Stupid pipe threads

Henning said:
No, DON'T use thread tape on an airplane.
Click to expand...



I did find a reference to thread tape in chapter 20 (standard practices) in at least one Citation maintence manual. It's probably in most of the models since it seems like they copy&paste that chapter every time a new model is introduced.


With all the different opinions here there isn't going to be conformity on aicraft but still makes one wonder how the RV10 builder settled on RTV.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
they are not the only repair station and the manufacturer sets warrantee policy, not the repair station.
Click to expand...

??? If they overhaul an old instrument, how is it the manufacturer sets policy?

GlennAB1 said:
Maybe in the car wash industry, rednecks. In professional industry, fluids are always liquids, gasses, plasmas and some plastics.

Check out #10 in the link, at least these writers aren't rednecks.
http://www.wikihow.com/Check-the-Fluids-in-a-Car
Click to expand...

You really seem a bit offended about this. Calm down. Don't be a pedant.
 
bnt83 said:
I did find a reference to thread tape in chapter 20 (standard practices) in at least one Citation maintence manual. It's probably in most of the models since it seems like they copy&paste that chapter every time a new model is introduced.


With all the different opinions here there isn't going to be conformity on aicraft but still makes one wonder how the RV10 builder settled on RTV.
Click to expand...

If there is a call and cause for it, fine, but in general, and with instrument suction systems specifically, it introduces a potential problem while providing no benefit. There is no way that tight pipe thread is going to leak sufficiently to make a difference, and most likely will not leak at all. Why introduce a potentially damaging component to the system?:dunno: I have never seen a lightly luricated bare fitting cause a problem, seen plenty of tape problems.
 
Anticept said:
??? If they overhaul an old instrument, how is it the manufacturer sets policy?
Click to expand...

Because the owner of the production certificate is the only one who can set the overhaul requirements, instrument shops don't own the rites to the insturment.
 
Tom-D said:
Because the owner of the production certificate is the only one who can set the overhaul requirements, instrument shops don't own the rites to the insturment.
Click to expand...

The manufacturer has no say in the repair station's warranty.
 
Instruments I've dealt with don't come with fittings installed. They must not be included in instrument overhaul procedure, or they would come with new fittings installed.
 
GlennAB1 said:
Instruments I've dealt with don't come with fittings installed. They must not be included in instrument overhaul procedure, or they would come with new fittings installed.
Click to expand...

Correct, typically fittings are considered part of the airplane and not the instrument so you remove them before shipping. If you send them with for the overhaul, it's a crapshoot if you get them back, and there's always something in the fine print about not being responsible for fittings.
 
GlennAB1 said:
I guess that's what a career in QC does to ya.
Click to expand...

In industrial manufacturing, yeah, it follows scientifically defined terms a bit more closely. In the maintenance field, things are sometimes a bit more "redneck". :p

Tom-D said:
Because the owner of the production certificate is the only one who can set the overhaul requirements, instrument shops don't own the rites to the insturment.
Click to expand...

The production certificate holder may set the overhaul requirements, but it's the repair station who deals with the training and tooling. The overhaulers that I deal with have their own warranties for the product they overhauled.

GlennAB1 said:
Instruments I've dealt with don't come with fittings installed. They must not be included in instrument overhaul procedure, or they would come with new fittings installed.
Click to expand...

MidContinent Instruments specifically tells us to remove fittings, and to use plugs on the ports before putting them in shipment.
 
Last edited:
Anticept said:
In industrial manufacturing, yeah, it follows scientifically defined terms a bit more closely. In the maintenance field, things are sometimes a bit more "redneck". :p
Click to expand...

I don't know what maintenance field you are referring to, but, Mr. FAA says "Aircraft fluid lines are usually made of metal tubing or flexible hose. Metal tubing (also called rigid fluid lines) is used in stationary applications and where long, relatively straight runs are possible. They are widely used in aircraft for fuel, oil, coolant, oxygen, instrument, and hydraulic lines. Flexible hose is generally used with moving parts or where the hose is subject to considerable vibration."
 
Anticept said:
The production certificate holder may set the overhaul requirements, but it's the repair station who deals with the training and tooling. The overhaulers that I deal with have their own warranties for the product they overhauled.
Click to expand...

When they won't abide by the manufacturer's requirements and add extra requirements, why would you use them?
Will they overhaul any unit that they have never overhauled prior, just because it has goop on the inlet fittings?

If they did that to me, I'd call and tell them to forward the unit to their competitor.
 
GlennAB1 said:
I don't know what maintenance field you are referring to, but, Mr. FAA says "Aircraft fluid lines are usually made of metal tubing or flexible hose. Metal tubing (also called rigid fluid lines) is used in stationary applications and where long, relatively straight runs are possible. They are widely used in aircraft for fuel, oil, coolant, oxygen, instrument, and hydraulic lines. Flexible hose is generally used with moving parts or where the hose is subject to considerable vibration."
Click to expand...

I highly doubt they meant to call them fluid lines just to be scientifically accurate. It would be silly to think that science is the only reason they are called fluid lines. Hell, the root words center around liquids and flowing, which these days we know that gasses flows, but I question whether or not ancient civilizations thought the same way.

I am NOT disagreeing with you on the definition of fluid. But if you went and talked to an everyday mechanic and called a pneumatic line a "fluid" line, they might expect there to be some sort of liquid if they aren't paying attention to markings. Gasses are not the first thing that comes to mind when someone says fluid. If you came to me and said the same thing about an unknown line, I would also think there is a liquid in it, unless I knew you meant the scientific definition.

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove when I agree with your points. I can go back and edit my post to say liquid if it bothers you that much.

Tom-D said:
When they won't abide by the manufacturer's requirements and add extra requirements, why would you use them?
Will they overhaul any unit that they have never overhauled prior, just because it has goop on the inlet fittings?

If they did that to me, I'd call and tell them to forward the unit to their competitor.
Click to expand...

Why would I care about a little thread tape and fittings? That seems like an awfully big deal to make out of it. I rather like their great warranties, overhaul exchange system, and the pricing structure we have.
 
Last edited:
GlennAB1 said:
Everyday mechanics differentiate; hydraulics, oil, pneumatic, oxygen, etc., the term fluids is rarely used.
Click to expand...

Correct, since it refers to anything that flows, it would is useless to industry with a need for specificity. Unless of course you need a catch all, then in the context of, "Check the fluids before you fire it up.", it is a term that is quite commonly used. Language is a wonderful thing, it allows hours of useless arguments of no consequence.
 
GlennAB1 said:
The flow from the crack pipe seems to be pretty heavy at your place.
Click to expand...

I admit that made me laugh, but seriously, the root words were fluide (french) and fluidus (latin), which were for substances which flow and were used to refer to things like water, or things that were "moist".
 
Anticept said:
I admit that made me laugh, but seriously, the root words were fluide (french) and fluidus (latin), which were for substances which flow and were used to refer to things like water, or things that were "moist".
Click to expand...

And air is moist...:lol:;)
 
Anticept said:
Dry too!



Doesn't change the fact that gas isn't the first thing that comes to mind when someone says "fluid". Still being pedantic :p
Click to expand...

I don't think either gas or liquid until given context, fluid just means it flows and provides resistance in the fluid modality, i.e. you don't have to break it to get through it, it parts easily to get through, and reforms when passed. Once the application is given, then context is added and I can decide if liquid, gas, or plasma state applies. Language is a wonderful thing, but we are getting close to the limits of it being useful for communication. Telepathy would be a much better way to communicate complex ideas, but we're not that evolved yet.;)
 
GlennAB1 said:
What's the most prominent fluid associated with aviation? It sure isn't a liquid.
Click to expand...

Gas, but it was still clear what I meant when I said:

> Basically, any pneumatics are to use thread tape, any fluid lines uses "goops" as appropriate.

:)

Henning said:
:confused: I didn't know money was a fluid...
Click to expand...

With how fast it flows out of my checking account, I would have made that same mistake!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top