Stuka Stunt Control Line Forum
Archive, 2000–2021 · recovered from the Internet Archive
Forums › Stuka Stunt Main Forum

Silk Wrinkles

Stuka Stunt Main Forum · 25 of 25 known posts recovered

Larry F · Apr 30, 2001 05:47 AM

#0 source
Gang --

Covered a plane with 5 momme silk (from Thai silks), wet, and it dried with not even the smallest wrinkle anywhere and no warps. Then I put on one coat of Brodak clear thinned 50/50, and it developed severe wrinkling near the leading and trailing edges, and in the tips. The wrinkles run parallel to the ribs. The grain of the silk is parallel to the spars.

First, any clues as to what I did wrong? Second, how do I fix it?
I don't ever remember this happening before, but it has been a few years, you know. Steam, maybe would fix it?

Larry F

LNeumann · Apr 30, 2001 08:18 AM

#1 source
How solidly was the silk layed down? What I am wondering is, did the silk pull up with that first layer of dope being applied? If the dope is put on too wet and the silk is not adequately doped down, the dope thinner could "eat" into the adhesive layer and cause it to pull away. It is probably best to put a good layer of dope down over the entire leading and trailing edges, as well as the tip surfaces (not the ribs) and let this dry well before applying dope to the main structure. Then put on several light coats before loading it on, which, again, gives it a chance to be sealed.

As a solution to your present problem, I guess I would try to brush a little thinner on those areas where it wrinkled and see if I could then pull it out tight. If so, then go back and dope down the leading and trailing edges with a second layer of relatively thick dope, before covering the whole thing. No guarantees, however, that this will work.

Leonard Neumann

Jake · Apr 30, 2001 08:51 AM

#2 source
Sounds like the covering loosened when you doped it. This is why I dope the entire framework several complete coats of clear until it is semi-glossy in sheen. Then cover, no warps from the wet silk (or tissue), and it sticks like mad. It is hard to get it loose if you have to. At this point, try Leonard's suggestion, but you may be in for a recovering job (guess how I know this)...

JAK

Flyin_Again · Apr 30, 2001 12:48 PM

#3 source
Larry,

After having the same problems last year, I found that I had to recover as a last resort.

To avoid this problem here is an idea for the future. First of all, this isn't my thought, but from a fellow that has been covering airplanes for just about 40 years. He suggested using candle wax or a light colored crayon on ribs that haven't been doped. Use the dope on LE, TE, center section and wingtips.

Apply the wax moderately on the sanded ribs and when the silk shrinks you won't get the wrinkles that you're discribing. Use light coats of dope until the silk is sealed and then you can apply more liberally.

Of course you still have to make sure that the silk didn't slip during the initial application. Like others, I've been there, done that!

Try to have a good day and good luck in removing the wrinkles.

Bill

The Kiwi · Apr 30, 2001 10:25 PM

RE: Silk "Wrinkles"#7 source
If the actual complaint is the way that the silk and the wood of the ribs interacted, such that it didn't adhere evenly, and neatly, that's at least partly a function of the way that balsa's exposed end grain varies in density/porosity and leaves part of the silk "dry" compared to other parts, where more of the paint was absorbed by the ribs in some places than others.

It could have been a variety of things, but one of the main reasons for using cap strips is to help the covering lay over the structure more smoothly AND to allow the covering to stick to the ribs better. Silk is both easier to use than silkspan in certain ways, and a lot harder in others. I like using silk, but in my opinion it does add half again, or even more, labor to the finishing process!


K.

.

Larry F · Apr 30, 2001 07:38 PM

#4 source
Thanks to Leonard, Jake, and Bill;

Bill, makes sense and I'll do that next time. To Jake and Leonard, with a little serendipity, it's working.

I tried the thinner, and the silk would not budge. (Remember, my Big, Strong, Handsome wife was holding the other end of the silk when we put it on, and I gave it an over-coat at the leading and trailing edges before doping the bays.)

What did work was the thinner! Even though I could not loosen the panels, the thinner took the wrinkles out like magic. Maybe not completely yet, but I experimented with three bays and a wingtip, and they have stayed taut for two hours now. Bottom line, I don't think the silk ever moved after the application, and this is a materials problem. I'll do the whole wing and see what happens.

Leonard, maybe silkspan next time!

Larry F

Jake · Apr 30, 2001 10:11 PM

#5 source
The only problem is, you WANT the covering to adhere to the ribs. Remember that an aircraft flies because of the difference in air pressure caused by the difference in speed of the air flow above and below the airfoil? Well, if the covering doesn't adhere to the ribs at all, it will tend to billow, or drum constantly as the plane flies, especially during manouvers. It does anyway between ribs, but that is a lot different than having the entire covering do it. Look at a photo of the upper wing surface of a full size fabric covered aircraft in flight sometime. That is why the covering is stitched (or glued in some cases) to each individual rib in the wing. NOT a good idea at all.

JAK

Flyin_Again · May 01, 2001 02:54 PM

#8 source
JAK,

I appreciate your thoughts! I was fortunate to own a fabric covered airplane some years ago and you are right about the stitching to each rib!

I hadn't thought about the billowing of the silk at all, but you brought up a very valid point. Thanks!

Bill

Steve Helmick · Apr 30, 2001 10:15 PM

#6 source
LAST EDITED ON Apr-30-01 AT 10:19 PM (EST)

LAST EDITED ON Apr-30-01 AT 10:18 PM (EST)

I was thinking the steam iron would be a good thing to try. I would give it a good steaming with YOUR steam iron (surely your strong and handsome wife wouldn't use one!) perhaps followed by a hair dryer treatment. For one thing, steam and heat always will affect a wing, even if temporarily ... and it wouldn't do anything that would prevent any of the other ideas from working. Thinner would be my second thing to try...liberally applied and allowed to dry slowly, or if that didn't work, then over a lightbulb. Something has to work. It sounds to me like there may be some "other" fibers in the silk or maybe Brodak's clear is a low shrink type? You wouldn't have used any retarder or plasticizer? I agree with Jake about waxing the ribs. Don't! Steve

EddyR · May 01, 2001 07:53 PM

#9 source
Larry Thai silk has two big proublems.First is the problem of it gettig wrinkles,second is fuel getting through it. Let me explain several years ago I printed in Pampa the note where to get Thai silk.I have used silk for over 250 FF and CL planes and learned to do all the things needed to get a good job.All the advice given by the others is good but Thai silk has soom bad proublems with it.I covered my Viking with the 10 weight amd it was drum tight after drying.One coat of dope and it was great,second coat and it got loose third coat it had big wrinkles in the same places as yours.I doped it again with super coat and puled it up tight around the tips.I used thinner to loosen it before the dope dried the pull out the wrinkles. I put at least 10 coats uf Super on it and it got tight and was like a piece of glass.By the 3rd flight I was getting fuil soaking spots in the covering.How could this be?I put on more dope and I was still getting fuel leaking.I took me a few months to it figure out. First the Thai silk stretches after it is doped and it doesn't pull back as the older silk's did.Also the grain of the Thai silk is so tight that the dope doesn't go through and fuel proof the bottom of the surface.The smallest amount of fuell will spread out on the insde of the covering and look like a huge fuel leak.If the plane is painted it doesn't show but its there.After 3 planes I have gone back to the older Silron and silks when I can find them.The 10 and 5 weight Thai silks seem to be the ones with the problem.Joe Wagner has used the # 3 without this problem.I hope this helps
Ed Ruane

Larry F · May 01, 2001 10:21 PM

#10 source
Ed --

Thanks a lot. I suspected it was a material problem, and thanks for confirming it. I am still not sure whether to leave it on or not. At 6:00 PM tomorrow, I'll have razor blade in hand and make a decision.

Convinced me of one thing, though. This is my last silk plane. It is silkspan forevermore.

(Thanks to Leonard for being polite and not shouting, "If you had listened to me, you wouldn't be in this mess!")

The wingtips did have some of the problem of slippage that Leonard and Jak noted. I am still convinced the rest was due to the silk. The Big, Strong, Handsome Wife suspects some kind of fire retardent as the culprit which has changed silk over the years.

Larry F

Jake · May 02, 2001 06:32 AM

#12 source
LAST EDITED ON May-02-01 AT 06:34 AM (EST)

Don't get put off silk too easily, I have used it for years, and will continue to. It is far easier to use on open bay structures than silkspan, especially on compound curves, and more puncture resistant. I quit using silkspan years ago, except for a few cases on sheet surfaces. Are you guys absolutely sure this is a problem with the silk, and not with the butyrate dope?
I have used mostly Aerogloss (which is really an acrylic lacquer) through the years on silk with zero problems of the type you mention.
I tried Sig dope, and had some of the same troubles you mentioned, none with AG. I haven't tried Brodak yet, but I did buy some 5mm Thai silk, and I'll let you all know how it works with the Aerogloss.

JAK

Flyin_Again · May 02, 2001 11:43 AM

#13 source
EddyR,

I was just checking a silk covered plane the other night and found where fuel has leaked into the wing. I had used Thai-Silk's 5mm on that model and many coats of Brodak's dope.

After finishing the model I added many coats of clear dope and it has baffled me as to why I got a soiled spot. The plane is solid and the leakage area looks like glass. The spot is on the wing planking. I've been scratching my head as to why the problem occurred, until I read your post.

I'll watch for the same problem on the two planes I'm about to cover now. As for the soiled wing on the previous plane, I'll just add a couple of more coats of clear on the leakage spot, just to lessen an increase of fuel soaking before I fly it this year.

Thanks for the tip!

Bill

bkruger · May 03, 2001 03:15 PM

#19 source

>find them.The 10 and 5
>weight Thai silks seem to
>be the ones with the
>problem.Joe Wagner has used the
># 3 without this problem.I
>hope this helps
>Ed Ruane


Ed;

The only #3 that I saw on the Thai silks list was a 17mm Shantung silk. Is this the one Joe Wagner is using? Seems kind of heavy....

Regards - Bob Kruger

Larry F · May 01, 2001 10:29 PM

#11 source
Steve --

No retarder. (Well, I did go to school in one of those real short yellow buses.) I did add some steam to the equation, but after some playing around, just used a teakettle.

It looks good for a while, then relapses. Ed's note below may explain all.

Larry F

PeterH · May 02, 2001 03:48 PM

#14 source
I have been following the questions and responses here, and I thought I'd stick in my two (divergent)cents' worth of opinion:

C/L folks seem to be wedded to materials and techniques I used forty years ago building airplanes, silk, silkspan, and butyrate dope. Good stuff all, but for 99% of us there are better materials that can turn up a sturdy flyable airplane without the fragility and associated patching of these materials. It seems as if sport builder/flyers have followed the contest stunter techniques when they are inappropriate to their needs. I've been using Polyspan (and I think Model Research Labs sells a 'generic' but identical product) on open-bay wings and stringered fuselage areas on my r/c airplanes very successfully. Nitrate dope to adhere, heat shrink with an iron, and finish to suit. There's no sagging problems and no fiddling with a finish. A few coats of nitrate, colorcoat with Krylon, clearcoat with Lusterkote clear to fuelproof, and done. Sand in between coats as appropriate. The folks who value perfection in finish and are willing to spend a kazillion hours getting it do not need to worry about the topic here, they already have techniques to get what they want. The other 99% of us are better served by a straightforward finish and go fly the airplane. The spun polyester is vastly stronger and more puncture resistant than teabag paper or silk, and suits me nicely. It does not get fuzzy unless the person doing the finish does something silly with sandpaper. Picky perfectionists can fuss about its finishability, but a rattle-can finish atop unwrinkled and unpatched spun polyester looks good to me for my learning machines, and can be relatively quick and straightforward to apply. But again, my opinion.

Larry F · May 02, 2001 05:09 PM

#16 source
Old Indians want a better birch-bark canoe. An aluminum "canoe" is just a boat with no motor, not a canoe.

I am an old Indian.

But thanks for sharing.

Larry F

Alan Hahn · May 02, 2001 04:13 PM

#15 source
LAST EDITED ON May-06-01 AT 09:44 PM (EST)

I had exactly the same problem you descibed (except using Sig Supercoat Dope). I was about ready to cut it off, but thought I'd throw the wing in the car. Well we had some 70+ degree days here in the Chicaco area (=80+ in the car), and guess what? The covering tightened up right nicely. Took the wing back down into the cold damp basement, and it kept taut. Put some more coats of SuperCoat on the wing, each time bringing it out of the basement to hang upstairs in the house (with temperatures in the 70 degree range)---not too popular with the wife tho.

As regards to the leakage problems described below, I don't see how the fuel is penetrating the dope layer in the first place. I don't look forward to this happening!

We'll see what happens

Larry F · May 02, 2001 07:56 PM

#17 source
Alan --

Razor blade is in the pocket for another day. Wing is in the trunk.

I'll let you know.

Larry F

EddyR · May 02, 2001 10:36 PM

#18 source
Give me a week and I will post some pictures of the oil soaked silk on the Cobra and Viking.I am leaving in a few hr's for Noth Caroline,my daughter lives about 5 miles from the Huntersville field and I plan on stoping over and see if any one is flying this weekend
Ed Ruane

Larry F · May 05, 2001 12:43 PM

#20 source
Thanks to All --

Well, I ended up cutting off the silk and putting on silkspan. I now have silk capstrips, whatever that is worth.

Alan -- your "trunk of the car" trick did indeed work. I could have salvaged the covering job with your hint, but it was still a little tacky looking, and I went for the gold.

Leonard and Jake -- Yeah, I lost the wingtips, and maybe some of the bays. These were indeed my errors. Even with silkspan I will be far more careful in the future.

Lessons for All -- Silk ain't what it used to be. This problem was a combination of poor craftsmanship and silk that doesn't behave the way it should. I suppose we could all choose 10 pound per square inch synthetics and be right happy. That darned Leonard, as usual, is on the mark, and silkspan is the best answer for most of us. I don't like the RC alternative covering options.

Larry F

Jake · May 05, 2001 01:34 PM

#21 source
LAST EDITED ON May-05-01 AT 01:35 PM (EST)

And I STILL think what you actually had is a dope problem, and not a silk problem. Unless they have changed the DNA on the little suckers that spin the fibres, silk is the same as it has been for uncounted thousands of years. IF there is any "sizing" or treatment added after weaving, that might cause a problem, but the fact that your's shrank tight when first applied tells me it is the dope. I had the same problem with SIG butyrate and silkspan by the way, so don't think you are off the hook with silkspan. I am getting ready to cover a couple models with 5mm Thai silk and Aerogloss, I'll let you know how they come out.

JAK

Larry F · May 06, 2001 08:48 AM

#22 source
Jake --

Ya know, covering is just one of those "givens" that separates the modelers from the rest of the world. I was more than a little embarrassed to tell this tale. Make sure you tell me the end of your story with the 5mm silk and Aerogloss. Hard to believe it is a Brodak dope failure, but I try to keep an open mind. Something other than my skill was involved. I freely admit to skill problems on the tips, but the between bay wrinkles are still a mystery, and related to some of the materials involved.

Oh yeah, the silkspan is perfect, no wrinkles, and it looks like a sheet of glass with just one coat of clear. Please follow up, as I would like to do some more silk on another project, but for now I am "scairt".

Larry F

gcb · May 06, 2001 09:08 AM

#23 source
I have been "lurking" on this thread because I too want to try silk. A well done translucent silk finish is hard to match, beauty wise.
Think I'll wait until the votes are in on this one.
I have always used silkspan and still like it. Some of us "older" guys remember when silkspan came in colors. I think I still have a little piece of red in my stash.
George

Jake · May 06, 2001 09:27 AM

#24 source
Larry, I don't mean I think it is the brand, I mean the type of dope. Butyrate is well known not to stick like nitrate does (it has other foilbles as well, it's main attractions are: more fire resistant, and more fuel proof to alcohol based fuels). On a diesel powered model, you don't need butyrate at all.
Aerogloss is an acrylic lacquer, and has been since about 1957, but it is still closer to a nitrate dope than it is to butyrate.
The full-size aircraft guys, use nitrate to attach the covering tapes to the steel tube fuselage , so that the covering envelope will adhere; then a coat of nitrate, followed by butyrate (silver UV blocking coat first, then color). The butyrate sticks to the nitrate as hard as nitrate sticks to everything else. If I am using butyrate dope, the covering is attached with nitrate, and the first coat is too, then the butyrate goes on.
Silkspan by the way, is paper, and is only as good as the glue used in the binding of the cellulose fibres. Some is great, but a LOT is poor today. I have had some that was 50 years old, and worked beautifully, while some other batches disintegrated in one decade or so. I just all depends on WHO made it and HOW.

JKA