Taylorcraft wire

[Jim Herpst]

Well Rob. Grrrrrreat contribution ! This has sure been super with the group contributions !!

Fingers crossed the spring company can make it as now completely layed out!!

[Robert Lees]

I attach the 7 readings from the analysis done by my friend. His conclusion is the match for 304 stainless is very good. However, due to XRF not being able to detect carbon, it only reports 304. It could be 304, 304L or 304H. See attached pdf.

His comments:

304 Stainless Steel
Stainless steel 304 is an austenitic grade that can be severely deep drawn. This property has resulted in 304 being the dominant grade used in applications like sinks and saucepans.

304L Stainless Steel
Type 304L is the low carbon version of Stainless steel 304. It is used in heavy gauge components for improved weldability. Some products such as plate and pipe may be available as “dual certified” material that meets the criteria for both 304 and 304L.

304H Stainless Steel
304H, a high carbon content variant, is also available for use at high temperatures.

See attached pdf

Rob

[Jim Herpst]

I attach the 7 readings from the analysis done by my friend. His conclusion is the match for 304 stainless is very good. However, due to XRF not being able to detect carbon, it only reports 304. It could be 304, 304L or 304H. See attached pdf.

His comments:

304 Stainless Steel
Stainless steel 304 is an austenitic grade that can be severely deep drawn. This property has resulted in 304 being the dominant grade used in applications like sinks and saucepans.

304L Stainless Steel
Type 304L is the low carbon version of Stainless steel 304. It is used in heavy gauge components for improved weldability. Some products such as plate and pipe may be available as “dual certified” material that meets the criteria for both 304 and 304L.

304H Stainless Steel
304H, a high carbon content variant, is also available for use at high temperatures.

See attached pdf

Rob

Well 304 stainless now raises another issue. I have a drawing supplied to me that was done by an engineer which is calling out 302 stainless. I was just about to send in the drawing I have. It was supplied to me by another member. hmmm

[Hank Jarrett]

We may want to do this the 1940s way. Make a piece from each type SS and see which one works best. Sometimes the simple method is the one that works best.

[Jim Herpst]

We may want to do this the 1940s way. Make a piece from each type SS and see which one works best. Sometimes the simple method is the one that works best.

Hank,

Do you suggest the wire bending company use two different callouts on the stainless (or more ?) for a sample ?

Thoughts?

[Hank Jarrett]

If they don't mind doing a test with a couple of pieces a foot or so long it would make sure they don't produce something we won't want.

[Jim Herpst]

If they don't mind doing a test with a couple of pieces a foot or so long it would make sure they don't produce something we won't want.

Sounds reasonable...until it is not anyway

[Mark Bowden]

Any new alloy that will eventually get used will be different from "what ever was used" on any given day by Taylorcraft. Music wire then isn't the music wire of today. Nor are any of the wartime ferrous and non-ferrous alloys. 302 was the closest to the Aeronca Music wire standard, 304 is also close too. It's a compromise.

We can never use what was used because it no longer exists. In the end it is just a clip that needs to be a bit stronger, more "springy" (for insertion and shape retention) and more corrosion resistant than the Aluminum rib.

If you want to use 304, use plain 304 as there is no need for the other alloy variants in this application. Modern music wire can be (you don't know generally) Carbon steel 1085, 302, 304, etc... or supplied under ASTM A228/A228M-18. However the ASTM grade is more prone to corrosion. It is cold drawn after the wire is made to it's final diameter.

Specifying 302 or 304 will result in less variability in what you get compared to "music wire" and it's non-aerospace fabrication methods.