Interglas Fabric Suppliers?

[sisu1a]

I googled a bit but came up with nothing very useful as of yet. Does
anyone know of a (preferably US...) supplier of Interglas fabrics? I
only need a few yards of both 92125 and 92145, for which I can find no
direct alternative equivalents for.

Alternatively, if anyone has some of this stuff on hand, would you be
willing to swing some this way? (cash prizes)

-Paul

[[email protected]]

On Sep 28, 12:40*pm, sisu1a > wrote:
> I googled a bit but came up with nothing very useful as of yet. Does
> anyone know of a (preferably US...) supplier of Interglas fabrics? I
> only need a few yards of both 92125 and 92145, for which I can find no
> direct alternative equivalents for.
>
> Alternatively, if anyone has some of this stuff on hand, would you be
> willing to swing some this way? (cash prizes)
>
> -Paul

Eastern Sailplane and M&H Soaring are 2 that I know regularly maintain
fresh stock of the se materials.
Good Luck
UH

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Sep 28, 9:40*am, sisu1a > wrote:
> I googled a bit but came up with nothing very useful as of yet. Does
> anyone know of a (preferably US...) supplier of Interglas fabrics? I
> only need a few yards of both 92125 and 92145, for which I can find no
> direct alternative equivalents for.

Hmmm... Judging by weight and weave, I've always thought 7725 was a
direct replacement for 92125. I can't help with 92145, but the grainy
photo in the ASW 12/15/17 repair manual makes it look a lot like 7781.

Thanks, Bob K.

[sisu1a]

> Hmmm... Judging by weight and weave, I've always thought 7725 was a
> direct replacement for 92125. I can't help with 92145, but the grainy
> photo in the ASW 12/15/17 repair manual makes it look a lot like 7781.
>
> Thanks, Bob K.

Not quite. Check this direct comparison chart of 92125 vs 7725. It
also shows 92145 vs 7715, which I think is 92145's closest US
brethren. They are both close, but definitely not direct
replacements...
http://tinyurl.com/4gm27m FWIW, here's a more broad Interglas
equivalency chart:
http://www.canardzone.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=1398&d=1205405858

I've already located the glass need and need only to fork over the
cash. Thanks for the tips.

-Paul

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Sep 29, 8:09*am, sisu1a > wrote:
> > Hmmm... Judging by weight and weave, I've always thought 7725 was a
> > direct replacement for 92125. I can't help with 92145, but the grainy
> > photo in the ASW 12/15/17 repair manual makes it look a lot like 7781.
>
> > Thanks, Bob K.
>
> Not quite. Check this direct comparison chart of 92125 vs 7725. It
> also shows 92145 vs 7715, which I think is 92145's closest US
> brethren. They are both close, but definitely not direct
> replacements...http://tinyurl.com/4gm27mFWIW, here's a more broad Interglas
> equivalency chart:http://www.canardzone.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=1398&d=12...

Yup, I was wrong about 92145 vs 7781, the closer match is definitely
between 92145 and 7715, sometimes known as "Rutan uni" (except, of
course, in Rutan-free zones).

However, as far as I can tell, 7725 is near enough equivalent to
92125 as makes no difference, and 7715 is close enough to 92145 as
anybody this side of Boeing needs to get. There is no seeeeeekrit
ingredient to the Interglas stuff that makes it stronger or stiffer
per unit mass than the Hexcel style equivalents.

Of course, I am perfectly prepared to be demonstrated wrong in this.
Feel free to send me 4" square, 5-ply test coupons of 92125 and 92145.
I'll match them with 7725 and 7715 equivalents, pull them apart on the
Break-o-tron, and post the results on YouTube. I'm not set up to
collect anything but the most rudimentary modulus measurements, but I
can easily do ultimates.

Thanks, and best regards to all

Bob K.

[Googlyman]

I've already located the glass need and need only to fork over the
cash. Thanks for the tips.

-Paul
Where did you end up finding the glass? I am in need of some as well. Thanks.

[Uncle Fuzzy]

On Sep 29, 10:55*am, Bob Kuykendall > wrote:
> On Sep 29, 8:09*am, sisu1a > wrote:
>
> > > Hmmm... Judging by weight and weave, I've always thought 7725 was a
> > > direct replacement for 92125. I can't help with 92145, but the grainy
> > > photo in the ASW 12/15/17 repair manual makes it look a lot like 7781..
>
> > > Thanks, Bob K.
>
> > Not quite. Check this direct comparison chart of 92125 vs 7725. It
> > also shows 92145 vs 7715, which I think is 92145's closest US
> > brethren. They are both close, but definitely not direct
> > replacements...http://tinyurl.com/4gm27mFWIW, here's a more broad Interglas
> > equivalency chart:http://www.canardzone.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=1398&d=12...
>
> Yup, I was wrong about 92145 vs 7781, the closer match is definitely
> between 92145 and 7715, sometimes known as "Rutan uni" (except, of
> course, in Rutan-free zones).
>
> However, as far as I can tell, 7725 *is near enough equivalent to
> 92125 as makes no difference, and 7715 is close enough to 92145 as
> anybody this side of Boeing needs to get. There is no seeeeeekrit
> ingredient to the Interglas stuff that makes it stronger or stiffer
> per unit mass than the Hexcel style equivalents.
>
> Of course, I am perfectly prepared to be demonstrated wrong in this.
> Feel free to send me 4" square, 5-ply test coupons of 92125 and 92145.
> I'll match them with 7725 and 7715 equivalents, pull them apart on the
> Break-o-tron, and post the results on YouTube. I'm not set up to
> collect anything but the most rudimentary modulus measurements, but I
> can easily do ultimates.
>
> Thanks, and best regards to all
>
> Bob K.

What I find difficult to believe is that there ISN'T a table (cheat
sheet) available somewhere that lists the interglas numbers and the
amurrican equivelant. F'rinstance:
(all numbers and descriptions just made up)
92110 - 5.2 oz/yd plain weave
92125 - 8.75 oz/yd 2 x 2 twill
etc.

[sisu1a]

> What I find difficult to believe is that there ISN'T a table (cheat
> sheet) available somewhere that lists the interglas numbers and the
> amurrican equivelant. *F'rinstance:
> (all numbers and descriptions just made up)
> 92110 * - *5.2 oz/yd plain weave
> 92125 * - *8.75 oz/yd 2 x 2 twill
> etc.

Ummm, the chart I linked has exactly that, except weights are in g/sq
m instead of oz/yd (easy conversion). Only problem, is there are NO
direct equivalents for 92125 or 92110 (or the 92145 I was also looking
for, in addition to several other common Interglas weaves...) and
that's the REAL problem.
http://www.canardzone.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=1398&d=1205405858
(in case you didn't look at it from my earlier post...) has the
comparison chart that has the US equals for them in the column second
from the left--IF one actually exists.

I myself am not comfortable with using something other than exactly
what the manufacture says (I find 'close' to be unacceptable in this
regard) when it comes to structure but hey, what's the worse that
could happen?

-Paul

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Oct 10, 2:44*pm, sisu1a > wrote:
> ...I myself am not comfortable with using something other
> than exactly what the manufacture says (I find 'close' to be
> unacceptable in this regard) when it comes to structure but
> hey, what's the worse that could happen?

I think that the worst is pretty deep. We could end up convincing the
retulatory agencies to partake in such paranoia as we'd never get
anything at all done and flying.

Note the marginalia at the left edge of the table you cite. Clearly
somebody thinks that 92125 is a reasonable substitution for Rutan bid,
and 92145 for Rutan uni. As for why they don't show entries in the "US
Styles" column, consider that 7725 and 7715 were not at all common in
the US until Rutan popularized them in the moldless foam core craze of
the mid 1970s. And judging by the font and layout of the table cited,
it might well predate that era.

Please do send me those materials coupons if you can, and I'll do a
round of pulls. Loser buys beer.

Thanks, Bob K.