[NSRCA-discussion] joys of trimming
shinden1 at cox.net
shinden1 at cox.net
Fri Mar 7 10:15:25 AKST 2008
Thats where we disagree Matt ,, Sorry
If you approach it this way you will have to add upp elevator mix on left knife edge
thrust adjustment is only a Band-Aid to a trim issue
no modern pattern airplane need s more than .5 deg down thrust or right thrust fot that matter
Bryan
---- rcmaster199 at aol.com wrote:
> Mike,
>
>
> ?
>
>
> The pull to canopy on uplines is a fairly simple fix... add?about 1 degree of downtrust to the engine.
>
>
> ?
>
>
> If the model pushed to gear on the upline, you would need to do the opposite
>
>
> ?
>
>
> MattK
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: shinden1 at cox.net
>
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>
> Sent: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 11:45 am
>
> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] joys of trimming
>
>
>
>
>
> Hey Mike I will give you the short version I will write up a full explanation when I have more time what we do as modelers is put more time in getting our planes to fly level then adjust expo`s for inverted flight feel this should be the last step in the process to properly trim the airplane it has to have 6 critical performance based outcomes that is achieved from 6 different demands from the airframe by performing 6 airframe demanding maneuvers. we can mask this by adding fins and wings but it will always raise it`s ugly little head in other demands from the airplane ,,,,,{Nat`s designs excluded } If we as trimmers ,,are extremely honest with ourselves we fall short in this area and use the radio to compensate Short explain.... the reason you can have an airplane fly horizontal great and pull to the canopy in a vertical is we add tail weight or up trim to produce the lift angle for one dynamic and settle for it then we don`t realize the!
> uptrim does the same job in the vertical lines ,,up or down what we have to do is use the wing to produce lift by adding inc and then use the weight shift to let the stab elevator steer the airplane in the up and down lines. this cuts across the grain of modern trim practice I know, But I will try to expound later one of the the second to last trim demand that should tell you if your plane is trimmed is the upline one positive or negative snap, when you can do this maneuver without leading with opposite rudder .elevator to mask the out come then your 98% there it should not displace off the line ,,, ofcourse proper input plays a factor in this ,,,, oh the joys of trimming !!!! DEAN P? more later ---- Michael Wickizer mwickizer at msn.com> wrote: > 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 creat!
> e drag on the up or downline.. Still, it's the best test w! e 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 lo!
> wered aileron > > increases the lift of the airfoil and lift creates
>
> drag so this w! ing may > > pull the plane off axis. the other is that the spiral slip stream 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 throt! tle 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 li
>
> sts.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 tho!
> ught 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+mor!
> e - Rolls> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > And while your at it, I'd apprecia
>
> te some discussion of the impact> > > of the top hinge system as seen on Viavat, and Prestige birds - (top> > > hinged, with fair! ing 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 thi!
> ngs 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 che! ck 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 m
>
> ore 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 va! rious design fixes-but> > > about the only one that seems to work is t o 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/listin!
> fo/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-dis! cussion at lists.nsrca.org> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsr ca-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 _______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion mailing list NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list