Where could I get this amzing little program?
--- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, "Bill Gowen" <wdgowen@...>
wrote:
>
> Gary
> From what others have told me, Bernie's program was pretty specific
for 65cm F1D. I still use it to compare the effects of changes to a
design. I figure if a change produces a positive result in the program
it might be beneficial in real life. When it tells me that my PP will
do 25 minutes I don't necessarily put much stock in that.
>
> The program is a pretty good tool for predicting stability. A big
negative number for the static stability margin can mean the model
will be difficult to trim.
> Bill Gowen
> Decatur, GA USA
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Warthodson_at_...
> To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 4:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [Indoor_Construction] A-6 design variables
>
>
> Don,
> I have had the best results from stabs of 50% to 42%. I have tried
larger
> stabs up to 70%. They seemed to work well at lower torque levels,
but I couldn't
> get them trimmed to handle the high torque levels required at
Johnson City &
> Kibbie dome. Maybe the tail booms were too floppy or too long, but
I never
> pursued it further. My CG is approx. 1.25" behind the wing
trailing edge. My tail
> booms range from 8.5" to 9.5" long. Within these ranges I have not
been able
> to measure any difference. It sounds like you need a better
motor/prop
> combination. What were the specifications of your motor & prop?
>
> Even with repeated 1/4 motor tests, I find it difficult to measure
> differences between two models because each wind of the motor
produces different results
> on the same model. For example, I have tried to winding a quarter
motor to
> 80% of max winds & each flight produces a different time on the
same plane.
> Going from memory, the variation is 5 to 10 seconds. that is 20 to
40 seconds on a
> full motor. I have also tried winding to the same torque each time
with
> similar results. This variation masks any difference between two
similar models
> with only slight design differences. I would love to hear how
others try to sort
> out the differences between two designs.
> To add one more thought. I have used Bernie Hunts program to
simulate &
> compare designs. It has pointed me in the right direction, but at
some point I
> cannot duplicate the results it suggests.
>
> Gary Hodson
>
>
> In a message dated 3/18/2006 2:34:55 PM Central Standard Time,
> ddeloach_at_... writes:
> What you think the optimum TMA and tail area are for A-6? I have
only built
> one and it has a 50% stab, appx 130% CG and did 8:52 at ETSU. Dead
sticked
> from 50 ft too. I am wondering what I can do to improve it.may
shorten TMA
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS Radio controlled Power source Aircraft
> Flying Newcomers Outside
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
> a.. Visit your group "Indoor_Construction" on the web.
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Indoor_Construction-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Received on Sun Mar 19 2006 - 20:36:28 CET
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:44 CET