[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

REFLECTOR: Re: That bearing

In a message dated 1/7/99 1:37:03 PM Pacific Standard Time,
bill.schweitzer@compaq.com writes:

> That is not the bearing they've been discussing.  It is the one at the front
>  of the aileron torque tube.  It is inside the keel on the pilot side, just
>  above the RG mechanism.
>  It would need something like this to hold it better.
>  Dale and David, a plate (as shown in this drawing
>  ) should hold the bearing in very well.  It will not require removing the
>  torque tube or the bracket and it does not require drilling another hole in
>  the bracket (wrt Dave's request).
>  what do you think?

Alright, your forced me to get off my holiday bloated butt and go down and get
my part. I have part number VFAB-01 labeled Bracket, Front Ail Torque
Brg.-Control System Part in hand. It is a bearing that has an intergal
shoulder built in that is captured in the aluminum angle bracket by two
phillips head AN whatever screws with nuts to lock them.

Now, did the screws fail allowing the bearing to fall out, or did the bearing
fail allowing the torque tube to become mis-aligned? If the bearing failed
ONLY, then another bearing can be sub'ed all the way up to a bearing that is
used for precise die alignment in high speed punch presses. I've seen them and
they are trick. If the screws failed, then a cap plate could be machined to
fit the existing plate which is somewhat "triangular" in shape. It could be
made bigger to allow room for the screws to be farther away from the bearing
to allow proper clearance for the nuts from the bearing.

Your design, while simply two identical, symetrical pieces is nice, it looks
as if milling work would be needed and that always goes slower than lathe
work. With my set up, all this could be done with one piece. I assume (there's
that word again) that you feel it in necessary to capture the bearing on both
sides of the plate? I think the shoulder in the bearing is strong enough to
handle that small amount of axial load. It's just that the screws may not have
been considering their mis-alignment in the original configuration. 

Let's keep the thinking caps on, we're doing good here...

Dale Alexander
173 RG Gull-Wing