[NSRCA-discussion] YS Questions+more - Rolls
J N Hiller
jnhiller at earthlink.net
Fri Mar 7 07:33:14 AKST 2008
The airplane may be flying with positive trim. Try reducing the down thrust
or move the CG back.
If it doesn’t help put it back.
Jim Hiller
-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Michael
Wickizer
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 8:19 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] YS Questions+more - Rolls
Bryan:
I agree that the plane doesn't know which direction it's flying, but then
why will a plane fly straight and level then pull to the canopy in uplines?
This has been driving Brett and me crazy for over a year. Admittedly, it a
much shorter drive for me:)
Mike
_____
> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 23:13:48 -0500
> From: shinden1 at cox.net
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] YS Questions+more - Rolls
>
> Chris ,, the airplane does not know it`s flying horizontal or vertical
> the wings are still lifting whether up or down that s why we can use the
vertical up or down to test this problem ,
> Bryan
> ---- krishlan fitzsimmons <homeremodeling2003 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Lance,
> >
> > Just a thought though, if going straight up, up straight down, aren't
the up and down ailerons both inducing equal drag, no lift? I've often
wondered if our straight up test is actually a perfect test for this. It is
for our up and down lines, but what about our 45's or horizontals where we
do indeed have lift on the low aileron and drag on the other? This would
create a different condition I'm guessing.. Probably small, but still a
little different because as I mention, both create drag on the up or
downline.. Still, it's the best test we have I guess..
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > Lance Van Nostrand <patterndude at tx.rr.com> wrote:
> > This thread is timely because I've been experimenting with differential
> > recently on a new design that seems to need it. Never needed it before
on a
> > pattern plane but now I might. My test is to fly very high, point the
nose
> > directly at the ground and roll pure aileron. Plane should be axial, but
> > remember that axial is along the vertical CG, which may not be a line
that
> > pierces the wing LE/TE. You need to do it a few times to be sure that
their
> > is an axis that everything rotates around and that line is straight. If
it
> > wobbles, then we have an issue. Another way to determine this is to do
> > unlimited rolls while flying straight up. If the airplane consistently
arcs
> > off its vertical line, you have a problem.
> >
> > Aerodynamics suggests two contributors. One is that the lowered aileron
> > increases the lift of the airfoil and lift creates drag so this wing may
> > pull the plane off axis. the other is that the spiral slipstream of the
prop
> > is pushing down on the right wing and up on the left so up/right aileron
is
> > more effective than up/left and down/left is more effective than
down/right.
> >
> > The overall effect for most pattern planes is minimal and usually
ignorable,
> > but on IMAC style planes these factors can be significant and the
resulting
> > differential corrections may need to be adjusted with something as
simple as
> > a prop change (from 3 blade to 2 for example).
> >
> > the correction of course is to start playing with aileron differential.
> > Given the contributors I've suggested, its not a given which way you go
with
> > the differential to correct the problem and the answer might not even be
> > symmetrical.
> >
> > Note that contributor #1 above will change if you are flying upright or
> > inverted, so it would seem that a correction for upright flight would
simply
> > exacerbate inverted flight, but contributor #2 is the same for any
flight
> > mode but is throttle dependent.
> >
> > --Lance
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Koenig, Tom"
> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> > Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 4:45 PM
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] YS Questions+more - Rolls
> >
> >
> > > My head is spinning!!! The more I think about this, the more questions
I
> > > have.........rather than answers!
> > >
> > > Maybe the contra rotating prop set up on a Voodoo X( Nat??) maybe the
> > > answer??
> > >
> > > I still 'feel', that the best rolls I get are with a 0 differential
set
> > > up-BUT- somehow I 'drive' that wing to 0 ( or should that be some sort
> > > of equilibrium??) during the rolls. Certainly in my case, it seems to
be
> > > Pilot dependant!!!
> > > I'm starting to think that my rudder control has turned to the
> > > proverbial trying to micro analyse what's happening!
> > >
> > > Tom
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> > > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of
> > > shinden1 at cox.net
> > > Sent: Friday, 7 March 2008 9:15 AM
> > > To: NSRCA Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] YS Questions+more - Rolls
> > >
> > > what happens on a 4piont?
> > > Bryan
> > > ---- Del Rykert wrote:
> > >> The general consensus has been that the faster moving molecules over
> > > the top surface don't require as big as a deflection as the aileron
that
> > > deflects towards the bottom of the plane. What one tries to achieve is
> > > the plane tracks as purely straight on a string as possible while one
> > > rolls both directions without introducing any yaw.
> > >>
> > >> Del
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From:
> > >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> > >> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 2:49 PM
> > >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] YS Questions+more - Rolls
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> > Nat and all you other aerodynamicists,
> > >> >
> > >> > I thought that the rational for "aileron differential" was that
> > > upward deflection causes more drag than downward deflection so to
> > > equalize drag and prevent yaw with aileron deflection, aileron
> > > differential is needed. It seems that you guys are now saying that
> > > ain't so. Please elaborate.
> > >> >
> > >> > George
> > >> >
> > >> > ---- Nat Penton wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > =============
> > >> > IMO center hinged or top hinged is OK. With top hinge, to achieve
> > > equal vertical travel of the trailing edge requires different angular
> > > travel, up vs down. The objective is zero aerodynamic differential.
> > >> >
> > >> > Ron I don't think a fairing would prevent separation but, how are
> > > you able to fair the gap using the top hinge ? Nat
> > >> > ----- Original Message -----
> > >> > From: ronlock at comcast.net
> > >> > To: NSRCA Mailing List
> > >> > Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 7:20 AM
> > >> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] YS Questions+more - Rolls
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > And while your at it, I'd appreciate some discussion of the impact
> > > of the top hinge system as seen on Viavat, and Prestige birds - (top
> > > hinged, with fairing that eliminates the gap at deflection)
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks, Ron Lockhart
> > >> >
> > >> > -------------- Original message --------------
> > >> > From: vicenterc at comcast.net
> > >> >
> > >> > Nat,
> > >> >
> > >> > Could you explain why the differential should be different for
> > > non-center hinged? I understand that the mechanical configuration of
> > > non-center hinged requires differential to obtain same travel in both
> > > directions. However, the travel up and down should be close to equal.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks,
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Vicente "Vince" Bortone
> > >> >
> > >> > -------------- Original message --------------
> > >> > From: "Nat Penton"
> > >> >
> > >> > Tom
> > >> > It's just something that is peculiar to the Southern
> > > Hemisphere.
> > >> >
> > >> > Changing wing incidence will not help. Unless things are really
> > > screwed up , at our roll rates, centrifugal forces are too low to
> > > cause a problem. You want zero differential, aero speaking ( same
> > > up/down if center hinged ).
> > >> >
> > >> > I find the best check is the fast half-roll in the vertical up.
> > > Regards Nat
> > >> > ----- Original Message -----
> > >> > From: Koenig, Tom
> > >> > To: NSRCA Mailing List
> > >> > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 7:24 PM
> > >> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] YS Questions+more
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Hi Troy!
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks for the info. I thought you would be toiling away on
> > > the next developmental stage of these engines!!
> > >> >
> > >> > Hopefully soon, I can find the time to get flying again. I am
> > > looking forward to running this little beast. I am still a little
> > > concerned in keeping it quiet though.
> > >> >
> > >> > Four blade props? I have some of the 18.1 x 12 two bladers
> > > but I just cant see how I'll shut the thing up with these paint
> > > stirrers??
> > >> >
> > >> > Also-one more question to any of you out there in pattern
> > > land.
> > >> >
> > >> > I have struggled with aileron differential for years. I am
> > > just not happy with the rolls. I have tried various design fixes-but
> > > about the only one that seems to work is to get the wing back to 0-0 (
> > > which can be achieved by a few ways, design, mix or thumbs)
Differential
> > > itself does not seem to work if the wing is POA ( well...it works for
> > > half the roll !)
> > >> > Another black magic fix appears to be to run parallel
> > > ailerons-but this only 'sorta' seems to fix it. I like the feel of
> > > equal% chord ailerons however.
> > >> >
> > >> > I am frustrated with it-I like my planes to roll as if they
> > > had a string up its ...........well you know!
> > >> >
> > >> > OK-any 'secrets' I need to know??? Very good elevator work
> > >> > fixes it ( hence my 0-0 comment)
> > >> >
> > >> > Tom
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > ----
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > 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
> > >> >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20080307/94ab18f9/attachment-0001.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list