Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Cleaveland Aircraft Tool, Rivet Squeezer Hydro-Pneumatic System Kit
- Thread starter RV-7 2004
- Start date
Cleavland Squeezer
We have the Cleavland Hydro-Pneumatic unit with the C Frame and Pulled rivet heads. It works very well.
We have manual Avery that uses the standard Frames and a Chicago Pneumatic unit.
We have found all of them to have a function in the building process.
We would like Main Squeeze but not yet invested in one.
We have the Cleavland Hydro-Pneumatic unit with the C Frame and Pulled rivet heads. It works very well.
We have manual Avery that uses the standard Frames and a Chicago Pneumatic unit.
We have found all of them to have a function in the building process.
We would like Main Squeeze but not yet invested in one.
david.perl
Well Known Member
I have the The SHPS Hydro-Pneumatic System Kit and am highly delighted with it. It performs well. I use the squeezer, head for the C frame and the rivet puller.
I had a slight issue with a broken part (my error) and the support and dispatch to the UK of parts was first class.
I had a slight issue with a broken part (my error) and the support and dispatch to the UK of parts was first class.
Yes, there the HPRS can be operated without your foot
Diamond,
For the Model 3300-1 intensifier, which powers the various heads, the foot pedal (which by the way is an option for all other hand held pnuematic squeezers) is the only way to operate it, unless you jury rigged up some other valving method. BUT, there is a model 3300-2 available that has a 12V solenoid operated valve. The -2 is smaller than the -1, and can allow for a trigger mounted on the head, or an electric foot switch which can be wired in parallel. The compactness of the -2 and the electrical control, allow it to be located anywhere within the distance of the 6-7' hydraulic hose. The -2 version is what I would personally prefer.
This is explained in detail on my website:
http://www.numatx-tools.com/index.html
Diamond,
For the Model 3300-1 intensifier, which powers the various heads, the foot pedal (which by the way is an option for all other hand held pnuematic squeezers) is the only way to operate it, unless you jury rigged up some other valving method. BUT, there is a model 3300-2 available that has a 12V solenoid operated valve. The -2 is smaller than the -1, and can allow for a trigger mounted on the head, or an electric foot switch which can be wired in parallel. The compactness of the -2 and the electrical control, allow it to be located anywhere within the distance of the 6-7' hydraulic hose. The -2 version is what I would personally prefer.
This is explained in detail on my website:
http://www.numatx-tools.com/index.html
Last edited:
Mark, what about the -3 model intensifier? I guess it's just like the -2, but has feathering capabilities. How important is it to have feathering?
Also, are the triggers currently available? I don't see them on your website. What is the cost of the trigger, remote or wired?
Also, are the triggers currently available? I don't see them on your website. What is the cost of the trigger, remote or wired?
3300-3 Answers
Diamond,
The -3 intensifier is in response to those that feel they really need to have feathering capbility with a solenoid controlled intensifier. I'll try to briefly explain the differences.
The -1 foot valve controlled unit can be made to "leak", by pressing the pedal into an intermediate position (it is very easy to do). This lets air serve both the advance and retract sides of the air piston of the intensifier, and causes the compression pin to pause in advancement. The normal condition for the -1 is for air to be directed to the retraction side of the intensifier air piston.
For the -2 it uses a single coil solenoid, which is strictly an on/off type valve, so it can not be postioned in a middle position similar to the -1 intensifier. For the -3, it has TWO 12V coils, which are independently controlled by their own switches, thus the advance and retract will only occur as long as each respective button is held.
Using the -3, you will need to depress two buttons for each rivet operation as opposed to the -2, so that is a consideration. I don't think most people really need the -3 version, but it is a flavor available. These HPRS riveters are a hair slower in operation than a pneumatic unit, and do not have quite the "pop" of a pneumatic unit, thus are more controllable.
I list a suggested electric switch from Mcmaster-Carr on the wiring drawing on my website. I don't inlcude these switches, since about any switch will work. Here are a few selections of switches for about $3-4 at radio shack that will all work:
http://www.radioshack.com/search/index.jsp?kwCatId=&kw=switches&origkw=switches&sr=1
Wires can be as small as 28ga (2 for the -2, 4 for the -3). The solenoids in the intensifiers are low voltage and current (12V @ 500ma max). I don't want to get into switch placement, as it is impossible to satisfy all potential users preferences (e.g. - "I'm left handed" or "I'd like to use my thumb", etc.) The switch can be wire tied to the forming head, or a simple sheet metal bracket made to the users satisfaction. Antother advantage of the -2 and -3 is that the intensifiers do not need to be on the floor at all, and can be located on a workbench or from a hangar rod (suspended above the workbench like a dremel tool might be). Wiring both trigger and foot switches in parallel is possible, per my drawing.
I tried not to over or under explain this, and hope this all helps.
Diamond,
The -3 intensifier is in response to those that feel they really need to have feathering capbility with a solenoid controlled intensifier. I'll try to briefly explain the differences.
The -1 foot valve controlled unit can be made to "leak", by pressing the pedal into an intermediate position (it is very easy to do). This lets air serve both the advance and retract sides of the air piston of the intensifier, and causes the compression pin to pause in advancement. The normal condition for the -1 is for air to be directed to the retraction side of the intensifier air piston.
For the -2 it uses a single coil solenoid, which is strictly an on/off type valve, so it can not be postioned in a middle position similar to the -1 intensifier. For the -3, it has TWO 12V coils, which are independently controlled by their own switches, thus the advance and retract will only occur as long as each respective button is held.
Using the -3, you will need to depress two buttons for each rivet operation as opposed to the -2, so that is a consideration. I don't think most people really need the -3 version, but it is a flavor available. These HPRS riveters are a hair slower in operation than a pneumatic unit, and do not have quite the "pop" of a pneumatic unit, thus are more controllable.
I list a suggested electric switch from Mcmaster-Carr on the wiring drawing on my website. I don't inlcude these switches, since about any switch will work. Here are a few selections of switches for about $3-4 at radio shack that will all work:
http://www.radioshack.com/search/index.jsp?kwCatId=&kw=switches&origkw=switches&sr=1
Wires can be as small as 28ga (2 for the -2, 4 for the -3). The solenoids in the intensifiers are low voltage and current (12V @ 500ma max). I don't want to get into switch placement, as it is impossible to satisfy all potential users preferences (e.g. - "I'm left handed" or "I'd like to use my thumb", etc.) The switch can be wire tied to the forming head, or a simple sheet metal bracket made to the users satisfaction. Antother advantage of the -2 and -3 is that the intensifiers do not need to be on the floor at all, and can be located on a workbench or from a hangar rod (suspended above the workbench like a dremel tool might be). Wiring both trigger and foot switches in parallel is possible, per my drawing.
I tried not to over or under explain this, and hope this all helps.
Last edited:
For -2 and -3 use momentary switches
I should add, for the -2 and -3 intensifiers use momentary switches, not toggle switches.
Here is a link to a $17 foot switch that will work:
http://www1.mscdirect.com/cgi/NNSRIT2?PMAKA=54097183&PMPXNO=1946519&cm_re=ItemDetail-_-ResultListing-_-SearchResults
or more generally:
http://www1.mscdirect.com/eCommerce/NavigationServlet/Electric-Foot-Switches/_/N-77gut?cm_re=Category-_-Breadcrumb-_-Electric+Foot+Switches
I should add, for the -2 and -3 intensifiers use momentary switches, not toggle switches.
Here is a link to a $17 foot switch that will work:
http://www1.mscdirect.com/cgi/NNSRIT2?PMAKA=54097183&PMPXNO=1946519&cm_re=ItemDetail-_-ResultListing-_-SearchResults
or more generally:
http://www1.mscdirect.com/eCommerce/NavigationServlet/Electric-Foot-Switches/_/N-77gut?cm_re=Category-_-Breadcrumb-_-Electric+Foot+Switches
Durability
Russ,
Thanks for your comments. These tools are cnc machined from BAR STOCK 6061, and 7075 (the highest strength grade aluminum). Compare this to the CP214 type CAST aluminum bodied tools, which AT BEST are A356 aluminum (top aircraft grade aluminum castings).
So they are every bit. I have thus had zero returns.
Mark
Russ,
Thanks for your comments. These tools are cnc machined from BAR STOCK 6061, and 7075 (the highest strength grade aluminum). Compare this to the CP214 type CAST aluminum bodied tools, which AT BEST are A356 aluminum (top aircraft grade aluminum castings).
So they are every bit. I have thus had zero returns.
Mark
grayforge
Well Known Member
Thanks for the info Mark. I'm sure the major portions of the Hydro-Pneumatic system are strong, much like an engine block is strong. I'm curious about the more intricate components: seals, shafts, valves, etc.
Without a long durability history, a somewhat short 6 month warranty is worrisome, especially in the timeline most aircraft build projects have. What was the thinking for 6 months vs a year or more?
I really want to pull the trigger on this innovative tool! (no pun intended)
Thanks,
Russ
Without a long durability history, a somewhat short 6 month warranty is worrisome, especially in the timeline most aircraft build projects have. What was the thinking for 6 months vs a year or more?
I really want to pull the trigger on this innovative tool! (no pun intended)
Thanks,
Russ
clevtool
Well Known Member
Russ,
It should say something that we are the distributor of the tool and as our warranty states we stand behind all of the tools that we sell. If it is not covered by the mfg. warranty we will take care of it as long as it was used at intended and not abused. See our warranty page for details.
http://www.cleavelandtoolstore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=SHPS
-
It should say something that we are the distributor of the tool and as our warranty states we stand behind all of the tools that we sell. If it is not covered by the mfg. warranty we will take care of it as long as it was used at intended and not abused. See our warranty page for details.
http://www.cleavelandtoolstore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=SHPS
-
Hydro Tool
We have also noticed that when pulling a Rivets the setting is uniform and does not jerk like the all pneuamtic pullers. Less chance of abrading the neigboring surfaces.
Frequent changes from the C Frame to the Pulled head will require a small increase in the frequency of bleeding the system.
We have also noticed that when pulling a Rivets the setting is uniform and does not jerk like the all pneuamtic pullers. Less chance of abrading the neigboring surfaces.
Frequent changes from the C Frame to the Pulled head will require a small increase in the frequency of bleeding the system.
So what's involved in bleeding the system and how often does that need to be done if one is changing frequently between tools? Also, how does the system tell you when it's time to bleed? Is there an obvious sign, or is it a gradual decrease in performance?
HPRS Bleeding Answers
Regarding BLEEDING THE UNITS, A complete manual of the HPRS system is available here:
http://www.numatx-tools.com/downloads_7.html
NUMATX SERIES 3000 OPERATING MANUAL
It details how to bleed the system.
It will become apparent that the system needs to be bled if the unit appears to have less force than needed, or does not stroke fully. As to how often one would need to bleed the system, that is a function of frequency of changing the heads. I estimate one could go several dozen disconnects without bleeding. This is based on my experience. And the fact that the rated air inclusion rate for the QD fittings (they are called "zero leakage" QDs but they are not perfectly zero) is about .02 cc/disconnect. Any air bubbles will typically be introduced where the QDs are located, near the forming heads. This means only a SMALL amount of fluid would need to be injected to force the air bubbles out of a given head. On the order of about 10-20 cc, or about 1/2 of the volume of the syringe provided.
So, once a unit is fully bled, one can switch heads on an occasional basis without rebleeding.
Now, I will take the opposite tact with this bleeding question (and I don't mean "bleeding" like the English might say: those "bleeding" buggers). If one plans on switching heads 20 times a day, 5 days a week... Then one should really consider getting dedicated intensifiers for each head.
Hope this helps.
Regarding BLEEDING THE UNITS, A complete manual of the HPRS system is available here:
http://www.numatx-tools.com/downloads_7.html
NUMATX SERIES 3000 OPERATING MANUAL
It details how to bleed the system.
It will become apparent that the system needs to be bled if the unit appears to have less force than needed, or does not stroke fully. As to how often one would need to bleed the system, that is a function of frequency of changing the heads. I estimate one could go several dozen disconnects without bleeding. This is based on my experience. And the fact that the rated air inclusion rate for the QD fittings (they are called "zero leakage" QDs but they are not perfectly zero) is about .02 cc/disconnect. Any air bubbles will typically be introduced where the QDs are located, near the forming heads. This means only a SMALL amount of fluid would need to be injected to force the air bubbles out of a given head. On the order of about 10-20 cc, or about 1/2 of the volume of the syringe provided.
So, once a unit is fully bled, one can switch heads on an occasional basis without rebleeding.
Now, I will take the opposite tact with this bleeding question (and I don't mean "bleeding" like the English might say: those "bleeding" buggers). If one plans on switching heads 20 times a day, 5 days a week... Then one should really consider getting dedicated intensifiers for each head.
Hope this helps.
Last edited:
HPRS Durability Answers, continued.
The HPRS uses industry standard BUNA orings (Nitrile compound) for the LP (low pressure) piston of the intensifier. It is necessary to add air tool oil to the intensifier to periodically lubricate the orings, akin to using most air tools. Several drops before usage is what I recommend. Using an inline filter/regulator/oiler is also a good idea.
The HP portion of the intensifier uses a polyeurathane seal which is essentially self lubricating by the Dexron III fluid in the upper portion of the intensifier. The forming heads use a combination of BUNA orings and teflon backup rings, and also are self lubricating. All these seals are internally protected, and wear should be extremely minimal over the life of the unit. The cylinders are anodized to further minimize wear.
Several owners have posted their positive comments on VAF regarding the system, and their satisfaction with the system. Some who have dipped their first toe in the water, have come back and ordered a second forming head. Instead of taking my words on all this, feel free to ask these users directly.
The HPRS uses industry standard BUNA orings (Nitrile compound) for the LP (low pressure) piston of the intensifier. It is necessary to add air tool oil to the intensifier to periodically lubricate the orings, akin to using most air tools. Several drops before usage is what I recommend. Using an inline filter/regulator/oiler is also a good idea.
The HP portion of the intensifier uses a polyeurathane seal which is essentially self lubricating by the Dexron III fluid in the upper portion of the intensifier. The forming heads use a combination of BUNA orings and teflon backup rings, and also are self lubricating. All these seals are internally protected, and wear should be extremely minimal over the life of the unit. The cylinders are anodized to further minimize wear.
Several owners have posted their positive comments on VAF regarding the system, and their satisfaction with the system. Some who have dipped their first toe in the water, have come back and ordered a second forming head. Instead of taking my words on all this, feel free to ask these users directly.
grayforge
Well Known Member
Good to hear Mike. In fact, I've about completed compiling a custom tool list from your web site. I'll have to figure out a way to get it to you.
Thanks!
Russ
I don't know how often a person would have need to switch back and forth between tools, but is there any way to run 2 lines off the intensifier with valves on each line to disengage pressure to the unused tool? I sure don't like the idea of buying more than one intensifier and I don't want to spend 30 minutes bleeding the system, unless it's very infrequent. Never having built an RV, I don't have any idea how often I would need to switch out tools on this system.
More Bleeding
Diamond,
Yes, you could probably add two lines with a tee at top of the intensifier and a manual shutoff valve to either line.
I may have not made this clear enough, but adding about 10cc of fluid to the head, brought on by some frequency of changing the heads, literally takes about a minute. It is not a complete recharge of the oil in the system, which is only about 50cc anyway. You are only pushing a small quantity of fluid to the head to force any air bubble out of the head.
When launching into a long project like building an RV, everyone decides how best to utilize their time, how much to spend on tooling, etc... If bleeding this system sounds like a lot of work, make sure to get a quick build kit, becasue you are otherwise in for a lot more work than you might realize. I know this personally. Also, I'd get the instrument panel work done by someone else and a host of other things. Bleeding this system is going to be by far the least of your troubles.
In the course of building my RV-7 I've probably spent more time adjusting the compression pin distance of a standard pneumatic squeezer than I would ever spend bleeding my HPRS system from occasionally swapping heads. Also, the weight difference between a standard pneumatic unit and my HPRS heads is significant. Holding an additional 3 lbs over the course of an hour of edge dimpling skins is very noticeable. The weight savings of my unit more than pays for any fuss with bleeding, in my opinion.
Again, seek out some other users experience. Ask David Perl in England or Karsten Woltering in Germany how many times they have needed to bleed their units. They both have the squeezer head, the puller head, and a DRDT head. Each head is powered by a single intensifier (-1 version) and each head has a QD. Their posts are number #3 and #5 respectively of this thread. Although they have never complained to me about bleeding the unit, you can get their feedback directly.
Diamond,
Yes, you could probably add two lines with a tee at top of the intensifier and a manual shutoff valve to either line.
I may have not made this clear enough, but adding about 10cc of fluid to the head, brought on by some frequency of changing the heads, literally takes about a minute. It is not a complete recharge of the oil in the system, which is only about 50cc anyway. You are only pushing a small quantity of fluid to the head to force any air bubble out of the head.
When launching into a long project like building an RV, everyone decides how best to utilize their time, how much to spend on tooling, etc... If bleeding this system sounds like a lot of work, make sure to get a quick build kit, becasue you are otherwise in for a lot more work than you might realize. I know this personally. Also, I'd get the instrument panel work done by someone else and a host of other things. Bleeding this system is going to be by far the least of your troubles.
In the course of building my RV-7 I've probably spent more time adjusting the compression pin distance of a standard pneumatic squeezer than I would ever spend bleeding my HPRS system from occasionally swapping heads. Also, the weight difference between a standard pneumatic unit and my HPRS heads is significant. Holding an additional 3 lbs over the course of an hour of edge dimpling skins is very noticeable. The weight savings of my unit more than pays for any fuss with bleeding, in my opinion.
Again, seek out some other users experience. Ask David Perl in England or Karsten Woltering in Germany how many times they have needed to bleed their units. They both have the squeezer head, the puller head, and a DRDT head. Each head is powered by a single intensifier (-1 version) and each head has a QD. Their posts are number #3 and #5 respectively of this thread. Although they have never complained to me about bleeding the unit, you can get their feedback directly.
Last edited:
Thanks for clarification Mark. The instructions in the manual of your website state a half hour for bleeding, but that is for a "full" bleed, as opposed to partial as you state in previous post here.
I'm sold on your system, but just trying to optimize it for my use. I don't plan on getting the pull riveter head, so I'll just have the other two tools. Tell me what would be good or bad about the following setup. Put the intensifier on floor below the DRDT with tee junction on top. Two lines come off tee and each has shut off valve. One line goes short distance to power drdt. The other line goes to the C frame head, which has a remote activation switch to activate the intensifier. Would this be an efficient way to utilize the system, or are there problems with this setup?
I'm sold on your system, but just trying to optimize it for my use. I don't plan on getting the pull riveter head, so I'll just have the other two tools. Tell me what would be good or bad about the following setup. Put the intensifier on floor below the DRDT with tee junction on top. Two lines come off tee and each has shut off valve. One line goes short distance to power drdt. The other line goes to the C frame head, which has a remote activation switch to activate the intensifier. Would this be an efficient way to utilize the system, or are there problems with this setup?
grayforge
Well Known Member
Instead of 2 shutoff valves, wouldn't a combo 'T' switching (Diverter) valve work better? Only one twist to switch tools instead of 2, plus, no risk of activating the Intensifier with both valves closed... likely not an issue though.
Options:
3000psi max at Amazon
6000psi at McMaster (Click the item entitled: "Diverting 3-Port Type 316 Stainless Steel Ball Valves with Yor-Lok Fittings")
Options:
3000psi max at Amazon
6000psi at McMaster (Click the item entitled: "Diverting 3-Port Type 316 Stainless Steel Ball Valves with Yor-Lok Fittings")
grayforge
Well Known Member
Question about C-Frame head
I've read that the DRDT-2 Frame's top arm bends upward 1/4 an inch when used with the Hydro-Pneumatic head. I've also seen this massive solid steel C shaped frame with the head mounted (way too heavy and difficult to make for me).
Any recommendations on strengthening the DRDT-2 to make it more applicable for the Hydro-Pneumatic head? Maybe weld 1/4" plate on either side of the back end? Or build one from scratch with 1/4" wall rectangle instead of 3/16"?
Or is it really not a factor?
Thanks!
I've read that the DRDT-2 Frame's top arm bends upward 1/4 an inch when used with the Hydro-Pneumatic head. I've also seen this massive solid steel C shaped frame with the head mounted (way too heavy and difficult to make for me).
Any recommendations on strengthening the DRDT-2 to make it more applicable for the Hydro-Pneumatic head? Maybe weld 1/4" plate on either side of the back end? Or build one from scratch with 1/4" wall rectangle instead of 3/16"?
Or is it really not a factor?
Thanks!
Last edited:
Ron RV8
Well Known Member
Hydropneumatic squeezer
I don't understand how one could add 10ccs of fluid to the head?? How physically would you do this??
I try and minimize switches between tools but have found that if I use a syringe to add a few drops of oil into the top of the male connector (held vertically) before reconnecting it reduces the bleeding frequency. If you look at the male connector before adding oil, you will notice that it is not "full" and although it will only take 2-3 drops, the little bubbles of air will add up over a few switches... I also store the tool not in use with the male connector vertical and a little rubber cover over it. Yeah I know that sounds a bit funny!!
I've got my slow build -8 kit up to quick build stage over a year of construction and have probably bled 3 times at about 20 mins each, not a major consideration...
I have found that I have to be a bit careful not to over tighten the ram where the set goes. What has happened to mine a couple of times is that the set end of the ram has mushroomed a bit, making it hard to remove from the yoke. A little dressing on the scotch brite wheel has taken care of it however...
I have also had to replace the roll pin that connects the set part of the ram to the threaded bit that allows the length to be adjusted. The ram has flats for a wrench, but you need to be careful not to apply too much torque or you can shear the roll pin... Better just to wiggle the yoke a bit if it seems to stick when you're adjusting...
Other than those minor points, and wrapping the metal braided hose with some hockey tape to cut down on abrasion to the airframe, it's been a great tool.
I don't understand how one could add 10ccs of fluid to the head?? How physically would you do this??
I try and minimize switches between tools but have found that if I use a syringe to add a few drops of oil into the top of the male connector (held vertically) before reconnecting it reduces the bleeding frequency. If you look at the male connector before adding oil, you will notice that it is not "full" and although it will only take 2-3 drops, the little bubbles of air will add up over a few switches... I also store the tool not in use with the male connector vertical and a little rubber cover over it. Yeah I know that sounds a bit funny!!
I've got my slow build -8 kit up to quick build stage over a year of construction and have probably bled 3 times at about 20 mins each, not a major consideration...
I have found that I have to be a bit careful not to over tighten the ram where the set goes. What has happened to mine a couple of times is that the set end of the ram has mushroomed a bit, making it hard to remove from the yoke. A little dressing on the scotch brite wheel has taken care of it however...
I have also had to replace the roll pin that connects the set part of the ram to the threaded bit that allows the length to be adjusted. The ram has flats for a wrench, but you need to be careful not to apply too much torque or you can shear the roll pin... Better just to wiggle the yoke a bit if it seems to stick when you're adjusting...
Other than those minor points, and wrapping the metal braided hose with some hockey tape to cut down on abrasion to the airframe, it's been a great tool.
10cc add
Ron,
Good to hear you are advancing your -8, and the HPRS is assisting with the effort.
When I mentioned adding 10cc, I should have more accurately stated that one would inject a small portion of a syringe worth at the intensfier bleed fitting. You are correct, that there isnt room for 10cc at the head, when the piston is in normally retracted position.
Sounds like you have a good plan for keeping the QDs in an upright position when not used, and adding 2-3 drops before connecting. The reason these QDs are not perfectly zero leakage, is that it is impossible to get the seals in both the male and female portions at the very extreme ends of both.
With regard to the compression pin, I think I can make the tips of these a little stronger, by putting slightly smaller wrench flats on them. The roll pin, at the internal end of the compression pin can only take light torque when making adjustments to the compression pin length.
Thanks for you input.
Ron,
Good to hear you are advancing your -8, and the HPRS is assisting with the effort.
When I mentioned adding 10cc, I should have more accurately stated that one would inject a small portion of a syringe worth at the intensfier bleed fitting. You are correct, that there isnt room for 10cc at the head, when the piston is in normally retracted position.
Sounds like you have a good plan for keeping the QDs in an upright position when not used, and adding 2-3 drops before connecting. The reason these QDs are not perfectly zero leakage, is that it is impossible to get the seals in both the male and female portions at the very extreme ends of both.
With regard to the compression pin, I think I can make the tips of these a little stronger, by putting slightly smaller wrench flats on them. The roll pin, at the internal end of the compression pin can only take light torque when making adjustments to the compression pin length.
Thanks for you input.
Good Valve Idea for HPRS
Grayforge,
Those valves you have links for would work fine I believe. You could buy two of these valves if you wanted to plumb to three heads, and run hard brake line at the rear of a workbench for example, with each T in series. You could then run flexible lines off of each valve. The only thing to keep in mind is to limit the flexible hose lengths, to avoid overly robbing stroke from the heads, due to line swell. I've estimated line swell to be on the order of .001" of diametrical growth. This doesn't sound like much, but over a 6' hose length, it translates into about .05 cu. in. of additional volume which the fluid tries to fill. The 3,000 psi valve would be adequate. Pressure rated devices such as valves typically have proof pressures of at least 2x, and burst pressures of at least 3x their rated pressure.
Also, although you don't bring it up, I will restate what I have in the past regarding the safety of hydraulic fluid at 3K pressure IN MY UNIT. The key word is INCOMPRESSIBLE. Air at this pressure is very dangerous, since air is highly compressible. My unit's hydraulic fluid at this pressure would only make a mess if something was to let go, since the Dexron III is nearly incompressible.
I think the valve idea you have suggested is great. The valve cost will be offset by not buying QDs. The hydraulic lines, by the way, can also be purchased at Mcmaster Carr. The hose should be rated at 3,000 psi, with 7/16"-20 37 degree fittings (for AN fittings).
http://www.mcmaster.com/#catalog/118/263/=g7i3bv
Grayforge,
Those valves you have links for would work fine I believe. You could buy two of these valves if you wanted to plumb to three heads, and run hard brake line at the rear of a workbench for example, with each T in series. You could then run flexible lines off of each valve. The only thing to keep in mind is to limit the flexible hose lengths, to avoid overly robbing stroke from the heads, due to line swell. I've estimated line swell to be on the order of .001" of diametrical growth. This doesn't sound like much, but over a 6' hose length, it translates into about .05 cu. in. of additional volume which the fluid tries to fill. The 3,000 psi valve would be adequate. Pressure rated devices such as valves typically have proof pressures of at least 2x, and burst pressures of at least 3x their rated pressure.
Also, although you don't bring it up, I will restate what I have in the past regarding the safety of hydraulic fluid at 3K pressure IN MY UNIT. The key word is INCOMPRESSIBLE. Air at this pressure is very dangerous, since air is highly compressible. My unit's hydraulic fluid at this pressure would only make a mess if something was to let go, since the Dexron III is nearly incompressible.
I think the valve idea you have suggested is great. The valve cost will be offset by not buying QDs. The hydraulic lines, by the way, can also be purchased at Mcmaster Carr. The hose should be rated at 3,000 psi, with 7/16"-20 37 degree fittings (for AN fittings).
http://www.mcmaster.com/#catalog/118/263/=g7i3bv
Last edited:
More thoughts on HPRS plumbing / valving
Diamond,
Yes, the half hour or so I refer to in the manual is the inital full bleed job. The units are shipped with fluid, but the fluid is not yet in the unit. This is necessary to better package the unit in a flat rate USPS box.
I think your plumbing plan is very similar to Grayforge's, and it should work well. See my prior post to his comments (I'm answering in reverse chronology).
I unfortunately finished my -7 structure ahead of developing most of the HPRS. Had I to do it again (someday an RV-8?), I would plumb up a similar setup as you are suggesting. When building one of these planes, you go through phases, such as building brackets (squeezer head), then dimpling wing and fuselage skins (DRDT head). So swapping heads probably is not all that frequent. But having dual lines that are valved, eliminates swapping altogether.
Again, just remember to keep each flexible line to around 6' long, to minimize hose swell effects.
Diamond,
Yes, the half hour or so I refer to in the manual is the inital full bleed job. The units are shipped with fluid, but the fluid is not yet in the unit. This is necessary to better package the unit in a flat rate USPS box.
I think your plumbing plan is very similar to Grayforge's, and it should work well. See my prior post to his comments (I'm answering in reverse chronology).
I unfortunately finished my -7 structure ahead of developing most of the HPRS. Had I to do it again (someday an RV-8?), I would plumb up a similar setup as you are suggesting. When building one of these planes, you go through phases, such as building brackets (squeezer head), then dimpling wing and fuselage skins (DRDT head). So swapping heads probably is not all that frequent. But having dual lines that are valved, eliminates swapping altogether.
Again, just remember to keep each flexible line to around 6' long, to minimize hose swell effects.
DRDT Frame
Grayforge,
The DRDT frame is not my product, so I will only offer suggestions.
First, the DRDT frame is a great unit. The frame was designed for dimpling or light riveting (3/32 rivets). It has a standard hand activated lever, which develops the mechanical advantage. It has ample stroke length, with the hand lever action. Thus, while there is frame flex, there is more than enough stroke to make up for this flex (1/4" or so).
If you plan on using an HPRS head for the DRDT frame, you need to understand that the stroke of the head is around .55", roughly equal to a standard pneumatic squeezer. The HPRS intensifiers were designed to output the displacement of the piston in the squeezer head or DRDT head.
With 3K of force developed by the DRDT head, the 1/4" of frame flex leaves only around .3" of effective travel. The male dimple die itself is around .18" tall (working off memory only here), so that if further subtracted from the .30" travel. The net result is that there may be only around .12" of clearance for repositioning the skin when dimpling.
So...this is why the frame flex can be less than optimal. You could weld some U-shaped doublers to each side of the frame. 3/16" - 1/4" thick steel would help lower the deflection and stress. The "What's New" page of my website shows where the stresses are concentrated in the DRDT frame.
http://www.numatx-tools.com/whats-new_8.html
What is really nice about using a powered head on the DRDT frame, is that it allows holding the skin with both hands when dimpling. Add an el cheapo red laser to the setup, pointing it at the tip of the male dimple die, and you will effortlessly move from one dimple hole to the next. This is also where a foot actuated intensifier unit shines. I recommend the -2 intensifier and an electric foot switch, as I previously mentioned in this thread.
Grayforge,
The DRDT frame is not my product, so I will only offer suggestions.
First, the DRDT frame is a great unit. The frame was designed for dimpling or light riveting (3/32 rivets). It has a standard hand activated lever, which develops the mechanical advantage. It has ample stroke length, with the hand lever action. Thus, while there is frame flex, there is more than enough stroke to make up for this flex (1/4" or so).
If you plan on using an HPRS head for the DRDT frame, you need to understand that the stroke of the head is around .55", roughly equal to a standard pneumatic squeezer. The HPRS intensifiers were designed to output the displacement of the piston in the squeezer head or DRDT head.
With 3K of force developed by the DRDT head, the 1/4" of frame flex leaves only around .3" of effective travel. The male dimple die itself is around .18" tall (working off memory only here), so that if further subtracted from the .30" travel. The net result is that there may be only around .12" of clearance for repositioning the skin when dimpling.
So...this is why the frame flex can be less than optimal. You could weld some U-shaped doublers to each side of the frame. 3/16" - 1/4" thick steel would help lower the deflection and stress. The "What's New" page of my website shows where the stresses are concentrated in the DRDT frame.
http://www.numatx-tools.com/whats-new_8.html
What is really nice about using a powered head on the DRDT frame, is that it allows holding the skin with both hands when dimpling. Add an el cheapo red laser to the setup, pointing it at the tip of the male dimple die, and you will effortlessly move from one dimple hole to the next. This is also where a foot actuated intensifier unit shines. I recommend the -2 intensifier and an electric foot switch, as I previously mentioned in this thread.
Hmmm, so if the flexible line has to be 6 foot or less, then the intensifier pretty much has to be close to the tool in use at all times. That may shoot my idea of leaving the intensifier below the drdt and just running a flex line to wherever I'm working with the C head.
-2 intensifier can be located on workbench
Diamond,
The -2 intensifier can be located on workbench, where a 6' hose will have ample reach to the DRDT head, and a second 6' hydraulic line can feed the squeezer head, isolated via a manual valve as you are envisioning. You can place an electric foot switch on the floor to control the -2. The only downside to all of this, is that should you need to squeeze rivets on the airframe, which will happen, you'd need to break loose the line to the DRDT head. And... the simplest way to do this is with a QD.
So basically I still think your best option is to just get one female portion of the QD for the hyd hose, and 2 male portions, one for each head.
Diamond,
The -2 intensifier can be located on workbench, where a 6' hose will have ample reach to the DRDT head, and a second 6' hydraulic line can feed the squeezer head, isolated via a manual valve as you are envisioning. You can place an electric foot switch on the floor to control the -2. The only downside to all of this, is that should you need to squeeze rivets on the airframe, which will happen, you'd need to break loose the line to the DRDT head. And... the simplest way to do this is with a QD.
So basically I still think your best option is to just get one female portion of the QD for the hyd hose, and 2 male portions, one for each head.
grayforge
Well Known Member
Good thought Diamond. Another nice feature would be for the hose to be clear rubber coated like many aftermarket steel braided brake lines for cars.
But I imagine Mark did plenty of research to find the optimum hose for this tool, so this might be the best hose currently out there based on price, expansion, flexibility.
But I imagine Mark did plenty of research to find the optimum hose for this tool, so this might be the best hose currently out there based on price, expansion, flexibility.
Getting serious with the DRDT frame
Grayforge,
Looks like you are getting serious with the DRDT frame build. It is work to build one ahead of time, and of course some cost, but you will be whistling while you work afterwords. Or you can rent out your unit when not in use
One thing I am not happy with my -7 project is the dimples in my skins. Before I developed the HPRS, I hand dimpled all my skins. Besides the labor involved, (Pick up hammer, 4 hammer blows, set hammer down, move skin, can't find next hole, find next hole, pick up hammer... X 10,000 or so it seemed) what I didnt realize that I now know, is that hand dimpling seems to cause slight coining. And I don't want to start a debate with anyone here, but I believe that by hand dimpling the holes the aluminum, which is already in the T3 condition, the material is further work hardened. What this means is that the dimples are not as crisp as a one shot action that develops a lot of force will do. It has to do with the rate of material flow, not just the force. I have measured some of my dimples with depth mic, and many of them check about .010 below the main surface lever of the skins. Not the end of the world of course, just being picky about my own work.
So maybe others may benefit from this realization, if they are ultra picky about the cosmetics of the dimples. This is more of a plug for some form of a DRDT frame, than for my system.
Grayforge,
Looks like you are getting serious with the DRDT frame build. It is work to build one ahead of time, and of course some cost, but you will be whistling while you work afterwords. Or you can rent out your unit when not in use
One thing I am not happy with my -7 project is the dimples in my skins. Before I developed the HPRS, I hand dimpled all my skins. Besides the labor involved, (Pick up hammer, 4 hammer blows, set hammer down, move skin, can't find next hole, find next hole, pick up hammer... X 10,000 or so it seemed) what I didnt realize that I now know, is that hand dimpling seems to cause slight coining. And I don't want to start a debate with anyone here, but I believe that by hand dimpling the holes the aluminum, which is already in the T3 condition, the material is further work hardened. What this means is that the dimples are not as crisp as a one shot action that develops a lot of force will do. It has to do with the rate of material flow, not just the force. I have measured some of my dimples with depth mic, and many of them check about .010 below the main surface lever of the skins. Not the end of the world of course, just being picky about my own work.
So maybe others may benefit from this realization, if they are ultra picky about the cosmetics of the dimples. This is more of a plug for some form of a DRDT frame, than for my system.
Last edited:
Hose lengths
Diamond / Grayforge,
Hard plumbing using automotive brake line or similar, can be any length you want. There isnt a swell issue with hard line. The potential issue is with a flexible hose. The 6' length isnt a hard limit, up to 8' has been used for the flexible hose. You just want to limit the length to avoid robbing stroke due to swell. As I stated earlier in the thread, this is really a factor for the DRDT head, not so much for the C-squeezer.
There are much heavier duty hoses out there, like hoses used in Enerpac systems. These are fairly heavy though, and most probably wont want to be lugging that additional weight around. I think these hoses will be more costly, but I haven't researched this. I've tried even lighter hoses, at 3/16" O.D., but that small of a hose impeded the flow rate. The forming heads and intensifiers have 1/8-27 npt threaded ports, nothing fancy, so users can adapt the lines to suit their needs.
I'm starting to look into using thermoplastic hose. This will solve any abrasion issues of an unshielded stainless braided line, but I don't think it will affect hose swell. The stainless steel hoses I am thus far supplying are braided for the hoop stress that the 3k+ pressure develops. Any flexible hose is going to swell. Again, we are only talking about roughly a .001" growth in diameter, but if you calculate the area of that .0005 ring (the growth of the radius is 1/2) it adds up to about .05 cu. in. over the length of the 6-7' hose.
Down the road I might try to enlarge my intensifier to give it a little more displacement. As anyone trying to make product in volume understands, you can't make changes like this at a moments notice, due to fixturing costs, cnc programs, purchased parts in inventory...
BOTTOM LINE: If you plan on using the DRDT powered head, on a DRDT type frame, use a flexible hose of no more than around 7' long.
If you have a basic sketch of how you want to lay out your lines, with the lengths involved, scan it and email it to me, and I'd be happy to look at it for you.
Diamond / Grayforge,
Hard plumbing using automotive brake line or similar, can be any length you want. There isnt a swell issue with hard line. The potential issue is with a flexible hose. The 6' length isnt a hard limit, up to 8' has been used for the flexible hose. You just want to limit the length to avoid robbing stroke due to swell. As I stated earlier in the thread, this is really a factor for the DRDT head, not so much for the C-squeezer.
There are much heavier duty hoses out there, like hoses used in Enerpac systems. These are fairly heavy though, and most probably wont want to be lugging that additional weight around. I think these hoses will be more costly, but I haven't researched this. I've tried even lighter hoses, at 3/16" O.D., but that small of a hose impeded the flow rate. The forming heads and intensifiers have 1/8-27 npt threaded ports, nothing fancy, so users can adapt the lines to suit their needs.
I'm starting to look into using thermoplastic hose. This will solve any abrasion issues of an unshielded stainless braided line, but I don't think it will affect hose swell. The stainless steel hoses I am thus far supplying are braided for the hoop stress that the 3k+ pressure develops. Any flexible hose is going to swell. Again, we are only talking about roughly a .001" growth in diameter, but if you calculate the area of that .0005 ring (the growth of the radius is 1/2) it adds up to about .05 cu. in. over the length of the 6-7' hose.
Down the road I might try to enlarge my intensifier to give it a little more displacement. As anyone trying to make product in volume understands, you can't make changes like this at a moments notice, due to fixturing costs, cnc programs, purchased parts in inventory...
BOTTOM LINE: If you plan on using the DRDT powered head, on a DRDT type frame, use a flexible hose of no more than around 7' long.
If you have a basic sketch of how you want to lay out your lines, with the lengths involved, scan it and email it to me, and I'd be happy to look at it for you.
Last edited:
clevtool
Well Known Member
David Perl has built the DRDT design out of 1/4" tube with no further reinforcement. He indicated that the deflection with the HPRS power head is less than 1/16", further the torsional rigidity helps with setting rivets.
For the hose swell, I have sold several systems with rigid plumbing. The kit is $45 and has a brass elbow coming out of the DRDT power head, the hard steel tube follows the top of the DRDT rearward, then bends down, and returns forward through the bottom tube of the DRDT. This way the disconnect can be on the outside of the bench. Putting on multiple hoses would double the hose swell problem unless it was done like suggested with a valve on the intensifier. I would not want to try and use the hand tool in the shop while it is tethered to the DRDT.
From my experience swapping tools at the airshows, it can be switched well over a dozen times before it needs bled. Holding the tool up and pushing a few CCs of fluid from the intensifier is quick and easy.
We have been working on solutions to the common wishes of customers and expect to have a packaged solution for a trigger and/or foot operated unit in the near future (late March). This option will be retrofitted to the units currently being sold.
As for the dimpling, it is all in the dies. The tool it is used in will not make a difference, but the pressure applied will either too much or too little. The quality of the dimple dies makes all the difference in the world. That is why we ask you to try ours and send them back if you don't think they work better than what you are currently using. Inferior dies are a chance to make 14,000 mistakes on your project.
-
For the hose swell, I have sold several systems with rigid plumbing. The kit is $45 and has a brass elbow coming out of the DRDT power head, the hard steel tube follows the top of the DRDT rearward, then bends down, and returns forward through the bottom tube of the DRDT. This way the disconnect can be on the outside of the bench. Putting on multiple hoses would double the hose swell problem unless it was done like suggested with a valve on the intensifier. I would not want to try and use the hand tool in the shop while it is tethered to the DRDT.
From my experience swapping tools at the airshows, it can be switched well over a dozen times before it needs bled. Holding the tool up and pushing a few CCs of fluid from the intensifier is quick and easy.
We have been working on solutions to the common wishes of customers and expect to have a packaged solution for a trigger and/or foot operated unit in the near future (late March). This option will be retrofitted to the units currently being sold.
As for the dimpling, it is all in the dies. The tool it is used in will not make a difference, but the pressure applied will either too much or too little. The quality of the dimple dies makes all the difference in the world. That is why we ask you to try ours and send them back if you don't think they work better than what you are currently using. Inferior dies are a chance to make 14,000 mistakes on your project.
-
According to Wally at Synergy Air when I took their intro to metalwork class, the Cleaveland springback dimple dies shine above all others because Mike's dad was a machinist before (and after) he started their company, so his designs and tolerances show a master's touch.
Sounded right to me.
--
Stephen
HPRS Plumbing Configuration Options
Maybe this illustration will help with planning how to route the HPRS plumbing.
http://numatx-tools.com/doc/HPRS_CONFIGURATION_OPTIONS.pdf
I still would prefer to just use the QDs, and as Mike Lauritsen explained, it really isnt that hard to add some fluid to the system. But there is more than one way to do it.
Some will still prefer the -1 intensifier, which only requires an air line ( the -2 needs a 12V power supply as well). But the above illustration (link) shows that the -2 can be located about anywhere, providing you keep the flexible hose to a reasonable length (6-7'). If you were only going to use a DRDT forming head, you could locate the -2 intensifier 50' feet away or more, provided it was hard plumbed.
Maybe this illustration will help with planning how to route the HPRS plumbing.
http://numatx-tools.com/doc/HPRS_CONFIGURATION_OPTIONS.pdf
I still would prefer to just use the QDs, and as Mike Lauritsen explained, it really isnt that hard to add some fluid to the system. But there is more than one way to do it.
Some will still prefer the -1 intensifier, which only requires an air line ( the -2 needs a 12V power supply as well). But the above illustration (link) shows that the -2 can be located about anywhere, providing you keep the flexible hose to a reasonable length (6-7'). If you were only going to use a DRDT forming head, you could locate the -2 intensifier 50' feet away or more, provided it was hard plumbed.
Last edited:
grayforge
Well Known Member
So this tool uses dry, filtered air with no oil? Just thinking about how I'd set up my air lines.
Something like:
1. The major line feeding the work area is filtered, then sent to a 'Y'.
2. One 'Y' line feeding the rivet gun and drill that has it's own pressure regulator and oiler.
3. The second line off the 'Y' feeding the HPRS with it's own regulator and no oiler.
Sound about right?
Also, I had an idea about a remote foot pedal for the HPRS: I like the idea of being able to feather the pedal to control the speed of the piston and to stop it mid-way, if needed. I also like the idea of having the Intensifier on the work table. So maybe I could split the pedal air valve from the Intensifier and run longer air lines from the pedal to the Intensifier. Seems like best of both worlds.
Something like:
1. The major line feeding the work area is filtered, then sent to a 'Y'.
2. One 'Y' line feeding the rivet gun and drill that has it's own pressure regulator and oiler.
3. The second line off the 'Y' feeding the HPRS with it's own regulator and no oiler.
Sound about right?
Also, I had an idea about a remote foot pedal for the HPRS: I like the idea of being able to feather the pedal to control the speed of the piston and to stop it mid-way, if needed. I also like the idea of having the Intensifier on the work table. So maybe I could split the pedal air valve from the Intensifier and run longer air lines from the pedal to the Intensifier. Seems like best of both worlds.
Possibilities are endless
Grayforge,
You need to add oil to the system in some manner, again the same as many air tools. Adding oil can be done by dropping 2-3 drops before use, using a an FRL unit (Filter/regulator/lubricator), or using an automatic oiler. Like the bleeding discussions, it is a function of frequency of usage of the unit. If you are using an oiler for other air tools, the HPRS should be fed by the same line.
You can remove the foot pedal operated air valve from the -1 intensifier, and locate the piston portion of the intensifier elsewhere, as you mention. If you want, I can supply a -1.5 intensifier version, which does not have the longer base of the -1, that normally mounts the foot valve, but instead has the base of the -2. You can run 1/4" air line (available at Lowes) from the foot valve to the intensifier.
BTW, there are two pages to the pdf file (link) mentioned in my previous post. Page 1 shows the QD setup. Page 2 shows a possible setup without QDs.
MANY, MANY ways to set up the system to your preference. It is a very flexible system, in addition to being lighter and more compact where it matters most: in the operator's hands.
Grayforge,
You need to add oil to the system in some manner, again the same as many air tools. Adding oil can be done by dropping 2-3 drops before use, using a an FRL unit (Filter/regulator/lubricator), or using an automatic oiler. Like the bleeding discussions, it is a function of frequency of usage of the unit. If you are using an oiler for other air tools, the HPRS should be fed by the same line.
You can remove the foot pedal operated air valve from the -1 intensifier, and locate the piston portion of the intensifier elsewhere, as you mention. If you want, I can supply a -1.5 intensifier version, which does not have the longer base of the -1, that normally mounts the foot valve, but instead has the base of the -2. You can run 1/4" air line (available at Lowes) from the foot valve to the intensifier.
BTW, there are two pages to the pdf file (link) mentioned in my previous post. Page 1 shows the QD setup. Page 2 shows a possible setup without QDs.
MANY, MANY ways to set up the system to your preference. It is a very flexible system, in addition to being lighter and more compact where it matters most: in the operator's hands.
Last edited:
Dimpling Frame looks great!
Russ,
Your dimpling frame looks great! Quite beefy. Sure to do a great job for you. I can't stress enough how much I wish I had one of these back when I was tap, tap, tapping away to hand dimple my skins. Get a cheap laser, mount it to the top of the frame, make it easily adjustable to target the male die installed in the lower portion of the frame, and your dimpling will be very painless.
A two hands on skin operation to boot!
Regards,
Russ,
Your dimpling frame looks great! Quite beefy. Sure to do a great job for you. I can't stress enough how much I wish I had one of these back when I was tap, tap, tapping away to hand dimple my skins. Get a cheap laser, mount it to the top of the frame, make it easily adjustable to target the male die installed in the lower portion of the frame, and your dimpling will be very painless.
A two hands on skin operation to boot!
Regards,
tack weld the lower die receiver bracket to the frame
Russ,
You may have already been planning on this, but just in case, I would mention that you should mount the powered head to the upper welded plate (not shown in your picture, which caps off the fwd end of the upper tube). Then, actuate the head to extend the compression pin, and use this to align the lower die receiver to the lower portion of the frame. Once you do this, you can tack weld the lower die receiver bracket to the frame. You wouldn't even need to get carried away with welding the lower bracket (since that bracket is in compression only), in case you ever need to make subtle adjustments. You can temporarily regulate the pressure to the intensifier down to 20-30 psi, to lower the force of the powered head, which will lower the frame flex.
Hope this helps.
http://numatx-tools.com/doc/NUMATX_MODEL_3400-1_SPECIFICATIONS.pdf
Russ,
You may have already been planning on this, but just in case, I would mention that you should mount the powered head to the upper welded plate (not shown in your picture, which caps off the fwd end of the upper tube). Then, actuate the head to extend the compression pin, and use this to align the lower die receiver to the lower portion of the frame. Once you do this, you can tack weld the lower die receiver bracket to the frame. You wouldn't even need to get carried away with welding the lower bracket (since that bracket is in compression only), in case you ever need to make subtle adjustments. You can temporarily regulate the pressure to the intensifier down to 20-30 psi, to lower the force of the powered head, which will lower the frame flex.
Hope this helps.
http://numatx-tools.com/doc/NUMATX_MODEL_3400-1_SPECIFICATIONS.pdf
