[NSRCA-discussion] Direct Servo Drive

[Ed Alt]

Eric:
Yeah, it could be alright in that application.  

Ed
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Grow Pattern 
  To: NSRCA Mailing List 
  Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 1:43 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Direct Servo Drive


  Ed,
       The 3-D throw set-up's could benefit from this 1-1 hook-up. I have seen some pretty extreme R,E and A throws used in that type of flying.

  Apart from the aesthetics, there is the question of how many of them would you fit to a control surface and the weight of the apparatus?

  I have done 1-1 servo connection on racing gliders with all moving wings. It was crap. Needed very small movements of the wing and the best possible resolution available. The 15 degree aileron set-up would need a very tight servo indeed.

  E.
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: John Ferrell 
    To: NSRCA Mailing List 
    Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 1:30 PM
    Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Direct Servo Drive


    If that can be worthy of a patent, the inmates are in charge of the asylum!

    John Ferrell    
    http://DixieNC.US

      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Bob Richards 
      To: NSRCA Mailing List 
      Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 9:08 AM
      Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Direct Servo Drive


      My feeling exactly.

      Bob R.


      Ed Alt <ed_alt at hotmail.com> wrote:
        Never have seen it before, but I guess the main question I have concerns the potential for loss of effective torque transmitted to the control surface.  I see that they claim it's better due to no losses.  That would be true in the sense that you don't lose that little bit in the linkage friction etc., but if you only want, say, 25 degrees of surface throw each direction, it would appear that you would have to limit the servo travel to 25 degrees as well.  If that's true, then you have less mechanical advantage for a given degree of movement for the surface, since you would normally have a servo traveling about doub! le that distance.  The control surface speed would be quicker, assuming the load is handled without any blowback or slowdown of movement due to the effectively lower torque transmitted while moving.  Maybe I'm not seeing it right, but it looks like it might not be such a good thing to use, unless you were already planning on having something close to a 1:1 correspondence of degrees of servo arm movement to degrees of surface travel.

        Ed



--------------------------------------------------------------------------


      _______________________________________________
      NSRCA-discussion mailing list
      NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
      http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion


----------------------------------------------------------------------------


    _______________________________________________
    NSRCA-discussion mailing list
    NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
    http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  NSRCA-discussion mailing list
  NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
  http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20060213/48e9bbce/attachment.html