded to the firewall with flox and multiple BID tapes. It appears to be painted and free-standing. That may be the source of your problem. Suggest it would be a good idea to cut the fuselage shell above the top surface of the canard, remove the canard, sand it down and do a proper repair, then re-mount it. Sam Hoskins has done this before and is a great source for how to do this.

 

Cheers,

Jay Scheevel, N8WQ

 

From: Q-LIST@...
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2018 7:23 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams

 

 

Here are some pics of the main project areas for the time being. I hope it doesn't sound like I'm just trying to find any random materials that might stick together just to get flying again. I'm an aerospace engineer with some experience in composites testing, so I do have an appreciation for the level of criticality of some of these repairs and the processes/materials used.  Most of my composite experience is in design validation and testing in a lab setting, but I do have a little hands on experience with repairs and fabrication; that being said I'm eager to get all the advice I can get. The pics are listed both in level of criticality and in the order I plan to complete them, for an educational build up.

Left rear wing, top skin and core damage, aft of shear web.

I'm in the process of staggering the 2 BID plies and getting a clean core removal down to the inside of the lower skin.

Inner skin delamination and core degradation along the bottom of the tail cone.  Seems to have been caused by the previous installation of a loose battery that repeatedly impacted the skin and leaked acid through the resulting cracks in the inner skin. The worst damage is between the last two bulkheads, but the floor between the next two bulheads moving forward is also a bit questionable.



Now the worst of it. A crack in the upper skin with surround delamination or the right hand portion of the forward wing.  Tap testing the area seems as if the delamition doesnt reach all the way to the spar and the spar itself sounds ok (I realize this warrants a visual inspection as well and a tap test isn't definitive).



Looking into the cockpit from the engine side of the heater hole.

Obvious buckling and delamination of the skin around the crack.

Thoughts?


From: logistics_engineering@... [Q-LIST]

Sent: Saturday, September 22, 1:08 PM

Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams

To: q-list@...

 

I agree with Sam. Post your pix so we can get a better idea of what you are doing. We have a lot of experience in these areas. I had a fully cracked carbon spar several years ago which I repaired and replaced foam. The repairs you are making are not insignificant. Q pilots have died making foam and glass modification and repairs that were not correct. How much foam/glass experience do you have.?

Best regards,

Jim Patillo

N46JP - Q200

1500+ hrs on my Q200




Re: Replacement Foams

One Sky Dog
 

Vern,

I have been intrigued by the Q-200 wing structure for a while. It seems that they are susceptible to top skin de-lamination in the transverse tensile loading of the foam. The spar often does not break but the top wing skin pulls off of the foam.

I have a hypothesis about this. I have not and will not run numbers to prove it. I used to work for a couple of companies where we had golf shaft projects. Basically scaled down tubular carbon spars. The amount of deflection during testing is incredible and they do not break.

So I believe the spar is capable of deflecting further than foam filled glass airfoil shape. The spar deflects during a hard landing and the top glass skin goes in compression. It either buckles in like Sams outboard of the fuselage and crushes the foam or buckles out when the foam fails in tension inside of the fuselage and is mistaken for heel damage.

I have seen a few composite projects over the years and this appears to be a design oversight (material modulus) times (section moment of inertia ) mismatch between the carbon spar and the wing skin. Another clue the problem is design is that it is not isolated to one aircraft and the defects are in similar locations on different aircraft.

My thoughts and worth what you paid for it.

Regards,

Charlie Johnson


On Sep 25, 2018, at 1:04 PM, Vern Lehman smeshno1@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

  I'm really interested in this and will dig into the investigation cause I'm a bit of a geek, even here at my job.

Used to drive my parents crazy with the "why" questions. Doing a repair of that magnitude inside that area

would have been a test of any mechanics endurance! Not my idea of a fun task.       




From: Q-LIST@... <Q-LIST@...> on behalf of logistics_engineering@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 6:20 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 

Hi Vern,

Take a look at my carbon spar failure in the files section.

Each spar was load tested at the Quickie factory in Mojave according to Scott Swing (who was doing the load testing). I was told they used a two piece aluminum fixture that bolted the spar in place while a sandbagged load was placed on the end. If the load didn't cause the spar to drop past a certain minimum for a certain amount of time, it passed. The only problem was the fixture wasn't radiused enough and sometimes caused a stress riser at about 10" out from the large end. He said several failed and in fact he used some of the failed and then repaired spars for his own Q200.

My problem was a little different in that I had to do the repair in a very small space (newly painted plane) with the plane sitting on it's gear.

Regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP - Q200 


Re: Replacement Foams

Frankenbird Vern
 

Ah. yes I am mixing D-flys and Q birds again.  




From: Q-LIST@... on behalf of Charlie oneskydog@... [Q-LIST]
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 5:38 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 

Vern,


Q’s are 1s or 3s clarification

Regards,

Charlie


On Sep 25, 2018, at 11:02 AM, Vern Lehman smeshno1@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 Something also to consider is the gear configuration. I might have missed the info already but Shaun, is your aircraft a MK1 or MKII

config? 


Jim,was the test fixture a usual part of the RAF process? Makes me wonder if your fortunate accident in discovery of the Spar crack 

is a red flag "AD" for un-knowing buyers. In my case the Q2 kit was only a partial. I knew going into the deal that many of the

original $18,000 worth of parts were missing. I was interested in the fuselage shells and bulkheads, which is why the foam cores 

which for me are not required.   


Vern Lehman


From: Q-LIST@... <Q-LIST@...> on behalf of logistics_engineering@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 3:58 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 



Good afternoon Shaun,

Thanks for the pictures.  As Gary said, the the main wing repair you started is clean and straight forward. Do you have a set of plans for the main and canard layup showing the number of plys and type of glass?

As you may know, that repair is simply backing out of the opening with proper layups as you already stated, keeping in mind the top spar layup.

The lower fuselage repair where the foam and skin is damaged is pretty straight forward as well. An option would be to purchase a new lower fuselage section from someone and replace only the section that was damaged but that would require a repaint. Since you have a pretty paint job that may not be an option. If you can cut to the outer skin without "punching through", you could vacuum bag some Clark foam into place and glass over it.

The canard repair is a bit more complicated and I would be happy to discuss it with you.. Take a look in the files section under Logistics Engineering "Modifications and other Stuff". Scroll down to Carbon Spar repair I made some1400 hours back. There you can see what I had to do to fix the cracked spar on my plane.Note: I've never had a real hard landing in my plane. It was determined this spar crack was caused at the Quickie Factory due to a bad test fixture which caused a stress riser in the spar just inside the fuselage on the passenger side. I accidentally found it on an annual inspection. 

How many hours was this plane flown prior to your buying it?  Who built it?

With a delamination on the canard that large, I suspect it had a very hard landing that may have caused a prop strike as well. I would work my way down from the top of the canard and continue to cut out the damage.. Tap test, the top and bottom of the canard on both sides as there may be damage on the other side as well that is not noticeable. I would also probably check the crank run out. Once it's determined that the spar is OK, the glass procedure is pretty basic. Remember the Canard carries about 60% of the total load, so once the repair is made, get one of your HEAVY buddies and taxi around with you. That will put more G load on it that you will see in the air typically.

Regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP - Q200  
510-468-4891     

                 


Re: Replacement Foams

Frankenbird Vern
 

  I'm really interested in this and will dig into the investigation cause I'm a bit of a geek, even here at my job.

Used to drive my parents crazy with the "why" questions. Doing a repair of that magnitude inside that area

would have been a test of any mechanics endurance! Not my idea of a fun task.       




From: Q-LIST@... on behalf of logistics_engineering@... [Q-LIST]
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 6:20 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 

Hi Vern,

Take a look at my carbon spar failure in the files section.

Each spar was load tested at the Quickie factory in Mojave according to Scott Swing (who was doing the load testing). I was told they used a two piece aluminum fixture that bolted the spar in place while a sandbagged load was placed on the end. If the load didn't cause the spar to drop past a certain minimum for a certain amount of time, it passed. The only problem was the fixture wasn't radiused enough and sometimes caused a stress riser at about 10" out from the large end. He said several failed and in fact he used some of the failed and then repaired spars for his own Q200.

My problem was a little different in that I had to do the repair in a very small space (newly painted plane) with the plane sitting on it's gear.

Regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP - Q200 


Re: Replacement Foams

Jim Patillo
 

Hi Vern,

Take a look at my carbon spar failure in the files section.

Each spar was load tested at the Quickie factory in Mojave according to Scott Swing (who was doing the load testing). I was told they used a two piece aluminum fixture that bolted the spar in place while a sandbagged load was placed on the end. If the load didn't cause the spar to drop past a certain minimum for a certain amount of time, it passed. The only problem was the fixture wasn't radiused enough and sometimes caused a stress riser at about 10" out from the large end. He said several failed and in fact he used some of the failed and then repaired spars for his own Q200.

My problem was a little different in that I had to do the repair in a very small space (newly painted plane) with the plane sitting on it's gear.

Regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP - Q200 


Re: Replacement Foams

One Sky Dog
 

Vern,

Q’s are 1s or 3s clarification

Regards,

Charlie


On Sep 25, 2018, at 11:02 AM, Vern Lehman smeshno1@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 Something also to consider is the gear configuration. I might have missed the info already but Shaun, is your aircraft a MK1 or MKII

config? 


Jim,was the test fixture a usual part of the RAF process? Makes me wonder if your fortunate accident in discovery of the Spar crack 

is a red flag "AD" for un-knowing buyers. In my case the Q2 kit was only a partial. I knew going into the deal that many of the

original $18,000 worth of parts were missing. I was interested in the fuselage shells and bulkheads, which is why the foam cores 

which for me are not required.   


Vern Lehman


From: Q-LIST@... <Q-LIST@...> on behalf of logistics_engineering@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 3:58 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 



Good afternoon Shaun,

Thanks for the pictures.  As Gary said, the the main wing repair you started is clean and straight forward. Do you have a set of plans for the main and canard layup showing the number of plys and type of glass?

As you may know, that repair is simply backing out of the opening with proper layups as you already stated, keeping in mind the top spar layup.

The lower fuselage repair where the foam and skin is damaged is pretty straight forward as well. An option would be to purchase a new lower fuselage section from someone and replace only the section that was damaged but that would require a repaint. Since you have a pretty paint job that may not be an option. If you can cut to the outer skin without "punching through", you could vacuum bag some Clark foam into place and glass over it.

The canard repair is a bit more complicated and I would be happy to discuss it with you.. Take a look in the files section under Logistics Engineering "Modifications and other Stuff". Scroll down to Carbon Spar repair I made some1400 hours back. There you can see what I had to do to fix the cracked spar on my plane.Note: I've never had a real hard landing in my plane. It was determined this spar crack was caused at the Quickie Factory due to a bad test fixture which caused a stress riser in the spar just inside the fuselage on the passenger side. I accidentally found it on an annual inspection. 

How many hours was this plane flown prior to your buying it?  Who built it?

With a delamination on the canard that large, I suspect it had a very hard landing that may have caused a prop strike as well. I would work my way down from the top of the canard and continue to cut out the damage. Tap test, the top and bottom of the canard on both sides as there may be damage on the other side as well that is not noticeable. I would also probably check the crank run out. Once it's determined that the spar is OK, the glass procedure is pretty basic. Remember the Canard carries about 60% of the total load, so once the repair is made, get one of your HEAVY buddies and taxi around with you. That will put more G load on it that you will see in the air typically.

Regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP - Q200  
510-468-4891     

                 


Re: Replacement Foams

Frankenbird Vern
 

 I see in one photo he sent.. it is a MK1 config.




From: Q-LIST@... on behalf of Gary McKirdy gary.mckirdy21@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 4:55 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 

Shaun and Jim,
Another thought. Assuming it is a tail dragger with engine hung sat on its gear I think carbon spar tube damage is unlikeky.
If however for any reason you suspect otherwise or want peace of mind there is a relatively painless way to check the spar for damage with minimal intrusion.
Rather than grinding glass off inside the fuselage, locate a spar tip, remove top outer face of wheel pant glass and foam to expose inner diameter of a spar tube and clean up before bonding a cap with a bicycle valve or small tube inserted. Blow a balloon up and seal to look for leaks. If it keeps going down cap the other spar tip closed and try again. If it still leaks you can be sure either one of the spars or middle junction is compromised.
Heavy weight deliberate taxiing over rough ground should mean it's OK for flight however if it's not you then lose a prop at least if not also creating a runout failure that wasn't there before but thats unlikely. If its already failed a runout test the spar by taxiing before engine rebuild if possible as there isnt much to lose.
Gary

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 17:28 logistics_engineering@... [Q-LIST], <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 



Good afternoon Shaun,

Thanks for the pictures.  As Gary said, the the main wing repair you started is clean and straight forward. Do you have a set of plans for the main and canard layup showing the number of plys and type of glass?

As you may know, that repair is simply backing out of the opening with proper layups as you already stated, keeping in mind the top spar layup.

The lower fuselage repair where the foam and skin is damaged is pretty straight forward as well. An option would be to purchase a new lower fuselage section from someone and replace only the section that was damaged but that would require a repaint. Since you have a pretty paint job that may not be an option. If you can cut to the outer skin without "punching through", you could vacuum bag some Clark foam into place and glass over it.

The canard repair is a bit more complicated and I would be happy to discuss it with you. Take a look in the files section under Logistics Engineering "Modifications and other Stuff". Scroll down to Carbon Spar repair I made some1400 hours back. There you can see what I had to do to fix the cracked spar on my plane.Note: I've never had a real hard landing in my plane. It was determined this spar crack was caused at the Quickie Factory due to a bad test fixture which caused a stress riser in the spar just inside the fuselage on the passenger side. I accidentally found it on an annual inspection. 

How many hours was this plane flown prior to your buying it?  Who built it?

With a delamination on the canard that large, I suspect it had a very hard landing that may have caused a prop strike as well. I would work my way down from the top of the canard and continue to cut out the damage. Tap test, the top and bottom of the canard on both sides as there may be damage on the other side as well that is not noticeable. I would also probably check the crank run out. Once it's determined that the spar is OK, the glass procedure is pretty basic. Remember the Canard carries about 60% of the total load, so once the repair is made, get one of your HEAVY buddies and taxi around with you. That will put more G load on it that you will see in the air typically.

Regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP - Q200  
510-468-4891     

                 


Re: Replacement Foams

Frankenbird Vern
 

 Something also to consider is the gear configuration. I might have missed the info already but Shaun, is your aircraft a MK1 or MKII

config? 


Jim,was the test fixture a usual part of the RAF process? Makes me wonder if your fortunate accident in discovery of the Spar crack 

is a red flag "AD" for un-knowing buyers. In my case the Q2 kit was only a partial. I knew going into the deal that many of the

original $18,000 worth of parts were missing. I was interested in the fuselage shells and bulkheads, which is why the foam cores 

which for me are not required.   


Vern Lehman


From: Q-LIST@... on behalf of logistics_engineering@... [Q-LIST]
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 3:58 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 



Good afternoon Shaun,

Thanks for the pictures.  As Gary said, the the main wing repair you started is clean and straight forward. Do you have a set of plans for the main and canard layup showing the number of plys and type of glass?

As you may know, that repair is simply backing out of the opening with proper layups as you already stated, keeping in mind the top spar layup.

The lower fuselage repair where the foam and skin is damaged is pretty straight forward as well. An option would be to purchase a new lower fuselage section from someone and replace only the section that was damaged but that would require a repaint. Since you have a pretty paint job that may not be an option. If you can cut to the outer skin without "punching through", you could vacuum bag some Clark foam into place and glass over it.

The canard repair is a bit more complicated and I would be happy to discuss it with you.. Take a look in the files section under Logistics Engineering "Modifications and other Stuff". Scroll down to Carbon Spar repair I made some1400 hours back. There you can see what I had to do to fix the cracked spar on my plane.Note: I've never had a real hard landing in my plane. It was determined this spar crack was caused at the Quickie Factory due to a bad test fixture which caused a stress riser in the spar just inside the fuselage on the passenger side. I accidentally found it on an annual inspection. 

How many hours was this plane flown prior to your buying it?  Who built it?

With a delamination on the canard that large, I suspect it had a very hard landing that may have caused a prop strike as well. I would work my way down from the top of the canard and continue to cut out the damage. Tap test, the top and bottom of the canard on both sides as there may be damage on the other side as well that is not noticeable. I would also probably check the crank run out. Once it's determined that the spar is OK, the glass procedure is pretty basic. Remember the Canard carries about 60% of the total load, so once the repair is made, get one of your HEAVY buddies and taxi around with you. That will put more G load on it that you will see in the air typically.

Regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP - Q200  
510-468-4891     

                 


Re: Replacement Foams

Gary McKirdy
 

Shaun and Jim,
Another thought. Assuming it is a tail dragger with engine hung sat on its gear I think carbon spar tube damage is unlikeky.
If however for any reason you suspect otherwise or want peace of mind there is a relatively painless way to check the spar for damage with minimal intrusion.
Rather than grinding glass off inside the fuselage, locate a spar tip, remove top outer face of wheel pant glass and foam to expose inner diameter of a spar tube and clean up before bonding a cap with a bicycle valve or small tube inserted. Blow a balloon up and seal to look for leaks. If it keeps going down cap the other spar tip closed and try again. If it still leaks you can be sure either one of the spars or middle junction is compromised.
Heavy weight deliberate taxiing over rough ground should mean it's OK for flight however if it's not you then lose a prop at least if not also creating a runout failure that wasn't there before but thats unlikely. If its already failed a runout test the spar by taxiing before engine rebuild if possible as there isnt much to lose.
Gary

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 17:28 logistics_engineering@... [Q-LIST], <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 



Good afternoon Shaun,

Thanks for the pictures.  As Gary said, the the main wing repair you started is clean and straight forward. Do you have a set of plans for the main and canard layup showing the number of plys and type of glass?

As you may know, that repair is simply backing out of the opening with proper layups as you already stated, keeping in mind the top spar layup.

The lower fuselage repair where the foam and skin is damaged is pretty straight forward as well. An option would be to purchase a new lower fuselage section from someone and replace only the section that was damaged but that would require a repaint. Since you have a pretty paint job that may not be an option. If you can cut to the outer skin without "punching through", you could vacuum bag some Clark foam into place and glass over it.

The canard repair is a bit more complicated and I would be happy to discuss it with you. Take a look in the files section under Logistics Engineering "Modifications and other Stuff". Scroll down to Carbon Spar repair I made some1400 hours back. There you can see what I had to do to fix the cracked spar on my plane.Note: I've never had a real hard landing in my plane. It was determined this spar crack was caused at the Quickie Factory due to a bad test fixture which caused a stress riser in the spar just inside the fuselage on the passenger side. I accidentally found it on an annual inspection. 

How many hours was this plane flown prior to your buying it?  Who built it?

With a delamination on the canard that large, I suspect it had a very hard landing that may have caused a prop strike as well. I would work my way down from the top of the canard and continue to cut out the damage. Tap test, the top and bottom of the canard on both sides as there may be damage on the other side as well that is not noticeable. I would also probably check the crank run out. Once it's determined that the spar is OK, the glass procedure is pretty basic. Remember the Canard carries about 60% of the total load, so once the repair is made, get one of your HEAVY buddies and taxi around with you. That will put more G load on it that you will see in the air typically.

Regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP - Q200  
510-468-4891     

                 


Re: Replacement Foams

Jim Patillo
 



Good afternoon Shaun,

Thanks for the pictures.  As Gary said, the the main wing repair you started is clean and straight forward. Do you have a set of plans for the main and canard layup showing the number of plys and type of glass?

As you may know, that repair is simply backing out of the opening with proper layups as you already stated, keeping in mind the top spar layup.

The lower fuselage repair where the foam and skin is damaged is pretty straight forward as well. An option would be to purchase a new lower fuselage section from someone and replace only the section that was damaged but that would require a repaint. Since you have a pretty paint job that may not be an option. If you can cut to the outer skin without "punching through", you could vacuum bag some Clark foam into place and glass over it.

The canard repair is a bit more complicated and I would be happy to discuss it with you. Take a look in the files section under Logistics Engineering "Modifications and other Stuff". Scroll down to Carbon Spar repair I made some1400 hours back. There you can see what I had to do to fix the cracked spar on my plane.Note: I've never had a real hard landing in my plane. It was determined this spar crack was caused at the Quickie Factory due to a bad test fixture which caused a stress riser in the spar just inside the fuselage on the passenger side. I accidentally found it on an annual inspection. 

How many hours was this plane flown prior to your buying it?  Who built it?

With a delamination on the canard that large, I suspect it had a very hard landing that may have caused a prop strike as well. I would work my way down from the top of the canard and continue to cut out the damage. Tap test, the top and bottom of the canard on both sides as there may be damage on the other side as well that is not noticeable. I would also probably check the crank run out. Once it's determined that the spar is OK, the glass procedure is pretty basic. Remember the Canard carries about 60% of the total load, so once the repair is made, get one of your HEAVY buddies and taxi around with you. That will put more G load on it that you will see in the air typically.

Regards,
Jim Patillo
N46JP - Q200  
510-468-4891     

                 


Re: Replacement Foams

Gary McKirdy
 

Hi Shaun, Great, So main area on top skin failure mode was most likely heat causing both 1. foam to swell and 2. glass plies to soften. If that alone wasn't enough to cause delamination the fact that the bulge would buckle under compression loads would. That explains the cracking as both compromised resin and a fibre compression failure under buckle of over stressed glass skin which works only if both 1. Well adhered to foam core and 2. as designer intended it to be built i.e. fibres straight. You probably know 1 degree of local loss of straightness normal to surface is all it takes to lose over 50% of ability to carry compressive loads.
Pilot's side delamination there is interesting but not uncommon in my experience. Believe it or not it can be caused by over stressing of footwear from pilot side which sees repeated climbing in and out! There isn't enough stiffness in laminate and foam combination to always prevent that.
This could also have happened and been a contributory factor on passenger side delamination of course.
Regards
Gary


On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 10:10 Shaun Milke shaun_milke@... [Q-LIST], <Q-LIST@...> wrote:
 

Hey all, I appreciate the advice so far and appologize if anyone is unable to view the photos I'm posting. Tips for a fail safe way to upload the photos would be helpful.

I've tapped the upper center section of the front wing and marked out two areas of definite delamination, seen in the photos below. There is a section between the two that may also be delaminated. The pilot's side of the top skin has a narrow area running spanwise from the trim pulley to about BL 10 that could be delaminating, but I may just be hearing things after all this tapping...





I hope these pics help. Has anyone had to make a similar repair and if so what was the extent of the damage to the carbon spars and fiberglass caps?

Thanks,
Shaun

From: Q-LIST@... <Q-LIST@...> on behalf of Vern Lehman smeshno1@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 4:26:08 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 

 Shaun,


 First..there are several Aerospace Engineering folks here including me. Not to send out a resume but my life in Composites began at

 Falcon Jet in 1978.  Beech on Starship 1, and from there up to today. My background is in Manufacturing Engineering where I see a lot

 of MRB activity.  The fact that your background in testing is viable..for sure this is comforting to learn.


 Your core repair material for the fuselage shell would be Last a Foam. Clark foam was what was used I believe in the 1980's but the

repair is straight forward.

 

  No doubt your aware that compression failure is the issue on the delam at this location. Your going to have to run FEA to see what

 the peak loads will be and I would do that before taking on materials. In any MRB activity the cost vs risk and toss in there the

 actual work involved sometimes determines a scrap disposition is the only path to take. An example is one #40 nutplate fastener hole

 accidentally drilled in a spar profile radius scrapped an entire flap at my job last week! That was minimum $50K down the tubes

 and possible impact on the eventual wing build.    


 The good news is I at least have the correct orange open cell foam for the surface and it has been protected should you decide against a

repair and decide rather to build new.  I have not examined the airfoil profile to be sure of which one it is. I believe there is enough to build

at least one surface.


 I live in Eastern Oklahoma, not far from Tulsa so perhaps transport would be possible rather than risk shipping.     


Vern



From: Q-LIST@... <Q-LIST@...> on behalf of Shaun Milke shaun_milke@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 1:22 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 

Here are some pics of the main project areas for the time being. I hope it doesn't sound like I'm just trying to find any random materials that might stick together just to get flying again. I'm an aerospace engineer with some experience in composites testing, so I do have an appreciation for the level of criticality of some of these repairs and the processes/materials used.  Most of my composite experience is in design validation and testing in a lab setting, but I do have a little hands on experience with repairs and fabrication; that being said I'm eager to get all the advice I can get. The pics are listed both in level of criticality and in the order I plan to complete them, for an educational build up.

Left rear wing, top skin and core damage, aft of shear web.
I'm in the process of staggering the 2 BID plies and getting a clean core removal down to the inside of the lower skin.




Inner skin delamination and core degradation along the bottom of the tail cone.  Seems to have been caused by the previous installation of a loose battery that repeatedly impacted the skin and leaked acid through the resulting cracks in the inner skin. The worst damage is between the last two bulkheads, but the floor between the next two bulheads moving forward is also a bit questionable.





Now the worst of it. A crack in the upper skin with surround delamination or the right hand portion of the forward wing.  Tap testing the area seems as if the delamition doesnt reach all the way to the spar and the spar itself sounds ok (I realize this warrants a visual inspection as well and a tap test isn't definitive).




Looking into the cockpit from the engine side of the heater hole.


Obvious buckling and delamination of the skin around the crack..



Thoughts?



From: logistics_engineering@... [Q-LIST]
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
I agree with Sam. Post your pix so we can get a better idea of what you are doing. We have a lot of experience in these areas. I had a fully cracked carbon spar several years ago which I repaired and replaced foam. The repairs you are making are not insignificant. Q pilots have died making foam and glass modification and repairs that were not correct. How much foam/glass experience do you have.?

Best regards,

Jim Patillo

N46JP - Q200
1500+ hrs on my Q200




Re: FOD

Jay Scheevel
 

Thanks for keeping up with Alan's return legs on his"secret" mission, Jon.

I drove to Trinidad yesterday and left Bruce and Jerry alone together to get into trouble. I hope to get home midday today.

Was great to see you and everyone and to experience great fellowship and comraderie under the hospitality unbrella provided by Bruce and JoAnn. Thanks to all who set it up and those who made the effort to come.

Cheers,
Jay


Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID


"jd@... [Q-LIST]" <Q-LIST@...> wrote:

 

Last night Alan Thayer reported being at Bullhead City and expecting to make the final hop home today (Tuesday).  Sounds like all is going well.


Jon


Re: FOD

Jon Finley
 

Last night Alan Thayer reported being at Bullhead City and expecting to make the final hop home today (Tuesday).  Sounds like all is going well.

Jon


Re: Replacement Foams

Shaun Milke
 

Hey all, I appreciate the advice so far and appologize if anyone is unable to view the photos I'm posting. Tips for a fail safe way to upload the photos would be helpful.

I've tapped the upper center section of the front wing and marked out two areas of definite delamination, seen in the photos below. There is a section between the two that may also be delaminated. The pilot's side of the top skin has a narrow area running spanwise from the trim pulley to about BL 10 that could be delaminating, but I may just be hearing things after all this tapping...





I hope these pics help. Has anyone had to make a similar repair and if so what was the extent of the damage to the carbon spars and fiberglass caps?

Thanks,
Shaun


From: Q-LIST@... on behalf of Vern Lehman smeshno1@... [Q-LIST] <Q-LIST@...>
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 4:26:08 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 

 Shaun,


 First..there are several Aerospace Engineering folks here including me. Not to send out a resume but my life in Composites began at

 Falcon Jet in 1978.  Beech on Starship 1, and from there up to today. My background is in Manufacturing Engineering where I see a lot

 of MRB activity.  The fact that your background in testing is viable..for sure this is comforting to learn.


 Your core repair material for the fuselage shell would be Last a Foam. Clark foam was what was used I believe in the 1980's but the

repair is straight forward.

 

  No doubt your aware that compression failure is the issue on the delam at this location. Your going to have to run FEA to see what

 the peak loads will be and I would do that before taking on materials. In any MRB activity the cost vs risk and toss in there the

 actual work involved sometimes determines a scrap disposition is the only path to take. An example is one #40 nutplate fastener hole

 accidentally drilled in a spar profile radius scrapped an entire flap at my job last week! That was minimum $50K down the tubes

 and possible impact on the eventual wing build.    


 The good news is I at least have the correct orange open cell foam for the surface and it has been protected should you decide against a

repair and decide rather to build new.  I have not examined the airfoil profile to be sure of which one it is. I believe there is enough to build

at least one surface.


 I live in Eastern Oklahoma, not far from Tulsa so perhaps transport would be possible rather than risk shipping.     


Vern



From: Q-LIST@... on behalf of Shaun Milke shaun_milke@... [Q-LIST]
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 1:22 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
 
 

Here are some pics of the main project areas for the time being. I hope it doesn't sound like I'm just trying to find any random materials that might stick together just to get flying again. I'm an aerospace engineer with some experience in composites testing, so I do have an appreciation for the level of criticality of some of these repairs and the processes/materials used.  Most of my composite experience is in design validation and testing in a lab setting, but I do have a little hands on experience with repairs and fabrication; that being said I'm eager to get all the advice I can get. The pics are listed both in level of criticality and in the order I plan to complete them, for an educational build up.

Left rear wing, top skin and core damage, aft of shear web.
I'm in the process of staggering the 2 BID plies and getting a clean core removal down to the inside of the lower skin.




Inner skin delamination and core degradation along the bottom of the tail cone.  Seems to have been caused by the previous installation of a loose battery that repeatedly impacted the skin and leaked acid through the resulting cracks in the inner skin. The worst damage is between the last two bulkheads, but the floor between the next two bulheads moving forward is also a bit questionable.





Now the worst of it. A crack in the upper skin with surround delamination or the right hand portion of the forward wing.  Tap testing the area seems as if the delamition doesnt reach all the way to the spar and the spar itself sounds ok (I realize this warrants a visual inspection as well and a tap test isn't definitive).




Looking into the cockpit from the engine side of the heater hole.


Obvious buckling and delamination of the skin around the crack..



Thoughts?



From: logistics_engineering@... [Q-LIST]
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Replacement Foams
To: q-list@...


 
I agree with Sam. Post your pix so we can get a better idea of what you are doing. We have a lot of experience in these areas. I had a fully cracked carbon spar several years ago which I repaired and replaced foam. The repairs you are making are not insignificant. Q pilots have died making foam and glass modification and repairs that were not correct. How much foam/glass experience do you have.?

Best regards,

Jim Patillo

N46JP - Q200
1500+ hrs on my Q200



8161 - 8180 of 55071