wing ribs

[Kamcoman77]

Just be sure all the vertical pieces from front spar to back of rear spar are 90° to the bottom capstrip and you should not have any trouble.

[kennyrayandersen]

Just curious why the Iron Designs rib and the original are different? IS the Iron Designs easier to build? is the airfoil the same -- what's the story?

[Chuck in Indiana]

As far as I know.. Iron Designs tried to "flesh out" Leonard's sketches to make them easier to understand. Scott *did* change the method of sealing up the aileron gap, which I, personally, think is an improvement. I think there will be less adverse yaw with the Iron Design method..but having never flown either version, you can take that with a grain of salt. 
As far as the airfoil being different.. well.. not much, and it won't matter. The important thing is to either use Leanord's full size rib template or Iron Designs, and build everything to fit.

[scottiniowa]

As far as I know.. Iron Designs tried to "flesh out" Leonard's sketches to make them easier to understand. Scott *did* change the method of sealing up the aileron gap, which I, personally, think is an improvement. I think there will be less adverse yaw with the Iron Design method..but having never flown either version, you can take that with a grain of salt. 
As far as the airfoil being different.. well.. not much, and it won't matter. The important thing is to either use Leanord's full size rib template or Iron Designs, and build everything to fit.

Every now and then this subject comes up and sometimes, I make a comment, this seems about the right time.  As there are a lot of folks  on both sides of the fence, you can take this (info)  with a grain of salt.

Exactly as Chuck stated, my main goal was to make them easier to understand.  (the plans, as at the time, there was a ton of questions)

I did make the "gap" tighter, but perhaps easier to make, really, just making the same number of parts in a slightly different way. But with really called out measurements or full size drawings, Nothing structural at all. This certainly was NOT calling one way better or worse... just in my mind, more efficient. A lot of folks have proven this, but far be it for me to say  " this is a lot better or worse " though it has been proven out to work very well.

At the speeds this wing will travel,  many of the parameters of flight testing will be subjective.  Meaning mostly, if one will cruise at 65 and the other 64, the next day it may be different.  Now if you get 10% better results, the same day, with the same engine and frame only different wings, would love to hear about it.  But I don't think it will happen as no one has the time/money/work time to do a complete test... This takes us back to the "easier/faster part" --- 1 vs the other.

As Chuck stated, one airfoil vs the other..(hardly different) . Please do tell if you find a difference in performance.. just so close, I can't even get a computer to come up with a calculated difference. Would need the plot points of both, I only have mine.  Please note, if the words defining the "difference of the airfoils"  include, "I think, maybe, possibly, seems like"  They won't hold much water in my glass.  I don't care who says it.

Chuck.s last line sums it up best, pick one or the other and stick to it.
Best of success.

[kennyrayandersen]

Thanks clarification. I think what I will do is just order both and then study it. I'm not opposed to doing something more efficiently! time is money! and it's not much money!

[Theodore]

Chuck and rechuck(check/recheck), or do it again Danny. who will build this,
 Yes all like parts much match(straight square and true!), wood easier to fix than 4130, course sand paper and shims. I will say the retired engineer is more particilar than the retired mechanic, in my career i was paid to get it right the first time, built to spec!
Thank you all!
Great forum!
that why i went with this aircraft,

[914pete]

If your new to building as I am I would highly recommend buying the Ironside supplemental plans. They add clarity and are very reasonably priced. I started building ribs using Leonard's full rib plan before buying the Ironside plans. An observation between the two plans shows the Ironside rib is roughly 1/2" shorter and 3/8" lower profile. If your buying both plans, pick one and build to it. I like the aileron cove design on the Ironside plans so now I'm adapting that to Leonard's rib. Of course I now have to adjust sizing a little to all the bits and pieces but I think I will like the finished product. The other thing I would do differently is I would build the aileron ribs separate from the regular ribs. Cutting and sanding off gussets is proving to take up a lot of precious time and its difficult to not sand the cap strips. I would probably even consider building the spars first just make sure you leave off the wing/strut attach point bracket 1/8" ply backing pieces until all your ribs are done and slid onto the rear spar.

I had a nice pic of both rib plans but it won't let me attach it. I'm getting: Your attachment has failed security checks and cannot be uploaded. Please consult the forum administrator.

[Kamcoman77]

Good information 914pete, but after reading all the issues people are having getting a satisfactory wing rib profile, I would not recommend building the spars first. I think it is far easier to size the spar verticals, and therefore the spar height, after you see how tall your ribs are, than trying to scale your wing rib profile to match the spar. I guess if you are really careful, it won't matter, but I built my ribs first, then the spars.

[Chuck in Indiana]

^^^^^
This.

[kennyrayandersen]

Keep in mind that the spar is actually the important part. As long as the height of the spar is at least the dimension shown then you'll be OK. The ribs structure is secondary to the spar. So, yes you should have a good profile, but not at the cost of making the structure weaker. Measure twice, cut once.