Fast on connectors

[Sprig]

Hail RAF Warrior Guy,

Originally Posted by Guy Prevost

Let's do a quick analysis.

1. Let's assume that it takes 15 lbs force to remove a fast-on connector (it takes almost twice that). 15 lbf = 66.7N
...

Can I add,

2. Lets Vibrate that connection at the natural resonance of the airframe.
3. Lets Thermally cycle each end of that connection for each and every day.
4. Lets Subject the connection materials to differing atmospheric pressures for every flight.
5. Lets Expose the connection to every airborne chemical for every flight.

Honest question follows:

Are these used anywhere on the Space Shuttle?

[Sprig]

Originally Posted by Guy Prevost

Let's do a quick analysis.

And, if just want to have some fun with this kinda stuff...


http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/D...eerbottle.html

Yeap, I'm going to build my RV out of CdRom Disks and Empty Beer Bottles!

Booze AND Tunes PRE-BUILT INTO my RV! I'm going to have the most nerdy flying bar at the airfield when I'm done...

[Dave_Boxall]

Originally Posted by Sprig

Hail RAF Warrior Guy,



Can I add,

2. Lets Vibrate that connection at the natural resonance of the airframe.
3. Lets Thermally cycle each end of that connection for each and every day.
4. Lets Subject the connection materials to differing atmospheric pressures for every flight.
5. Lets Expose the connection to every airborne chemical for every flight.

Honest question follows:

Are these used anywhere on the Space Shuttle?

And then let's do the same for those little screw & ring terminals that are the "aircraft alternative" to Fastons. How will they fare under this test? Remember you're not trying to find a perfect connector - you're just trying to find an acceptable or best option.

I don't know whether Fastons are used on the Space Shuttle, but they ARE good enough for Cessna.

Dave

[RV6_flyer]

Originally Posted by Dave_Boxall

And then let's do the same for those little screw & ring terminals that are the "aircraft alternative" to Fastons. How will they fare under this test? Remember you're not trying to find a perfect connector - you're just trying to find an acceptable or best option.

I don't know whether Fastons are used on the Space Shuttle, but they ARE good enough for Cessna.

Dave

Dave:

You are correct. An acceptable or best option is what I was looking for.

I have both in my RV-6. I have only had ONE connection come lose after almost 9 years of flying. The connection was a screw lockwasher ring on a Mil Spec switch that cost me $20 USD ten years ago. The screw and lockwasher came with the switch. The ring was the AMP brand and type recommended by Bob. I now have 1,950 hours. I found the lose connection when checking my landing lights during my condition inspection in July 2006. The light on the left wing DID NOT work. The airplane had about 1,900 hours on the hobbs at that time. After replacing the bulb I started trouble shooting. Spent about 20 minutes tracing the wire back from the wing tip to the switch checking voltages at the connectors till it got to the switch.

[Sprig]

Hail VAF Warriors,

Originally Posted by Dave_Boxall

And then let's do the same for those little screw & ring terminals that are the "aircraft alternative" to Fastons. How will they fare under this test?

I've NEVER personally seen one fail.

Stuff "Happens"; so it "could have been."

I personally will NOT build a modern aircraft with 1940's electrical connection technology.

[keen9a]

Originally Posted by RV6_flyer

I have only had ONE connection come lose after almost 9 years of flying. The connection was a screw lockwasher ring on a Mil Spec switch that cost me $20 USD ten years ago.

Hmm, so with the ring terminal, when it fails to hold you get a loose wire and a loose screw floating around your airplane waiting for Murphy's Law to ensure it find the location where it can do the most damage.

If a Fast-on connecton fails, no loose parts!

[ddurakovich]

Originally Posted by Sprig

I personally will NOT build a modern aircraft with 1940's electrical connection technology.

Why do I have the nagging feeling that's what the Lancair and other composite guys are saying about us aluminum RV builders?

[N395V]

Why do I have the nagging feeling that's what the Lancair and other composite guys are saying about us aluminum RV builders?

Nope,
My new composite is full of fast ons as is my F1,

I have yet to have vibration, dust Gs, chemicals or Murphy cause a fast on to fail. Now of course that is after only 3 years and 500 hours.

I have had several rings connectors come loose and they were promptly changed to fast ons.

I do not think given their record that I will copy any technology from the space shuttle.

[thallock]

Originally Posted by Sprig

I personally will NOT build a modern aircraft with 1940's electrical connection technology.

Sprig,

First of all, the FastOn connectors are not 1940s technology, they are the best solution for the price using today's technology. You can probably find something that is superior, but not anywhere near the price. Regarding what is used on the Space Shuttle, I should remind you that we have spent billions and billions of dollars on the Space Shuttle, so whatever they might be using for connectors, I would not be suprised if their solution would not be viable for my kit. I spent 4 years in the Air Force working on nuclear weapons, so I have seen connectors that will never come off, but at $150 a pop, and 6 ounces per connector, none of these will make it into my airplane.

Bob Nickolls recommends FastOn connectors because they do not come loose, and he thinks they are better than ring terminals, because nuts do come loose. Bob has worked in the avation industry designing electrical systems for something like 40 years, so he has had a fair amount of experience with these types of connectors. Having experimented with the FastOn connectors, myself, I tend to trust him on this.

BTW, do not discount the quality of FastOn connectors based upon what you have seen in an auto parts store. I recommend that you actually buy a few of these from Stein and see what a quality piece of technology the good ones actually are. Also, go to Bob Nicholls website and look at some of his examples. Always good reading.

Regarding the use of 40s technology, does this mean you will not use any round gauges, Lyco engines, or a tail wheels on your airplane? When you start building your airplane, then please keep us informed, as a lot of us would probably be interested in what you come up with.

Cheers,
Tracy.

[ddurakovich]

I was actiually referring to the 70 year old metal technology vs. composite technology rather than Fast-Ons. I have them through out my plane, as well as the Skyhawk I fly regularly!