Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:08 AM - Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim (Frans Veldman)
2. 04:05 AM - Re: Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim (Peter Zutrauen)
3. 05:56 AM - Re: Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim (Frans Veldman)
4. 06:24 AM - Re: Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim (Peter Zutrauen)
5. 06:46 AM - Re: Anyone use D-sub connectors to connect instrument module? (rampil)
6. 06:53 AM - Re: Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim (Frans Veldman)
7. 07:45 AM - Re: Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim (Bud Yerly)
8. 08:03 AM - Re: Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim (GRAHAM SINGLETON)
9. 08:54 AM - Re: Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim (Peter Zutrauen)
10. 08:56 AM - Re: Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim (Raimo Toivio)
11. 10:25 AM - PH-DIY performance data (Frans Veldman)
12. 10:49 AM - Re: PH-DIY performance data (David Joyce)
13. 10:53 AM - Europa Company Spares support (Brian Davies)
14. 12:02 PM - Re: PH-DIY performance data (Frans Veldman)
15. 12:44 PM - Re: Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim (Frans Veldman)
16. 02:18 PM - Re: Anyone use D-sub connectors to connect instrument module? (rparigoris)
17. 06:33 PM - Re: Europa Company Spares support (Martin Tuck)
18. 06:39 PM - Re: Anyone use D-sub connectors to connect instrument module? (rampil)
19. 07:43 PM - Skin wrinkling outside fuel fill (William McClellan)
20. 07:57 PM - Re: Anyone use D-sub connectors to connect instrument module? (rparigoris)
21. 11:17 PM - Re: Europa Company Spares support (GRAHAM SINGLETON)
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim |
On 04/12/2010 08:06 PM, Peter Zutrauen wrote:
> I'm perplexed - all the photos I've ever looked at of Europas in cruise,
> the trim tab is *up* (as others have noted), thus the flying elevator is
> by definition providing *lift* to the tail.... a contradiction to my
> teachings.
Let's add some more to the confusion...
Especially for those who claim never having seen an Europa with the anti
servo tab NOT in the up position, here are some pictures we took when
flying our PH-DIY in formation with the PH-JAI from Tim Weert.
As you can see on the attached pictures, the PH-DIY has the anti servo
tab perfectly in line with the rest of the tail plane (as it should be,
because it is an anti servo tab, who's task it is to drive the tailplane
until it is line with the trim tab).
Frans
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim |
Thanks Frans!
*Very* interesting.
just a note - my original statement below is wrong - as an upward trim tab
results in a downward force on the tail, not lift as I had originally
(incorrectly) thought.
questions:
- were you in stead-state constant-altitude cruise?
- where was your trim set at?
- was your stick force = 0?
- what was your cruise speed?
- what was your weight and balance (with fuel at that point in time)?
As the tailplane is a symmetrical airfoil, my confused mind asserts that in
cruise (since the horizontal stab by definition must be providing a downward
force) your tailplane must have been at a negative angle of attack, and
since the combination anti-servo/trim tab was in a neutral position then I
would have expected a steady stick force would have needed to be applied....
or a far aft CG condition would have been needed?
Many thanks!
Pete
A239
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 4:05 AM, Frans Veldman <frans@privatepilots.nl>wrote:
> On 04/12/2010 08:06 PM, Peter Zutrauen wrote:
>
> > I'm perplexed - all the photos I've ever looked at of Europas in cruise,
> > the trim tab is *up* (as others have noted), thus the flying elevator is
> > by definition providing *lift* to the tail.... a contradiction to my
> > teachings.
>
> Let's add some more to the confusion...
>
> Especially for those who claim never having seen an Europa with the anti
> servo tab NOT in the up position, here are some pictures we took when
> flying our PH-DIY in formation with the PH-JAI from Tim Weert.
>
> As you can see on the attached pictures, the PH-DIY has the anti servo
> tab perfectly in line with the rest of the tail plane (as it should be,
> because it is an anti servo tab, who's task it is to drive the tailplane
> until it is line with the trim tab).
>
> Frans
>
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim |
On 05/12/2010 01:03 PM, Peter Zutrauen wrote:
> As the tailplane is a symmetrical airfoil, my confused mind asserts
> that in cruise (since the horizontal stab by definition must be
> providing a downward force) your tailplane must have been at a negative
> angle of attack, and since the combination anti-servo/trim tab was in a
> neutral position then I would have expected a steady stick force would
> have needed to be applied....
This is an *anti servo trim tab*, if it is not in line with the
tailplane, it puts a force on the tailplane so that the tailplane
rotates until it is in line with the anti servo trim tab again.
You can easily see what I mean by exercising the trim in whatever
position, and then carefully with your hands on the anti servo tab, try
to push it in line with the tailplane again. You will see that the
tailplane rotates during this process, and that you will always end up
with the anti servo tab in line with the tailplane.
This is true for *any* speed, *any* CG, etc, except when the pilot
exercises some force on the stick. Any force on the stick gets into the
equation and disturbes this balance.
If you trim for a specific speed, all you do is put the stick in a
specific position, and then with the trim button, line up the anti servo
tab with the tailplane, to keep the tailplane at its new position. You
will always end up with the anti servo tab in the same relative position
of the tailplane.
The real confusion is that there are people flying around with the anti
servo tab not in line with the tailplane. This means they are either
pulling or pushing slightly on the stick, or that the tailplane is not
balanced out properly.
About the latter: I disconnected everything from the tailplane when
balancing it out. If you leave the stick connected, you won't get a
proper balance and the anti servo tab will not find its equilibrium in
line with the tailplane.
Next time we do this, I will vary the speed, trim for each speed, and
make a picture again. I would be really surprised if at any speed the
anti servo tab will not remain in its same relative position to the
tailplane. (Of course at every speed, the whole stack of tailplane plus
anti servo tab will rotate to a specific position... but with the anti
servo tab always in line with the tailplane. This is what you do if you
trim: lining the anti servo tab up with the tailplane in its new position).
Now, for your questions (although they don't matter):
> - were you in stead-state constant-altitude cruise?
Yep. (We were in close formation so we wouldn't dare to fly anything
than a very stabilized attitude).
> - where was your trim set at?
At 1/3 from the nose down limit.
> - was your stick force = 0?
Of course 0.
> - what was your cruise speed?
About 110 Knots.
> - what was your weight and balance (with fuel at that point in time)?
Two adults, about 20Kg of bagage, and about 40 liters of fuel.
Frans
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim |
Hi Frans,
I understand your thesis (thanks again! :-).
Your thesis assumes that the tailplane is aerodynamically balanced wrt to
the torque-tube position, and the only aerodynamic component which is
stabilizing it and keeping it from flutter is the anti-servo tab.
I question this, as the fulcrum is ahead of the center of the tailplane.
Maybe my skepticism is unwarranted? Is the fulcrum in the center of the
tailplane aerodynamically? Without the anti-servo tab, would the tailplane
flutter by design? I doubt this is the case, as (I believe) the flettner
strips were added to eliminate the 'dead zone' of the anti-servo tab
(bringing it out of the boundary layer) to eliminate a trim-hunting issue,
not flutter (someone with some historical knowledge please do chime in!).
I would expect/hope that the tailplane would remain aerodynamically stable
without the anti-servo tab, and that the tab is there only to provide for
progressive stick forces, and trim.
The "still curious",
Pete :-)
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Frans Veldman <frans@privatepilots.nl>wrote:
>
> On 05/12/2010 01:03 PM, Peter Zutrauen wrote:
>
> > As the tailplane is a symmetrical airfoil, my confused mind asserts
> > that in cruise (since the horizontal stab by definition must be
> > providing a downward force) your tailplane must have been at a negative
> > angle of attack, and since the combination anti-servo/trim tab was in a
> > neutral position then I would have expected a steady stick force would
> > have needed to be applied....
>
> This is an *anti servo trim tab*, if it is not in line with the
> tailplane, it puts a force on the tailplane so that the tailplane
> rotates until it is in line with the anti servo trim tab again.
> You can easily see what I mean by exercising the trim in whatever
> position, and then carefully with your hands on the anti servo tab, try
> to push it in line with the tailplane again. You will see that the
> tailplane rotates during this process, and that you will always end up
> with the anti servo tab in line with the tailplane.
> This is true for *any* speed, *any* CG, etc, except when the pilot
> exercises some force on the stick. Any force on the stick gets into the
> equation and disturbes this balance.
> If you trim for a specific speed, all you do is put the stick in a
> specific position, and then with the trim button, line up the anti servo
> tab with the tailplane, to keep the tailplane at its new position. You
> will always end up with the anti servo tab in the same relative position
> of the tailplane.
>
> The real confusion is that there are people flying around with the anti
> servo tab not in line with the tailplane. This means they are either
> pulling or pushing slightly on the stick, or that the tailplane is not
> balanced out properly.
>
> About the latter: I disconnected everything from the tailplane when
> balancing it out. If you leave the stick connected, you won't get a
> proper balance and the anti servo tab will not find its equilibrium in
> line with the tailplane.
>
> Next time we do this, I will vary the speed, trim for each speed, and
> make a picture again. I would be really surprised if at any speed the
> anti servo tab will not remain in its same relative position to the
> tailplane. (Of course at every speed, the whole stack of tailplane plus
> anti servo tab will rotate to a specific position... but with the anti
> servo tab always in line with the tailplane. This is what you do if you
> trim: lining the anti servo tab up with the tailplane in its new position).
>
> Now, for your questions (although they don't matter):
>
> > - were you in stead-state constant-altitude cruise?
>
> Yep. (We were in close formation so we wouldn't dare to fly anything
> than a very stabilized attitude).
>
> > - where was your trim set at?
>
> At 1/3 from the nose down limit.
>
> > - was your stick force = 0?
>
> Of course 0.
>
> > - what was your cruise speed?
>
> About 110 Knots.
>
> > - what was your weight and balance (with fuel at that point in time)?
>
> Two adults, about 20Kg of bagage, and about 40 liters of fuel.
>
> Frans
>
>
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Anyone use D-sub connectors to connect instrument module? |
I think the dbs on the panel module should be male instead of female as you propose.
After all, the module is inserted into the fuse!!
Actually, I used CPC connectors because they are engineered for
applications like this and are far more rugged
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=297482#297482
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim |
On 05/12/2010 03:22 PM, Peter Zutrauen wrote:
> Your thesis assumes that the tailplane is aerodynamically balanced wrt
> to the torque-tube position, and the only aerodynamic component which is
> stabilizing it and keeping it from flutter is the anti-servo tab.
Stabilizing, but not necessarily keeping it from flutter. I think that
the mass balance weight is to keep it from flutter, just as with the
ailerons (that don't need to have a trim tab for that either).
> I would expect/hope that the tailplane would remain aerodynamically
> stable without the anti-servo tab, and that the tab is there only to
> provide for progressive stick forces, and trim.
This is how it works I believe. At least is seems so on the PH-DIY. ;-)
Frans
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim |
Good analysis Frans,
If the tail plane is perfectly balanced and friction in the system nil,
the trim tab is centered.
A too heavy counter weight is offset by the trailing edge of the tab up.
A difference in flettner strips can cause the same.
Flutter is dependent on the center of mass and the aerodynamic center.
A horizontal control surface, mechanically balanced, with a symmetrical
airfoil surface with the aero center co-located with the center of mass
tends to stay neutrally stable. Camber angle and or trim tabs change
that of course.
When the center of mass is behind the the center of pressure, the
trailing edge goes down due to gravity, aerodynamic forces then try to
lift the trailing edge and in some cases overshoot the center line, so
gravity and the aero forces push the TE down, then it overshoots again
and flutter occurs. This is especially a concern of a cambered aileron
not mass balanced.
I don't have time to go into the drawings, but a symmetrical airfoil
contributes no moment to its normal force at low angles. That is, if it
is perfectly balanced at its aerodynamic center, it will stay at its
angle of attack unless acted on mechanically and requires no force
(beyond mechanical friction in the mechanism) to move it. It will, by
previous statement, also apply no counter force when moved (so no pilot
feel). This is why we have the anti servo tab, to create feedback to
the pilot. It also cleverly applies trim.
If the flettner strips are not perfect, and or the mass balance is
slightly off, your trim tab will show the effect of that. The
asymmetric flettner strips of course act as a flap and become not an
anti-servo tab, but a servo tab which drives the trim tab, which drives
the tail.
As for the unbalanced anti-servo tab. The tab itself does not
contribute to flutter if it is fixed. If the tab is loose, the tail
plane bushings or trim bushings are missing, loose, damaged or not
installed, flutter will occur. This is why, I am such a zealot about
stabilators, loose pins, and bearings. I would even prefer to try to
mechanically balance the trim tab for the guy who mistakenly fails to
hook up the trim tab pins to the trim bar.
Hope that doesn't add to the confusion Pete.
Bud Yerly
Tech Support
----- Original Message -----
From: Frans Veldman<mailto:frans@privatepilots.nl>
To: europa-list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 9:52 AM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch
Trim
<frans@privatepilots.nl<mailto:frans@privatepilots.nl>>
On 05/12/2010 03:22 PM, Peter Zutrauen wrote:
> Your thesis assumes that the tailplane is aerodynamically balanced
wrt
> to the torque-tube position, and the only aerodynamic component
which is
> stabilizing it and keeping it from flutter is the anti-servo tab.
Stabilizing, but not necessarily keeping it from flutter. I think that
the mass balance weight is to keep it from flutter, just as with the
ailerons (that don't need to have a trim tab for that either).
> I would expect/hope that the tailplane would remain aerodynamically
> stable without the anti-servo tab, and that the tab is there only to
> provide for progressive stick forces, and trim.
This is how it works I believe. At least is seems so on the PH-DIY.
;-)
Frans
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List<http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Europa-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim |
Pete=0AYou are right about the flettner strips, they bite through the bound
ary layer and stop trim hunting hunting. The mass balance is there to balan
ce the weight of the elevator.=0AGraham=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A_____________________
___________=0AFrom: Peter Zutrauen <peterz@zutrasoft.com>=0ATo: europa-list
@matronics.com=0ASent: Wednesday, 12 May, 2010 14:22:36=0ASubject: Re: Euro
pa-List: Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim=0A=0AHi Frans,=0A
=0AI understand your thesis (thanks again! :-).=0A=0AYour thesis assumes th
at the tailplane is aerodynamically balanced wrt to the torque-tube positio
n, and the only aerodynamic component which is stabilizing it and keeping i
t from flutter is the anti-servo tab. =0A=0AI question this, as the fulcru
m is ahead of the center of the tailplane. Maybe my skepticism is unwarrant
ed? Is the fulcrum in the center of the tailplane aerodynamically? Without
the anti-servo tab, would the tailplane flutter by design? I doubt this i
s the case, as (I believe) the flettner strips were added to eliminate the
'dead zone' of the anti-servo tab (bringing it out of the boundary layer) t
o eliminate a trim-hunting issue, not flutter (someone with some historical
knowledge please do chime in!).=0A=0AI would expect/hope that the tailplan
e would remain aerodynamically stable without the anti-servo tab, and that
the tab is there only to provide for progressive stick forces, and trim.=0A
=0AThe "still curious",=0APete :-)=0A=0A=0A=0AOn Wed, May 12, 2010 at 8:54
AM, Frans Veldman <frans@privatepilots.nl> wrote:=0A=0A>--> Europa-List mes
sage posted by: Frans Veldman <frans@privatepilots.nl>=0A>=0A>=0A>>On 05/12
/2010 01:03 PM, Peter Zutrauen wrote:=0A>=0A>>> As the tailplane is a symme
trical airfoil, my confused mind asserts=0A>>> that in cruise (since the h
orizontal stab by definition must be=0A>>> providing a downward force) your
tailplane must have been at a negative=0A>>> angle of attack, and since th
e combination anti-servo/trim tab was in a=0A>>> neutral position then I wo
uld have expected a steady stick force would=0A>>> have needed to be applie
d....=0A>=0A>This is an *anti servo trim tab*, if it is not in line with th
e=0A>>tailplane, it puts a force on the tailplane so that the tailplane=0A>
>rotates until it is in line with the anti servo trim tab again.=0A>>You ca
n easily see what I mean by exercising the trim in whatever=0A>>position, a
nd then carefully with your hands on the anti servo tab, try=0A>>to push it
in line with the tailplane again. You will see that the=0A>>tailplane rota
tes during this process, and that you will always end up=0A>>with the anti
servo tab in line with the tailplane.=0A>>This is true for *any* speed, *an
y* CG, etc, except when the pilot=0A>>exercises some force on the stick. An
y force on the stick gets into the=0A>>equation and disturbes this balance.
=0A>>If you trim for a specific speed, all you do is put the stick in a=0A>
>specific position, and then with the trim button, line up the anti servo
=0A>>tab with the tailplane, to keep the tailplane at its new position. You
=0A>>will always end up with the anti servo tab in the same relative positi
on=0A>>of the tailplane.=0A>=0A>>The real confusion is that there are peopl
e flying around with the anti=0A>>servo tab not in line with the tailplane.
This means they are either=0A>>pulling or pushing slightly on the stick, o
r that the tailplane is not=0A>>balanced out properly.=0A>=0A>>About the la
tter: I disconnected everything from the tailplane when=0A>>balancing it ou
t. If you leave the stick connected, you won't get a=0A>>proper balance and
the anti servo tab will not find its equilibrium in=0A>>line with the tail
plane.=0A>=0A>>Next time we do this, I will vary the speed, trim for each s
peed, and=0A>>make a picture again. I would be really surprised if at any s
peed the=0A>>anti servo tab will not remain in its same relative position t
o the=0A>>tailplane. (Of course at every speed, the whole stack of tailplan
e plus=0A>>anti servo tab will rotate to a specific position... but with th
e anti=0A>>servo tab always in line with the tailplane. This is what you do
if you=0A>>trim: lining the anti servo tab up with the tailplane in its ne
w position).=0A>=0A>>Now, for your questions (although they don't matter):
=0A>=0A>=0A>>> - were you in stead-state constant-altitude cruise?=0A>=0A>Y
ep. (We were in close formation so we wouldn't dare to fly anything=0A>>tha
n a very stabilized attitude).=0A>=0A>=0A>>> - where was your trim set at?
=0A>=0A>At 1/3 from the nose down limit.=0A>=0A>=0A>>> - was your stick for
ce = 0?=0A>=0A>Of course 0.=0A>=0A>=0A>>> - what was your cruise speed?
=0A>=0A>About 110 Knots.=0A>=0A>=0A>>> - what was your weight and balance (
with fuel at that point in time)?=0A>=0A>Two adults, about 20Kg of bagage,
and about 40 liters of fuel.=0A>=0A>>Frans=0A>=0A>>========
====0A>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-
List=0A>>============0A>http://forums.matronics.com
=0A>>============0A>>le, List Admin.=0A>>="_blank">
http://www.matronics.com/contribution=0A>>===========
=======================
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim |
Thanks to both Frans & Bud for the detailed explanations!
Coo!l ... it's all so clear to me now :-)
My build goal with then to have a perfectly flettner'd tab to emulate
Frans's beautiful workmanship.
Cheers & thanks again!
Pete
A239
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Bud Yerly <budyerly@msn.com> wrote:
> Good analysis Frans,
>
> If the tail plane is perfectly balanced and friction in the system nil, the
> trim tab is centered.
> A too heavy counter weight is offset by the trailing edge of the tab up. A
> difference in flettner strips can cause the same.
>
> Flutter is dependent on the center of mass and the aerodynamic center. A
> horizontal control surface, mechanically balanced, with a symmetrical
> airfoil surface with the aero center co-located with the center of mass
> tends to stay neutrally stable. Camber angle and or trim tabs change that
> of course.
>
> When the center of mass is behind the the center of pressure, the trailing
> edge goes down due to gravity, aerodynamic forces then try to lift the
> trailing edge and in some cases overshoot the center line, so gravity and
> the aero forces push the TE down, then it overshoots again and flutter
> occurs. This is especially a concern of a cambered aileron not mass
> balanced.
>
> I don't have time to go into the drawings, but a symmetrical airfoil
> contributes no moment to its normal force at low angles. That is, if it is
> perfectly balanced at its aerodynamic center, it will stay at its angle of
> attack unless acted on mechanically and requires no force (beyond mechanical
> friction in the mechanism) to move it. It will, by previous statement, also
> apply no counter force when moved (so no pilot feel). This is why we have
> the anti servo tab, to create feedback to the pilot. It also cleverly
> applies trim.
>
> If the flettner strips are not perfect, and or the mass balance is slightly
> off, your trim tab will show the effect of that. The asymmetric flettner
> strips of course act as a flap and become not an anti-servo tab, but a servo
> tab which drives the trim tab, which drives the tail.
>
> As for the unbalanced anti-servo tab. The tab itself does not contribute
> to flutter if it is *fixed*. If the tab is loose, the tail plane bushings
> or trim bushings are missing, loose, damaged or not installed, *flutter
> will occur. * This is why, I am such a zealot about stabilators, loose
> pins, and bearings. I would even prefer to try to mechanically balance the
> trim tab for the guy who mistakenly fails to hook up the trim tab pins to
> the trim bar.
>
> Hope that doesn't add to the confusion Pete.
>
> Bud Yerly
> Tech Support
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Frans Veldman <frans@privatepilots.nl>
> *To:* europa-list@matronics.com
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 12, 2010 9:52 AM
> *Subject:* Re: Europa-List: Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch
> Trim
>
>
> On 05/12/2010 03:22 PM, Peter Zutrauen wrote:
>
> > Your thesis assumes that the tailplane is aerodynamically balanced wrt
> > to the torque-tube position, and the only aerodynamic component which is
> > stabilizing it and keeping it from flutter is the anti-servo tab.
>
> Stabilizing, but not necessarily keeping it from flutter. I think that
> the mass balance weight is to keep it from flutter, just as with the
> ailerons (that don't need to have a trim tab for that either).
>
> > I would expect/hope that the tailplane would remain aerodynamically
> > stable without the anti-servo tab, and that the tab is there only to
> > provide for progressive stick forces, and trim.
>
> This is how it works I believe. At least is seems so on the PH-DIY.
> p; Features Chat, http://www.matronnbsp; via the Web
> title=http://forums.matronics.com/
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List>
> _p; generous bsp; title
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution href="
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution">
> http://www.matronics.com/c================
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
Message 10
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim |
>>
> The real confusion is that there are people
> flying around with the anti
> servo tab not in line with the tailplane. This
> means they are either
> pulling or pushing slightly on the stick, or
> that the tailplane is not
> balanced out properly.
Frans, take it again:
Balancing is nothing to do with that.
Balancing is to prevent possible flutter.
Only case when the trim tabs and the stabilator
are in line is then, when they are in their
neutral position.
That is if the plane is correctly build as per
manual.
In that case only the plane is in its cleanest
condition.
You are able to achieve that with a certain
combination of weight, speed, CofG etc but that is
a special case.
What faster we fly that more we get lift by wings.
That is why we have to push more or trim nose down
= trim tabs move upp when flying faster.
The stabilators=B4 trailing edges move then down.
They cannot be in-lined any more.
Overall, tailplanes /stabilators are neutralized
only when CofG = CofL (w zero stick forces).
If you have to declect tailplanes (and wanna
neutralize stick forces) you have to trim trim
tabs to other direction.
The aerodynamical forces /deflected trim tab are
then equal with the aerodynamical forces
/deflected tailplanes.
They are balancing then each others by
aerodynamically.
They have to be un-lined normally, more or less!
If not I am a Donald Duck!
That is why we usually and almost always see them
(trimtabs) in deflected position only.
I am sure you will confirm that when you get take
more photos.
In your photo you were flying 110 knots, w/o stick
forces, trim tabs and tailplanes in line:
congratulations, your plane is very economical
with that speed because obviously tailplanes are
in their neutral position and the plane is most
streamlined.
Otherwise - your neutral is not exactly neutral.
I assume your fuelflowcomputer will confirm that.
If you wanna fly slower or faster (with same load
and conditions) I am sure your tailplanes and trim
tabs are not any more in line.
The stick forces in Europa are quite light around
100 knots. Also the necessary movements to keep
level flight are small.
I would like to say: almost invisible when looking
photos!
Look at attached photo: I was flying around 120
knots with one Dynamic WT9.
My trim tabs are slightly deflected upwards - so
the stabilators have to be deflected downwards a
little bit.
If flying faster - they have to be deflected even
more of course.
The stabilators are very powerful - that is why
they are near their neutral position almost
always.
That is why also the trim tabs are *almost*
in-line fith stabilators.
Notice - just almost. If you have trimmed, they
are not exactly in-lined any more.
***
Concorde did this by pumping fuel into fin or out
from there. The stabilators could be so almost
always in their neutral position and the plane was
very clean.
With Europa, we could have let is say 10 kilos of
fuel inside the fin...
That was my thought only. No confusion at all.
Just aerodynamic.
I am sure I will get a fast speed reply ;)
Raimo
Terveisin, Raimo Toivio
Europa XS Mono OH-XRT #417
37500 Lemp=E4=E4l=E4
FINLAND
p +358-3-3753 777
f +358-3-3753 100
toivio@fly.to
www.rwm.fi
Message 11
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | PH-DIY performance data |
A few days ago we recorded some performance data. Air was not entirely
smooth, so speed may be off a few knots.
The cowl flap made a very noticable difference. Also, we got some rain,
and it seems that it cuts a few knots off the speed.
The data below was recorded with the cowl flap in cruise setting (almost
closed) and with dry wings. Airplane (Hi-top Tri gear) was a bit over
MTOW. Power plant is a Rotax 914 coupled to a Woodcomp high twist
2-blade SR3000/W.
I think the fuel consumption is a bit on the high side, what do you
think? (Fuel flow has not been calibrated, sensors were used with
factory calibration, but seems to roughly match with refueling data).
Also, some people later commented that it is better to have a higher RPM
for the Rotax and lower MAP's, any comments on this?
MAP 27, RPM 4500: IAS 121, Fuel flow 15,5 L/h
MAP 29, RPM 4800: IAS 134, Fuel flow 19,7 L/h
MAP 31, RPM 5000: IAS 145, Fuel flow 24,0 L/h
How does this compare?
Any other MAP/RPM combinations I should try?
Frans
Message 12
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: PH-DIY performance data |
Frans, For what it's worth my 914 Xs/normal top/mono + speed kit/ Woodcomp
SR3000W/3blade does the following at >90%MaxAUW at 2000ft:
TAS 120 Kts 14 l/hr
,, 130 ,, 19 ,,
,, 140 ,, 23 ,,
We have found on many trips that extra wheels don't help, but your figures
are pretty close to mine even so, assuming your ASI reads correctly
Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frans Veldman" <frans@privatepilots.nl>
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 6:19 PM
Subject: Europa-List: PH-DIY performance data
>
> A few days ago we recorded some performance data. Air was not entirely
> smooth, so speed may be off a few knots.
>
> The cowl flap made a very noticable difference. Also, we got some rain,
> and it seems that it cuts a few knots off the speed.
>
> The data below was recorded with the cowl flap in cruise setting (almost
> closed) and with dry wings. Airplane (Hi-top Tri gear) was a bit over
> MTOW. Power plant is a Rotax 914 coupled to a Woodcomp high twist
> 2-blade SR3000/W.
>
> I think the fuel consumption is a bit on the high side, what do you
> think? (Fuel flow has not been calibrated, sensors were used with
> factory calibration, but seems to roughly match with refueling data).
> Also, some people later commented that it is better to have a higher RPM
> for the Rotax and lower MAP's, any comments on this?
>
> MAP 27, RPM 4500: IAS 121, Fuel flow 15,5 L/h
> MAP 29, RPM 4800: IAS 134, Fuel flow 19,7 L/h
> MAP 31, RPM 5000: IAS 145, Fuel flow 24,0 L/h
>
> How does this compare?
> Any other MAP/RPM combinations I should try?
>
> Frans
>
>
>
Message 13
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Europa Company Spares support |
There have been a number of complaints regarding the supply of spares from
the factory of late so I thought you might be interested in my experience.
Yesterday afternoon I spotted that one of the rubber tubes connecting the
carbs to the plenum chamber on my 912S was cracked. I phoned Europa late
afternoon and two new rubber tubes arrived in the mail at 10 o'clock today.
Can't get better than that! Clearly, if they have the part they work hard
to ship as soon as possible.
Brian Davies
Message 14
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: PH-DIY performance data |
On 05/12/2010 07:47 PM, David Joyce wrote:
> Frans, For what it's worth my 914 Xs/normal top/mono + speed kit/
> Woodcomp SR3000W/3blade does the following at >90%MaxAUW at 2000ft:
> TAS 120 Kts 14 l/hr
> ,, 130 ,, 19 ,,
> ,, 140 ,, 23 ,,
Is this TAS indeed? My data was based on IAS. At 2000 feet I can add
about 4 knots to my speeds to get TAS.
Anyway, then my fuel consumption doesn't seem to be that high, I assume
this will improve a bit once the engine has been fully run in.
(Operating temperatures are still dropping, so I assume it is still
getting rid of excess friction).
> We have found on many trips that extra wheels don't help,
That's why I decided to get rid of one wheel, I'm happy with only three
wheels. ;-)
> figures are pretty close to mine even so, assuming your ASI reads correctly
The ASI has been calibrated (mandatory) and was found to be correct to 1
knot over the entire range. The backup ASI (with separate pitot) agrees
with the primary ASI.
Do you recall what RPM and MAP settings you normally use?
Thanks,
Frans
Message 15
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Effects of Flaps and Ailerons on Pitch Trim |
On 05/12/2010 05:17 PM, Donald Duck wrote:
> What faster we fly that more we get lift by wings.
> That is why we have to push more or trim nose down = trim tabs move upp
> when flying faster.
> The stabilators trailing edges move then down.
YES! And the story doesn't end here.
Now, before we go any further, print this out, and take it with you to
the hangar.
Are you there? Fine.
1) Put the trim in the middle, and line up the tailplane and anti servo
tab by rotating the tailplane. If done properly, the tailplane is in
about its "neutral" position when it lines up with the anti servo tab.
2) Now, trim the nose down with your trim button. Anti servo tabs moves
up (assuming you wired everything correctly).
3) Let's play aerodynamics. Your hand is the airstream. The anti servo
trim "sticks out" in the airstream. Push with your hand on the anti
servo tab to imitate the aerodynamic forces.
4) Now LOOK! The anti servo tab goes down. Due to some ingenious
mechanical linking the trailing edge of the tailplane also moves down
(this is why you trimmed the nose down after all).
But most important: The anti servo tab moves faster down than the
tailplane. While pushing the anti servo tab downward, it will at some
moment be in line with the tailplane. Stop when you reach that moment.
This is your newly trimmed out position!
5) Now stare at it for a while, and consider what you just did. Try it
the other way around.
6) Start wondering why the anti servo tab would remain sticking out in
the airstream by itself while nobody is keeping it there. Also try
moving the trailing edge of the tailplane down without the anti servo
tab moving twice as fast downwards as well. It can't be done!
7) Congratulations! You just discovered that an anti servo tab is not a
regular trim tab! A regular trim tab is held in a fixed position and has
no choice. An anti servo tab can move, seek the most convenient
position, and as a consequence take the tailplane with it.
> They have to be un-lined normally, more or less!
>
> If not I am a Donald Duck!
Quack. :-D
> That is why we usually and almost always see them (trimtabs) in
> deflected position only.
> I am sure you will confirm that when you get take more photos.
If the opportunity exists, I will show it to you so you can see it with
your own eyes.
Frans
Message 16
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Anyone use D-sub connectors to connect instrument module? |
Hi Ira
Thx. for the reply.
Did you mount CPC connector on the bottom of the instrument module?
Did you install on both left and right sides of instrument module to accept fuse
wires?
I think
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=297539#297539
Message 17
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Europa Company Spares support |
Every time I look at the Parts and Accessories page on the Europa
Aircraft website it just has 'tba' for the price so I don't see how you
can order anything.
Martin Tuck
Europa N152MT
Wichita, Kansas
Brian Davies wrote:
> There have been a number of complaints regarding the supply of spares
> from the factory of late so I thought you might be interested in my
> experience. Yesterday afternoon I spotted that one of the rubber
> tubes connecting the carbs to the plenum chamber on my 912S was
> cracked. I phoned Europa late afternoon and two new rubber tubes
> arrived in the mail at 10 o'clock today.
>
> Can't get better than that! Clearly, if they have the part they work
> hard to ship as soon as possible.
>
> Brian Davies
Message 18
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Anyone use D-sub connectors to connect instrument module? |
I have three CPCs, left right and center tunnel.
I am not sure what you are referring to as "fuse" wires. Do you mean
thin wires ala Nuckolls? Why would you put them in a plastic connector
when if they actually overload, they flame and melt.
Although I did put two sets of those fusible wires in my plane to
protect my two ammeters. If I have to do it again, I'd use auto blade
fuses for access and serviceability.
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=297553#297553
Message 19
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Skin wrinkling outside fuel fill |
I see in the archives that there has been a problem for some with the fuselage
skin wrinkling in the area of the plastic fuel fill tube. My question is, why
is it happening to only a few and is there a conclusive reason for it happening?
Maybe the fuel fill tube should not be affixed to the inside skin of the
fuselage as stated in the building manual but instead allowed to be more of a
floating fit so the rubber hose will take up the expansion/contraction the plastic
tube might be doing. Can anyone give me the answer to this question?
Thanks,
Bill McClellan
Message 20
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Anyone use D-sub connectors to connect instrument module? |
Hi Ira
"I have three CPCs, left right and center tunnel."
How do you get to your left and right CPCs?
Are they located inside instrument module where with instrument module in place
and front panel inserts removed you access CPCs inside instrument module? If
this is the case are they mounted to instrument module or firewall?
Or are CPCs mounted to bottom of instrument module where they are accessed from
the bottom of instrument module (could access with instrument module and front
panels in place)?
Sorry for confusing, when I mentioned fuse wires I was referring to fuselage wires,
we have a bundle on the port side and also on starboard that needs to get
into instrument module, low amperage stuff for the most part (nothing to do with
fusible links), fuselage wires for:
*switches on sticks
*fuel flow transducers (2)
*fuel gage sender
*stabilator antiservo servo
*aileron servo
*E-Bus and always Hot-bus that live resident on back of starboard headrest need
to plumb electron flow into instrument module
*airspeed switch for gear warning
*D10a magnitometer
*20% throttle reed switch
*gear down latch reed switch
ron Parigoris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=297560#297560
Message 21
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Europa Company Spares support |
Brian=0AI heard that there was a bad batch of rubber carb tubes, Neil Franc
e had his 1 year old ones fail recently 100 miles from home.=0AGraham=0A=0A
=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Brian Davies <bdavies@dir
con.co.uk>=0ATo: europa-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Wednesday, 12 May, 2010
18:52:16=0ASubject: Europa-List: Europa Company Spares support=0A=0A=0ATher
e have been a =0Anumber of complaints regarding the supply of spares from t
he factory of late so =0AI thought you might be interested in my experience
. Yesterday afternoon I =0Aspotted that one of the rubber tubes connecting
the carbs to the plenum chamber =0Aon my 912S was cracked. I phoned Europa
late afternoon and two new rubber tubes =0Aarrived in the mail at 10 o'clo
ck today.=0A =0ACan't get better =0Athan that! Clearly, if they have the p
art they work hard to ship as soon =0Aas possible.=0A =0ABrian =0ADavies=0A
=================
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|