>"As a safety professional I would have to say that this is not a
> > safe way to operate..." I just thought your "adhesive technologist"
>> statement sounded a lot like that.
>
>Sorry, I did not mean to sound pompous or to lecture. I was
>speaking from a stress-distribution,
>mode-of-load-application perspective.
Um...I thought it was funny, not pompous. Never mind. Darn
computers just don't convey smiles or chuckles.
I like the idea of using CA, and take your endorsement to heart.
Next plane will have CF pushrods with CA bonding.
>If anyone is actually bothered by gluing a CF rod to a
>clevis, hey, no problem. Use a different method of making
>the push rod. That's what living in a free country is all
>about.
I know that using CA doesn't bother me. I was trying to point out
that it would take a pretty big force (with stress is bizarre
directions) to break the bond of CA with CF pushrods and the links
you described.
- David
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
