[bobrv7taildragger]

Ok, so what are you planning to do about it?

Hassle vans to improve their quality control…improve the parts….replace the dodgy ones. Do you have under pressed parts?

 

[bobrv7taildragger]

There is never harm in asking questions; the issue is when you do not like the answer.

You are uncomfortable. So what will you do about it?

Implying that everyone else should also be uncomfortable changes nothing.

At the end of the day, you can either trust the designers or not.

If it still bothers you, you could always get a bead roller and modify the ribs to your specifications. You could also model the structure in readily available software to verify those specifications and compare that to a flat rib. That would tell you what you want to know…

See above.

 

[Walt]

There is never harm in asking questions; the issue is when you do not like the answer.
You are uncomfortable. So what will you do about it?
Implying that everyone else should also be uncomfortable changes nothing.
At the end of the day, you can either trust the designers or not.
If it still bothers you, you could always get a bead roller and modify the ribs to your specifications. You could also model the structure in readily available software to verify those specifications and compare that to a flat rib. That would tell you what you want to know…

A true Van’s fanboy reply, model the structure yourself, re-press all your bad parts… really?
When you pay as much as folks do for a kit these days it doesn’t seem unreasonable to expect a quality product does it?
Builders should not have to be Van’s quality control department.
Perhaps Van’s should reallocate some of the funds they spend on engineering validation of bad parts to a QA department.
Better yet would be to make sure every employee understands that they are the ‘QA’ department and they should take the time to ensure every part they produce must be of consistent quality, if not it should be tossed in the scrap pile.

 

[Jonnyb]

A true Van’s fanboy reply, model the structure yourself, re-press all your bad parts… really?
When you pay as much as folks do for a kit these days it doesn’t seem unreasonable to expect a quality product does it?
Builders should not have to be Van’s quality control department.
Perhaps Van’s should reallocate some of the funds they spend on engineering validation of bad parts to a QA department.
Better yet would be to make sure every employee understands that they are the ‘QA’ department and they should take the time to ensure every part they produce must be of consistent quality, if not it should be tossed in the scrap pile.

I don't think it's a "fanboy" reply, it's a legitimate question. What are you going to do? Vans says the parts are fine, and meet the structural requirements of the aircraft without the beading. If they continue to take that stance, and I can't see why they wouldn't, what are builders going to do?

 

[Walt]

I don't think it's a "fanboy" reply, it's a legitimate question. What are you going to do? Vans says the parts are fine, and meet the structural requirements of the aircraft without the beading. If they continue to take that stance, and I can't see why they wouldn't, what are builders going to do?

Sure it is, because he's not in that situation.
What would I do... I'd be forced to purchase new parts and hope they have since corrected the problem.
If they looked the same as the 'bad' ones I'm replacing, I'd return them and try again later till I got good parts.
In the meantime, Van's continues to lose credibility by not owning the problem.

 

[PhatRV]

Sure it is, because he's not in that situation.
What would I do... I'd be forced to purchase new parts and hope they have since corrected the problem.
If they looked the same as the 'bad' ones I'm replacing, I'd return them and try again later till I got good parts.

so if you always get the ribs that you don’t like, then what are you going to do? Stop building? Even when Vans says the parts are good?

 

[Majorpayne317641]

so if you always get the ribs that you don’t like, then what are you going to do? Stop building? Even when Vans says the parts are good?

For me personally, I would probably pick up the metal fabrication process required to make them the way I want them. But that’s not reasonable for all builders.

 

[Walt]

so if you always get the ribs that you don’t like, then what are you going to do? Stop building? Even when Vans says the parts are good?

That's the problem, folks have major investments in these planes so they can't afford to just walk away, they have to build, or face loosing significant $$.
Really bad position to be in and I feel terrible for the builders that are caught up in all this mess.
This is not the same company it was back in the day... 20 years ago they would have just sent you new parts.
Still a great airplane and I love the design, but the company needs to pull it's head out.

 

[JonJay]

Early on in the restructuring , Vans committed to employing a full time quality control person. I wonder if that part of the plan didn’t happen?
They recognized then they had a problem important enough to dedicate resources to it.

 

[JonJay]

Just checked. The job of “Quality Technician” is currently open at Vans.

 

[Cholley6]

Here is my plan. I do have a couple underpressed replacement ribs. The W-1010-R/L-1. I am continuing to use them, but these are the root rib, a stiffening angle could easily be added later if they decide one is needed. They also already have the W-1025 flap hinge bracket attached as well as the W-1029 torque tube support assembly riveted to them which also act as stiffeners.

Through this whole ordeal of LCP I have just moved on to another section not affected and kept building. More info usually comes out. And I’m still able to move in a positive direction. Things usually become clearer with time to study the issue.

 

[PhatRV]

For me personally, I would probably pick up the metal fabrication process required to make them the way I want them. But that’s not reasonable for all builders.

But then how does the builder know if his homemade part meets the engineering standards from vans? And the airfoil shape, radius of curvature specs, etc? Not to mention there will not be any match hole

 

[RV8JD]

This was posted to Van’s website on 8/2/2024. May take some time and $$ to implement.

Van’s Aircraft Partners with Fuuz for Advanced Cloud MES and WMS Solutions - Van's Aircraft Total Performance RV Kit Planes

Van’s Aircraft has partnered with Fuuz, an advanced cloud-based manufacturing solution. This marks a significant step in Van’s manufacturing modernization process, enhancing operational efficiency and growth. Fuuz will enable Van’s to transition from a patchwork of technologies, including a...

www.vansaircraft.com

And:

https://wgntv.com/business/press-releases/ein-presswire/731584065/vans-aircraft-partners-with-fuuz-for-advanced-cloud-mes-and-wms-solutions/

 

[RV7A Flyer]

This was posted to Van’s website on 8/2/2024. May take some time and $$ to implement.

Van’s Aircraft Partners with Fuuz for Advanced Cloud MES and WMS Solutions - Van's Aircraft Total Performance RV Kit Planes

Van’s Aircraft has partnered with Fuuz, an advanced cloud-based manufacturing solution. This marks a significant step in Van’s manufacturing modernization process, enhancing operational efficiency and growth. Fuuz will enable Van’s to transition from a patchwork of technologies, including a...

www.vansaircraft.com

And:

https://wgntv.com/business/press-releases/ein-presswire/731584065/vans-aircraft-partners-with-fuuz-for-advanced-cloud-mes-and-wms-solutions/

Buzzword bingo! LOL!

 

[Jjackh10]

I bought the info pack and video in the early 90's and have wanted an rv ever since. I had hoped to be able to build an RV-7 in the not too distant future. I may afford it by purchasing second hand kits, and avionics, OH a run out motor, and fabricating FWF parts myself. Now if I get there I will have to look for pre-2018 kits, or pick a different design.

 

[Majorpayne317641]

But then how does the builder know if his homemade part meets the engineering standards from vans? And the airfoil shape, radius of curvature specs, etc? Not to mention there will not be any match hole

Using my engineering background and machining skills. That’s why it’s not a reasonable solution for everyone.

 

[PhatRV]

Using my engineering background and machining skills. That’s why it’s not a reasonable solution for everyone.

But my question is how do you do know your part meets the engineering specs, loads, stress, unless you recalculate them from scratch? What airfoil shape are you planning to use?

 

[Majorpayne317641]

But my question is how do you do know your part meets the engineering specs, loads, stress, unless you recalculate them from scratch? What airfoil shape are you planning to use?

This is all a thought experiment at this point as I have no skin in this current problem.

If original design characteristics was that much of a concern, you can easily 3D scan a known good part into Solidworks then duplicate its stresses to test it out through M&S. You can then use that as your model and move it over to AUTOCAD to make your prints to build your parts.

I’m simply duplicating the part but with the desired correct attributes (copy a good rib). If you use the same material, same thickness, same fundamental process to make said part, you should arrive at a part that is as strong as built by Vans. I’d be happy with that result. Maybe that’s not enough for others.

It would be my personal way to solve it, not expecting anyone else to follow this method.

 

[PhatRV]

If you use the same material, same thickness, same fundamental process to make said part, you should arrive at a part that is as strong as built by Vans. I’d be happy with that result. Maybe that’s not enough for others.

I am not clear why people why people get their blood pressure up on this topic but based on what you said is perfectly acceptable for you, and the safety of the aircraft that is built based on your process.

We don't know the "fundamental process" that Vans build their parts and we don't know the strength margin but some how we know the hack part is "as strong as built by Van's". An these hack parts handmade by the buider are totally acceptable to build the replica Vans RVs. And , yet people are having a fit when Vans said the factory produced ribs are perfectly okay when building its Vans RV. There is something I am missing.

 

[bobrv7taildragger]

So there you have it I’m not the only one in this situation. Vans knows it’s a problem…they have acknowledged it then swung into full “engineering design” mode to say it’s all ok. Why even put the depressions in? Yes they told us…to look like other aircraft. Why not change them?….oh yes don’t need to spend the money on changing the tooling. Why the inconsistencies?….oh yes we got that bit “WRONG” and we will tighten up a spec that doesn’t exist. So for all of us with parts that will not look like other newer parts but are “ok” (have these new parts been tested through a rigorous testing program….yes the new parts that are pressed from T3 not T0 and heat treated or are we to assume they are the same as the ones with the cut up ribs that were tested) we are to fit them. Nope…..I want parts that all look the same….that is…..produced with consistency. I do not want to be subject to an AD down the track trying to remove ribs later or adding stiffeners…..we all saw how the LCP issue went. Oh hang on….not the sycophants with no skin in the game. I’m on my second set of ribs already…..as Walt said. I’ll likely end up having to replace 10 of my ribs that are severely under pressed myself if and when these things are produced with consistency. Remember….vans said that part was “WRONG” and I want what I paid for. QA is rubbish and credibility is not going in the correct direction….remember this too?….”we have let you down…we will do better”. Vans you need to send all your parts back to be re pressed correctly….QA them. It’s a simple fix. Make your unhappy customers whole. Let’s not forget how these look.

 

[bobrv7taildragger]

I am not clear why people why people get their blood pressure up on this topic but based on what you said is perfectly acceptable for you, and the safety of the aircraft that is built based on your process.

We don't know the "fundamental process" that Vans build their parts and we don't know the strength margin but some how we know the hack part is "as strong as built by Van's". A these hack parts are totally acceptable to build the replica Vans RVs. And , yet people are having a fit when Vans said the factory produced ribs are perfectly okay when building its Vans RV. There is something I am missing.

Yes my question….are you affected by this issue?

 

[Jjackh10]

I am no clear why people why people get their pressure up on this topic but based on what you said is perfectly acceptable for you, and the safety of the aircraft that is built based on your process.

We don't know the "fundamental process" that Vans build their parts and we don't know the strength margin but some how we know the hack part is "as strong as built by Van's". An these hack parts are totally acceptable to build the replica Vans RVs. And , yet people are having a fit when Vans said the factory produced ribs are perfectly okay when building its Vans RV. There is something I am missing.

I'm simpler minded than the engineers on here. To me the stiffeners add strength in compression which contributes to the wing loading ability. An RV-7 is designed for 14.8lbs/sqft. We don't know what safety factor was used, that's up to the engineer, who I believe was Richard VanGrunsven originally. The current engineer states that the under pressed stiffeners meet HIS margins. These less stiff components combined with other recent engineering misses (LCP and QB primer) have brought concerns with the current vans engineering group.

As for how I would proceed; I'd squish a properly pressed rib in a press. Then either roll a deeper bead or rivet on an angle till it held the same pressure as a good one. Again simple minded.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

An RV-7 is designed for 14.8lbs/sqft. We don't know what safety factor was used, that's up to the engineer, who I believe was Richard VanGrunsven originally. The current engineer states that the under pressed stiffeners meet HIS margins. These less stiff components combined with other recent engineering misses (LCP and QB primer) have brought concerns with the current vans engineering group.

This is key. If the original part, as formed with the beads and such, was designed for a structure that is subject to 14.8 lgs/ft^2 *with a specific RDF*, say, 2.0, and no more (that is to say, it was engineered to meet the requirement and no more, which is fine), and the now-not-properly-formed part is analyzed and determined to meet some specific RDF, then we should know what that RDF is...is it the original 2.0? Or is it less than that, and if so, by how much?

Otherwise, all the verbiage about the history of aircraft ribs and cutting parts apart and whatnot just serves to obfuscate the issue, and feels a whole lot like TLAR "engineering".

 

[Cholley6]

Has anyone brought up that the old style rib had less flange cut outs, relief cuts (correct term escapes me at the moment). I assume that engineering wouldn’t have done that without reason, and have tested it. But it does look different than the previous ribs did. So is that not acceptable as well? Does this mean every updated part is inferior to a previous one? It is very clear in Bob’s pic that they are different designs, did they also accidentally cut these bits of the flange out?

 

[rocketman1988]

Sure it is, because he's not in that situation.
What would I do... I'd be forced to purchase new parts and hope they have since corrected the problem.
If they looked the same as the 'bad' ones I'm replacing, I'd return them and try again later till I got good parts.
In the meantime, Van's continues to lose credibility by not owning the problem.

I'm simpler minded than the engineers on here. To me the stiffeners add strength in compression which contributes to the wing loading ability. An RV-7 is designed for 14.8lbs/sqft. We don't know what safety factor was used, that's up to the engineer, who I believe was Richard VanGrunsven originally. The current engineer states that the under pressed stiffeners meet HIS margins. These less stiff components combined with other recent engineering misses (LCP and QB primer) have brought concerns with the current vans engineering group.

As for how I would proceed; I'd squish a properly pressed rib in a press. Then either roll a deeper bead or rivet on an angle till it held the same pressure as a good one. Again simple minded.

A true Van’s fanboy reply, model the structure yourself, re-press all your bad parts… really?
When you pay as much as folks do for a kit these days it doesn’t seem unreasonable to expect a quality product does it?
Builders should not have to be Van’s quality control department.
Perhaps Van’s should reallocate some of the funds they spend on engineering validation of bad parts to a QA department.
Better yet would be to make sure every employee understands that they are the ‘QA’ department and they should take the time to ensure every part they produce must be of consistent quality, if not it should be tossed in the scrap pile.

Sorry Walt, it is NOT a "fanboy" reply; it is a legitimate question...and while there is little tone to this form of discussion, I don't appreciate the perceived condescension in your post.

So again, I ask what are you going to do? If the engineers say that a perfectly flat rib will do the job and the bead is not required, are you going to stop building? Are you going to "roll your own"? Will you take the time to model the structure to get a satisfactory answer, which will likely agree with the engineer?

What will you do if Vans stops making the beaded rib in favor of a flat rib? Are you going to go hunting for the old style rib?

Did you blow a gasket when vans changed the ailerons on the -10 to make them like the -14? Why not? It is a changed structure and the engineers said it was ok...

The point is, things change. You can choose to believe the engineers, or not. If you choose not to believe them, where is the supporting data to disprove their statements?

"Feelings" don't apply. Either believe them or prove them wrong.



It would also seem that there are quite a few here that obviously know far more about Vans designs, business practices, manufacturing and fabrication of these kits. I read that Vans was hiring for several positions...might be a good fit and I'm sure they would appreciate the help.

 

[Jjackh10]

Sorry Walt, it is NOT a "fanboy" reply; it is a legitimate question...and while there is little tone to this form of discussion, I don't appreciate the perceived condescension in your post.

So again, I ask what are you going to do? If the engineers say that a perfectly flat rib will do the job and the bead is not required, are you going to stop building? Are you going to "roll your own"? Will you take the time to model the structure to get a satisfactory answer, which will likely agree with the engineer?

What will you do if Vans stops making the beaded rib in favor of a flat rib? Are you going to go hunting for the old style rib?

Did you blow a gasket when vans changed the ailerons on the -10 to make them like the -14? Why not? It is a changed structure and the engineers said it was ok...

The point is, things change. You can choose to believe the engineers, or not. If you choose not to believe them, where is the supporting data to disprove their statements?

"Feelings" don't apply. Either believe them or prove them wrong.



It would also seem that there are quite a few here that obviously know far more about Vans designs, business practices, manufacturing and fabrication of these kits. I read that Vans was hiring for several positions...might be a good fit and I'm sure they would appreciate the help.

Don't want to speak for Walt but since I was tagged I believe we both answered your question about what we were going to do.

 

[rocketman1988]

Don't want to speak for Walt but since I was tagged I believe we both answered your question about what we were going to do.

"As for how I would proceed; I'd squish a properly pressed rib in a press. Then either roll a deeper bead or rivet on an angle till it held the same pressure as a good one. Again simple minded."

You'd do this instead of believing an engineer?

 

[Walt]

"As for how I would proceed; I'd squish a properly pressed rib in a press. Then either roll a deeper bead or rivet on an angle till it held the same pressure as a good one. Again simple minded."

You'd do this instead of believing an engineer?

Are these the same engineers that said build on with laser cut parts for over a year before finally admitting there was a problem?
And I believe I answered your question about what I would do if faced with this situation, I would not install a clearly under formed part.
Engineers are not gods, they work in a cubicle and most have never worked on the stuff they design, couldn’t shoot a rivet if their life depended on it.

 

[rocketman1988]

Are these the same engineers that said build on with laser cut parts for over a year before finally admitting there was a problem?
And I believe I answered your question about what I would do if faced with this situation, I would not install a clearly under formed part.
Engineers are not gods, they work in a cubicle and most have never worked on the stuff they design, couldn’t shoot a rivet if their life depended on it.

...and yet they produce successful safe designs. Go figure.

So when they decide that a non beaded rib is sufficient and stop making beads ones, I guess you are out of luck?

 

[Walt]

...and yet they produce successful safe designs. Go figure.

So when they decide that a non beaded rib is sufficient and stop making beads ones, I guess you are out of luck?

There was a reason I chose Van's when I decided to build, it was because they chose to use proven/sound aircraft designs that I was thoroughly familiar and comfortable with. The further they stray from those design practices, the less likely I would be making the same choice.

The reason (IMO) they had to declare bankruptcy was due to overwhelming manufacturing mistakes that they couldn't recover from.
And unfortunately, it appears they have not learned their lesson yet, the same folks making the same bad decisions.

The first lesson we learned as mechanics was if you make a mistake, own it, don't try to hide it for goodness' sake!!!

 

[Cholley6]

Question for you guys that have more design and engineering experience. Were a lot of Vans designs from before computer stress modeling? Or before it was available for a company of their size? Just wondering if things have changed in the stress analysis world to change previous expectations.

 

[DeltaRomeo]

You know, with some consistently and never-endingly complaining multiple times in this thread, over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over, on how Van's needs to run their business, or how they did this or that wrong, or how this or that engineer would/should do something different...........it's getting old. Closing this thread.

I hope some consider pausing for a bit from the nonstop complaining.

My .02, we’re going two towns over for gas and lunch. Not Saturn. We’re building a small plane (which is not that complicated), not a Swiss watch with an integrated chronograph mechanism. The RV-6 spar I literally hammered together on my concrete garage floor 25 years ago with a baby sledgehammer and C-tool is doing OK on its 22 year of flight, with tapered spar strip manually cut four feet long on a bandsaw and filed smooth. The parts back then were more Flintstones than they are now.

dr

 

[Van's Aircraft]

We'd like to provide some clarity on the questions raised in this thread about lightly formed stiffening rings and beads, and offer concerned customers the option to exchange these parts.

Historically, Van's engineering drawings did not specify a required depth for stiffening rings and beads in these parts. As a result, over time there has been a broad variance in the depth of these features. In early / mid 2023, Van's press operators and members of the quality team noted that the stiffening rings and beads were not being formed at previously observed depths, and they brought this to the attention of Van's engineering and leadership. They reviewed the issue and determined that, even though it was obvious that the depth of these features was significantly less than historically produced parts, since there was no safety or engineering concern, they made the decision to ship the parts as-is. The press operators and quality team have continued to produce parts under this guidance.

Although the lack of depth in stiffening rings and beads does not pose any safety or strength issues (as previously explained), we have now established a specification for the depth of these features and implemented process controls to reduce the scope of variation.

Reviewing this thread it is clear that a few of you remain concerned about this issue. Therefore, if you have new, unused ribs which have little to no visible stiffening rings and beads, you can return these to Van's at your expense, and we will exchange them. Note: Van's will not charge for the replacement ribs, but you will incur the cost of shipping both ways.