There is nothing wrong with the Zenair approach ... it is used on the
CH-2000 and thus has been certificated by the FAA ... the method is however
a little unusual and can be a little confusing for some builders. I am not
quite sure why Heintz uses this method in lieu of a more standard
installation. Perhaps someone can enlighten us.

Whilst some blind rivets do have strengths that approach or in some cases
exceed the strength of standard MS20470/426AD solid rivets the main draw
backs a

1. They can leak and thus need to be sealed.

2. They are more prone to working and loosening. The extent of this problem
is a function of the type of blind rivet. The Avdel rivets used by Zenair
are the cheapest and simplest type of blind rivet and will be more prone to
working and loosening than a Cherry Max or Cherry Lock. Pop rivets are
generally best used in lowly stressed areas for this reason (which is really
most of the structure in a light aircraft). Note that Zenair and many other
designers don't use blind rivets in the main spar prefering standard AD
rivets. Even the more expensive and sophisticated Cherry rivets will
work/loosen and most manufacturers or real airplanes will place restrictions
on where they may be used to replace AD rivets for repair work.





"Richard Lamb" wrote in message
...
Orval Fairbairn wrote:

(snipped)
You should note that I specified STRUCTURAL aluminum. Yes, nonstructural
parts are made for other reasons and have a places for other grades of
aluminum.

BTW, Zenith also uses pop rivets rather than driven rivets, so they
should not be used as an example.

6061-T6 is so structural aluminum.
You _can_ even get it "clad" if you got the bucks.

And the Zenith rivet technique is quite fascinating.

They start off with countersunk head steel cored rivets and use a
modified nose piece in the rivet gun to form a domed head when the
rivet is pulled. The head gets work hardended furing forming.

It's a very sound rivet approaching driven rivets in strength.