Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:11 AM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (Roger & Lina Hill)
2. 06:02 AM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (Juan Vega)
3. 06:11 AM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (Juan Vega)
4. 06:13 AM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (Juan Vega)
5. 06:21 AM - Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (gburdett)
6. 07:18 AM - Heavy engine and Horiz. stab (Grant Corriveau)
7. 07:36 AM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (steve)
8. 07:36 AM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (Dirk Zahtilla)
9. 07:42 AM - Re: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab (Dirk Zahtilla)
10. 07:48 AM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (steve)
11. 08:20 AM - Re: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab (steve)
12. 08:45 AM - Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (Sabrina)
13. 09:16 AM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (Joe Stevenson)
14. 09:17 AM - Re: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab (Bryan Martin)
15. 09:32 AM - Re: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab (Bryan Martin)
16. 09:35 AM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (ihab.awad@gmail.com)
17. 09:54 AM - Re: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab (Paul Mulwitz)
18. 10:05 AM - Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (Sabrina)
19. 10:37 AM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (ihab.awad@gmail.com)
20. 10:55 AM - Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (THOMAS SMALL)
21. 03:20 PM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (JAPhillipsGA@aol.com)
22. 03:23 PM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (JAPhillipsGA@aol.com)
23. 03:48 PM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (jaybannist@cs.com)
24. 04:11 PM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (Roger & Lina Hill)
25. 04:18 PM - Re: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab (Roger & Lina Hill)
26. 04:55 PM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (Flydog1966@aol.com)
27. 05:21 PM - Re: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? (jeyoung65@aol.com)
28. 06:07 PM - Re: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab (Frank Roskind)
29. 07:04 PM - Re: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab (JohnDRead@aol.com)
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
Oh well, now I feel better.
Roger
Project Orion wasn't powered by a reactor - it was powered by a series of
small atomic bombs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)
I'm certain the cable tension would have been critical :-)
-- Craig
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger & Lina
Hill
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:05 PM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
Ya, I guess nuclear reactors falling from the sky was not a very great
concern at the time.
Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sabrina
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 9:56 PM
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
One word: WOW... do you guys know that General Atomic came this >< close to
producing atomic propulsed space craft in the 1960s.
Paul... sorry about the no-brainer comment. I actually mis-drilled the first
aluminum part I touched. When I put the cylinders on my engine, I actually
left a sealing ring off. It is such a terrible feeling to put your engine
together and have extra parts afterwords.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213883#213883
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
Dirk,
A look at 90 percent of GA aircraft, including quite few few Jets, show that
they use cables. The rods are no better than the cables. the flaw is in the
builders not following simple directions to tesnionthe cable. Maybe its becasue
cable need vigialance more so than rods. Cables need to be retightened from
time to time and maintained. Its not the cable design, its the builders. We
are the builders and its funny how people blame everything but the builders.
If I have a problem with my plane, and it is due to something I over looked or
neglected, I just look in the mirror as to placing the blame. I believe quite
comfortably the design of the aircraft is quite sound. The problems lie
in the build and most, the maintenance. Tension the cables, and swage them
correctly, and you will be fine, if cables were an issue , they wopuild not
have them on most Boeing and Airbus aircraft.
Juan
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Dirk Zahtilla <ideaz1@sbcglobal.net>
>Sent: Nov 12, 2008 10:00 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>
>
>Back to the cable tension debate, if I may, with all the discussions of
>cables and flutter I am more convinced than ever to use pushrods, and
>balanced control surfaces. To me, this is a simple, logical fix. I'm not the
>first person to do this, and probably not the last. pushrods never need
>tension adjusting, they do not put a permanent strain on the airframe like
>cables do. If there is any play from worn parts you can tell instantly on
>your pre-flight.
>As to balance of controls this further relieves stress on the airframe and
>if I'm not mistaken helps reduce the possibility of flutter.
>
>I frankly don't care if Zenith Inc. doesn't like this but it is obviously
>very hard and embarassing for a company to admit that they could have done
>better and make changes to their design, admitting to those weaknesses in
>their design, so I use my own experience and compare this plane to other
>designs that have done a better job on some of these issues. I didn't invent
>pushrods and balanced ailerons, but I have flown some exceptional planes
>that had them so why not.. I'm sure I'm not the only person to write to Mr
>Heinz about this issue and the wing failure issue only to get the pat
>response that "there are hundreds of these planes flying so it must be OK"
>Well maybe most people don't get close to the design limits of their planes
>and never find out the hard way that they are borderline in some areas and
>you only get one chance to cross that line.
>
>I still like the plane and plan to build it, but I'll fix these obvious (in
>my opinion) weaknesses.
>
>Dirk
>PS Let the flames begin, I'm ready for you!
>
>
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
Thanks DIrk,
Its called Dynamic stability. All plane fly as speed regulated by pitch (trim)
and throttle for decent and accent.(lift, weight, drag, thrust)...
I hear you on the cable vs rod debate , i think its not the design though, its
the maintenacne issue. ALot of guys building, build their planes and do not
realize the maintenance requirement involved. Cables are not set and forget.
Maybe that would be the strenght of Rods. I think where allt he accidents
have happened for the ecception of a few has been oversight on the ground. A
bolt not tightened, a cable not propoerly swaged. Someone second guessing the
plans and over torquing, etc...
Juan
-----Original Message-----
>From: Dirk Zahtilla <ideaz1@sbcglobal.net>
>Sent: Nov 12, 2008 9:30 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>
>
>Sorry, no offense Steve, but I agree with Juan on this one. Simple test...
>fly straight and level then cut throttle to idle while holding the elevator
>steady. I promise you that ANY plane will soon be in a steep dive toward the
>ground. Full power from straight and level (if your trimmed for level at
>low power) and you will pitch up and climb. I thought we all knew this
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "steve" <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net>
>To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
>Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 3:24 PM
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>
>
>>
>> P factor and torque is corrected by left or right engine mount setting.
>> OR rudder offset. I understand that Sabrina was talking about climb and
>> desent. With power or not the attitude (verticle) should not change a
>> whole bunch.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Juan Vega" <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
>> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>; <zenith-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 2:32 PM
>> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> "Throttle is for climb and decent, you trim for speed" A plane that is
>>> trimmed at a set speed wil climb or decend with a change in throttle rpm
>>> or power setting, so angle on engine is more for p factor/ torque than
>>> anything, relavant on a limitted basis to level flight.
>>>
>>> Juan
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>From: steve <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net>
>>>>Sent: Nov 12, 2008 3:35 PM
>>>>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>>>>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Butting in here but,,,,
>>>>In my Experimental airplane adventures, I ve found that pitching up under
>>>>power and then pitching down with reduced power is an indication of the
>>>>engine mount not being set at the correct angle........
>>>>Steve W.
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: "Sabrina" <chicago2paris@msn.com>
>>>>To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
>>>>Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 1:25 PM
>>>>Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey there to the person aka Joe Kidd,
>>>>>
>>>>> It is sad, but even MIT's wind tunnel is too small. The way the turbo
>>>>> prop guys blast the aircraft at the end of the East ramp at KARR as
>>>>> they
>>>>> warm up and wait for IFR clearance for 27, I don't need one. :o)
>>>>>
>>>>> I am confident the problems will be figured out in a matter of months,
>>>>> not
>>>>> years. I had the cable tensions adjusted from a liability point of
>>>>> view.
>>>>> So too, I hope the new 40/30/22 +/-5 set of tensions bring the control
>>>>> inputs towards the middle, as opposed to having the elevator too light,
>>>>> and the rudder too stiff.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jay,
>>>>>
>>>>> I added elevator trim ONLY because people were complaining about
>>>>> nose-heavy XLs wanting to fly nose down. I did not think that
>>>>> pitching
>>>>> the H-stab down would work as well as it did. The Sabrina Mark 1
>>>>> pitches
>>>>> up at full power, down at reduced power and is level in cruise without
>>>>> any
>>>>> trim. Did you pitch your H-stab at all? Do you have a heavy engine?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213795#213795
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
next time balance the prop, people tend to forget that little part.
-----Original Message-----
>From: Roger & Lina Hill <hills@sunflower.com>
>Sent: Nov 12, 2008 7:10 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>
>My 601HDS propeller fluttered too !!!!
>
>Then it broke off.
>
>
>
>
>
>Roger
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
>From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of J.T. Machin
>Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:49 AM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>
>
>
>
>Sabrina,
>
>I have to agree with Wade. Every aircraft's control system is different and
>and the fact that the ailerons have a balance cable really does not impact
>its flutter characteristics because flutter is not really a control surface
>deflection that originates from the stick. The deflection comes from a
>flexing of the system that then stores the spring energy. This flexing and
>storing of energy and then releasing that energy as the surface unflexes is
>a primary driver in the creation of the flutter effect. That is why stiffer
>is better when it comes to control systems.
>
>That being said, a flutter situation can occur in any of the control
>surfaces. As the XL has had several reported instances of aileron flutter,
>it seems to be the most prevalent flutter mode. I have not heard of any
>report instances of elevator flutter. Also, any additional weight at the
>trailing edge of a control surface will absolutely reduce the flutter speed.
>I'm not saying that the XL with aileron trim is unsafe, but it does have
>less flutter margin than one without the trim system.
>
>I decided to go with a bungee type trim if required for the the ailerons.
>
>Jim Machin
>601XL, 0-200
>Almost done!
>
>--- On Wed, 11/12/08, Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com> wrote:
>
>From: Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>
>Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 8:24 AM
>
>
>
><chicago2paris@msn.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>"I did use elevator trim."
>
>
>
>
>
>Wade,
>
>
>
>
>
>Personally, the elevator trim weight bothered me more than
> the aileron trim.
>
>
>The ailerons, by their nature of one being up and one down, should, if
>properly
>
>
>tensioned, be easier to dampen in flight than a fluttering elevator. So
>too, a
>
>
>builder can easily adjust an XL's horizontal stabilizer for proper cruise
>
>
>configuration since it sits so high off the longerons. The aileron trim
>was a
>
>
>much easier call for me than the elevator trim. If no aileron trim under
>Par.
>
>
>4-36, why elevator trim?
>
>
>
>
>
>As to Par 4-36(c) was it the Cardinal that used foam in the elevator trim
>tab
>
>
>that took on water/ice and threw it off balance?
>
>
>
>
>
>Has anyone had to drill a weep hole in their elevator trim tab to make sure
>ice
>
>
>does not build up? I ended up gust-locking my elevator in the up position
>
>
>rather than down to keep the ice out.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Read this topic online
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
Yes Gig, I stand corrected.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213913#213913
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: | Heavy engine and Horiz. stab |
I'm confused by the comments regarding the engine mass and the
horizontal stab installed angle.
Isn't the engine mass counter-balanced during the construction by
final placement of the battery(s) to maintain the Weight & Balance
inside the acceptable envelope? Once this is accomplished there is
no need to consider "adjusting" the horizontal stab to account for
the engine weight, is there?
Curious in Canada
Grant
601 HDS / CAM100 (heavy but worth it)
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
Its ok, no offense taken. We all "discuss" what we have learned over
theyears we have been involved in this hobby.
One of my airplanes would not climb as advertised. I would fly along side
other aircraft ( same make and models) and these guys always out climbed me
by at lease 400 FPM.
One day a builder suggested I look at the upward thrust of the engine mount.
Sure enough, the engine crank shaft pointed down. Waaaay down....
Just a few washers under the bottom attach bolts took care of the problem.
Sure if the pilot reduces power the nose will drop, but not much. Just
enough to maintain the current trim speed...
I think if the power was reduced and the airplane nose went straight down,
there is a problem. On the other hand, and this example is waaay out, if
your aircraft, model X65-970, is in level, trimmed flight and the pilot goes
full throttle, and it loops....youve got a problem....
Its not trim, its not angle of incidence. It might be engine position.
Goofy aint I ????
I accept being wrong.. But if so, geeze there are a lot of student pilots
out there flying with my spew of B.S.
Hey, I m the guy who cant even get my 601XL to balance within the
envelope....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dirk Zahtilla" <ideaz1@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 7:30 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>
> Sorry, no offense Steve, but I agree with Juan on this one. Simple test...
> fly straight and level then cut throttle to idle while holding the
> elevator steady. I promise you that ANY plane will soon be in a steep dive
> toward the ground. Full power from straight and level (if your trimmed
> for level at low power) and you will pitch up and climb. I thought we all
> knew this
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "steve" <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 3:24 PM
> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>
>
>>
>> P factor and torque is corrected by left or right engine mount setting.
>> OR rudder offset. I understand that Sabrina was talking about climb and
>> desent. With power or not the attitude (verticle) should not change a
>> whole bunch.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Juan Vega" <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
>> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>; <zenith-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 2:32 PM
>> Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> "Throttle is for climb and decent, you trim for speed" A plane that is
>>> trimmed at a set speed wil climb or decend with a change in throttle rpm
>>> or power setting, so angle on engine is more for p factor/ torque than
>>> anything, relavant on a limitted basis to level flight.
>>>
>>> Juan
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>From: steve <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net>
>>>>Sent: Nov 12, 2008 3:35 PM
>>>>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>>>>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>>>>
>>>><notsew_evets@frontiernet.net>
>>>>
>>>>Butting in here but,,,,
>>>>In my Experimental airplane adventures, I ve found that pitching up
>>>>under
>>>>power and then pitching down with reduced power is an indication of the
>>>>engine mount not being set at the correct angle........
>>>>Steve W.
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: "Sabrina" <chicago2paris@msn.com>
>>>>To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
>>>>Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 1:25 PM
>>>>Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey there to the person aka Joe Kidd,
>>>>>
>>>>> It is sad, but even MIT's wind tunnel is too small. The way the
>>>>> turbo
>>>>> prop guys blast the aircraft at the end of the East ramp at KARR as
>>>>> they
>>>>> warm up and wait for IFR clearance for 27, I don't need one. :o)
>>>>>
>>>>> I am confident the problems will be figured out in a matter of months,
>>>>> not
>>>>> years. I had the cable tensions adjusted from a liability point of
>>>>> view.
>>>>> So too, I hope the new 40/30/22 +/-5 set of tensions bring the control
>>>>> inputs towards the middle, as opposed to having the elevator too
>>>>> light,
>>>>> and the rudder too stiff.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jay,
>>>>>
>>>>> I added elevator trim ONLY because people were complaining about
>>>>> nose-heavy XLs wanting to fly nose down. I did not think that
>>>>> pitching
>>>>> the H-stab down would work as well as it did. The Sabrina Mark 1
>>>>> pitches
>>>>> up at full power, down at reduced power and is level in cruise without
>>>>> any
>>>>> trim. Did you pitch your H-stab at all? Do you have a heavy engine?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213795#213795
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
Hi Juan,
I agree again with you regarding the maintenance issue of cables and I do
think this is a good reason for using pushrods as they are easy to check. A
little feel of the aileron on pre flight will tell you if there is something
loose or worn as you can feel the play. If a cable is loose from stretching
it may still have tension an you wont feel the difference. Are cable users
going to do a tension test every time they fly? I know I wouldn't so I
choose to make that problem not a possibility for me. Simple choice.
I do also believe (am I right?, I hope so.) that the bigger issue is balance
of the ailerons on this plane. As designed there is NO balancing of these
control surfaces. This drastically limits the operating speed ( and creates
most of the heavy feel of the ailerons). This web site has some very good
info and explanation on the subject PLEASE CHECK IT OUT!
http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/aircraft/32996-balanced-ailerons.html
Ailerons are balanced in two main ways, with weight and air pressure. Both
methods require the hinge point to be somewhere behind the leading edge of
the control surface. The XL as designed is just forward of the leading edge
and therefore cannot be balanced as is. The simplest fix (if I may use that
term) is to extend the lower skin enough to add weights to it (look at a
Cessna, this is how my 150's ailerons are balanced). The result is that
control pressure remains the same throughout the speed range of the
aircraft. Another simple method (using pressure) would be to add spades to
the ailerons.
At least this should be food for your thoughts. At best you may get a
better(safer) aircraft.
Cheers,
Dirk
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: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab |
Yup, you are on the right track here. the horiz stab is used to change pitch
angle. If you are nose heavy it must be counteracted by down force on the
horiz stab/ elevator, efectively doubling the weight that is off balance. In
a perfect world there would be 0lbs. of downforce in straight and level
flight. Our job is to come as close as we can by balancing the weight before
flight.
Dirk
----- Original Message -----
From: "Grant Corriveau" <grant.corriveau@TELUS.NET>
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 7:17 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab
> <grant.corriveau@telus.net>
>
> I'm confused by the comments regarding the engine mass and the horizontal
> stab installed angle.
>
> Isn't the engine mass counter-balanced during the construction by final
> placement of the battery(s) to maintain the Weight & Balance inside the
> acceptable envelope? Once this is accomplished there is no need to
> consider "adjusting" the horizontal stab to account for the engine
> weight, is there?
>
> Curious in Canada
> Grant
> 601 HDS / CAM100 (heavy but worth it)
>
>
>
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
I m thinking of a simple under the aileron mass balance.
There are a lot of airplanes that have a small hanging "spade" type
balance and it works. With the 601 ailerons being so light I m sure it
wouldn take much lead (Forward) of the hinge line to get that neutral
condition...
SW
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dirk Zahtilla" <ideaz1@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>
> Back to the cable tension debate, if I may, with all the discussions of
> cables and flutter I am more convinced than ever to use pushrods, and
> balanced control surfaces. To me, this is a simple, logical fix. I'm not
> the first person to do this, and probably not the last. pushrods never
> need tension adjusting, they do not put a permanent strain on the airframe
> like cables do. If there is any play from worn parts you can tell
> instantly on your pre-flight.
> As to balance of controls this further relieves stress on the airframe and
> if I'm not mistaken helps reduce the possibility of flutter.
>
> I frankly don't care if Zenith Inc. doesn't like this but it is obviously
> very hard and embarassing for a company to admit that they could have done
> better and make changes to their design, admitting to those weaknesses in
> their design, so I use my own experience and compare this plane to other
> designs that have done a better job on some of these issues. I didn't
> invent pushrods and balanced ailerons, but I have flown some exceptional
> planes that had them so why not.. I'm sure I'm not the only person to
> write to Mr Heinz about this issue and the wing failure issue only to get
> the pat response that "there are hundreds of these planes flying so it
> must be OK" Well maybe most people don't get close to the design limits of
> their planes and never find out the hard way that they are borderline in
> some areas and you only get one chance to cross that line.
>
> I still like the plane and plan to build it, but I'll fix these obvious
> (in my opinion) weaknesses.
>
> Dirk
> PS Let the flames begin, I'm ready for you!
>
>
>
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: | Re: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab |
But, But, but what about flying wings ? These dont have a horizontal
stablizer....
My son has a EZE that doest have a H.S. It has two flying surfaces. So
does the flying flea from the 1930s....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dirk Zahtilla" <ideaz1@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab
>
> Yup, you are on the right track here. the horiz stab is used to change
> pitch angle. If you are nose heavy it must be counteracted by down force
> on the horiz stab/ elevator, efectively doubling the weight that is off
> balance. In a perfect world there would be 0lbs. of downforce in straight
> and level flight. Our job is to come as close as we can by balancing the
> weight before flight.
> Dirk
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Grant Corriveau" <grant.corriveau@TELUS.NET>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 7:17 AM
> Subject: Zenith-List: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab
>
>
>> <grant.corriveau@telus.net>
>>
>> I'm confused by the comments regarding the engine mass and the
>> horizontal stab installed angle.
>>
>> Isn't the engine mass counter-balanced during the construction by final
>> placement of the battery(s) to maintain the Weight & Balance inside the
>> acceptable envelope? Once this is accomplished there is no need to
>> consider "adjusting" the horizontal stab to account for the engine
>> weight, is there?
>>
>> Curious in Canada
>> Grant
>> 601 HDS / CAM100 (heavy but worth it)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
Attached are renderings of a part. Given its size, is there anyone on the list
with the capability of machining it to very close tolerances from a CATIA part
file. I don't have cash, but I do have access to Engelhard silver to barter
with. I am told that it would take a 5 axis CNC mill. I am hoping that it
could be machined from a 530 x 600 x 180mm billet on a 3 axis mill white side
up, flipped and machined again green side up. Material is your choice so long
as it is stable. Any thoughts on whether the bit could reach down the side
without binding against the material remaining would be appreciated.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213943#213943
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/filledqpart_186.jpg
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: | Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
Have you considered a casting instead of the milled part? You'd only need a
ccess to a CNC router to achieve that, then a geared head or knee mill to f
inish out the part. Would love to help you more but only have a South Bend
9A lathe and don't have a milling machine yet. However, I have done a bit o
f casting and have found that most regional casting compainies of fabricati
on shop's are more than up to such a challange.=0A=0AJWS=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A____
____________________________=0AFrom: Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>=0ATo:
zenith-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 10:45:12 AM
=0ASubject: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?=0A=0A--> Zenith-List
message posted by: "Sabrina" <chicago2paris@msn.com>=0A=0AAttached are ren
derings of a part.- Given its size, is there anyone on the list with the
capability of machining it to very close tolerances from a CATIA part file.
- I don't have cash, but I do have access to Engelhard silver to barter w
ith.- I am told that it would take a 5 axis CNC mill.- I am hoping that
it could be machined from a 530 x 600 x 180mm billet on a 3 axis mill whit
e side up, flipped and machined again green side up.- Material is your ch
oice so long as it is stable. Any thoughts on whether the bit could reach d
own the side without binding against the material remaining would be apprec
iated.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ARead this topic online here:=0A=0Ahttp://forums.matron
ics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213943#213943=0A=0A=0A=0A=0AAttachments: =0A=0Aht
=- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Matt Dralle
========================0A=0A
=0A
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: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab |
In the real world, you need a certain amount of down force on the tail
for adequate pitch stability. The correct amount of down force will
cause the airplane to return straight and level flight at the trimmed
airspeed in about two oscillations after a disturbance. That would be
pretty hard to achieve with zero down force. On the other hand,
depending on the mission of the airplane, you might want more or less
pitch stability
Ideally, in straight and level flight at cruising speed the trim tab
and elevator should be in their neutral position and the angle of
incidence of the stabilizer should provide enough down force for
acceptable pitch stability.
On Nov 13, 2008, at 10:41 AM, Dirk Zahtilla wrote:
> >
>
> Yup, you are on the right track here. the horiz stab is used to
> change pitch angle. If you are nose heavy it must be counteracted by
> down force on the horiz stab/ elevator, efectively doubling the
> weight that is off balance. In a perfect world there would be 0lbs.
> of downforce in straight and level flight. Our job is to come as
> close as we can by balancing the weight before flight.
> Dirk
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Grant Corriveau" <grant.corriveau@TELUS.NET
> >
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 7:17 AM
> Subject: Zenith-List: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab |
These are home built aircraft, every one is unique. No matter how
carefully you follow the plans there will be variations from one plane
to the next. With my airplane, after I completed it and determined
that the CG was within the acceptable range, I still could not trim
the airplane for hands off flight during my first few test flights. I
corrected the problem by bringing the leading edge of the stabilizer
down about half an inch. Now I fly with the trim tab near neutral
position most of the time.
On Nov 13, 2008, at 10:17 AM, Grant Corriveau wrote:
> >
>
> I'm confused by the comments regarding the engine mass and the
> horizontal stab installed angle.
>
> Isn't the engine mass counter-balanced during the construction by
> final placement of the battery(s) to maintain the Weight & Balance
> inside the acceptable envelope? Once this is accomplished there is
> no need to consider "adjusting" the horizontal stab to account for
> the engine weight, is there?
>
> Curious in Canada
> Grant
> 601 HDS / CAM100 (heavy but worth it)
>
--
Bryan Martin
N61BM, CH 601 XL,
RAM Subaru, Stratus redrive.
do not archive.
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:45 AM, Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com> wrote:
> Attached are renderings of a part. Given its size, is there anyone on the list
with the capability
> of machining it to very close tolerances from a CATIA part file.
What are your tolerances? Given that you don't mind the material,
would it be adequate to make it in a 3D printer out of plastic? Some
hint of what you need it for might give people a clue as to how they
could help -- like, is this a wind tunnel model?
Ihab
--
Ihab A.B. Awad, Palo Alto, CA
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: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab |
Hi Grant,
What a great question!
After scratching my head for a while and reading a half dozen or so
responses, I have to come down on the side that a heavy engine does
indeed require more down force from the elevator rigging.
The reason is only partly because of the heavy engine. You are
correct that the balance issue is resolved by repositioning the
battery and other equipment. Still, a heavier engine means a heavier
empty weight. If you hold the rest of the plane to the same weight
(a crazy idea, but I don't know how to handle any other
assumption) then the lift must be more to fly level and the elevator
must cause a higher angle of attack to get this.
Paul
XL getting close
At 07:17 AM 11/13/2008, you wrote:
>I'm confused by the comments regarding the engine mass and the
>horizontal stab installed angle.
>
>Isn't the engine mass counter-balanced during the construction by
>final placement of the battery(s) to maintain the Weight & Balance
>inside the acceptable envelope? Once this is accomplished there is
>no need to consider "adjusting" the horizontal stab to account for
>the engine weight, is there?
>
>Curious in Canada
>Grant
>601 HDS / CAM100 (heavy but worth it)
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
Dear Ihab,
I was going to use the part to create a mold to make the "green" portion of the
rendering. 120 of those green portions assemble into a 3 meter sphere. The
gray portion was added to give a flat surface during milling of the top, green
surface. Tolerances are important but not vital. If a 3D printer could punch
out just 1, much less 120 of the attached Q parts, I would be forever grateful.
This is a just a mock up of the cockpit of N5887Q.
Off to class... (I have Wednesdays off, 1 morning class at 7AM, the rest in the
afternoon for those of you asking--it is a boarding school.)
Sabrina
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213954#213954
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/qinside_155.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/qoutside_154.jpg
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: | Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:05 AM, Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com> wrote:
> If a 3D printer could punch out just 1, much less 120 of the attached Q parts,
I would be forever grateful.
:)
One thought could be to 3D print a *negative* of the part, then use it
as a mold for 120 fiberglass layups. I guess it depends on your
budget. Also, depending on your needs, 120 slabs of metal in a 3 meter
sphere could be way heavy; if you made them out of fiberglass then
stuck the borders together with epoxy or whatever, you could end up
with a lightweight yet strong part. As in, "Use the monocoque, Luke."
Ihab
--
Ihab A.B. Awad, Palo Alto, CA
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
For some of the old timers on the list might I make a request: if you're
going to leave a topic please change the subject line - the reason
should be obvious.
thank you
jeff do not archive
>I was going to use the part to create a mold to make the "green"
portion of the
>rendering. 120 of those green portions assemble into a 3 meter
sphere. The
>gray portion was added to give a flat surface during milling of the
top, green
>surface. Tolerances are important but not vital. If a 3D printer
could punch
>out just 1, much less 120 of the attached Q parts, I would be forever
grateful.
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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
What strap? What modification? I have not heard of this. Please inform me.
Bill
**************
Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news &
http://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001)
Message 22
| 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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
It had to be connected to a covair motor, right?
**************
Get the
Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news &
download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001)
Message 23
| 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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
Bill,
I'm assuming that this "strap" was added to versions earlier than mine.? It is
included in my drawings dated 08/05; page 6-T-3.? It is Part No. 6T3-8, and is
called a "Bent Strip".? It is .040", 6061-T6, 20mm wide, 100mm long, with the
ends bent up to a 95 deg angle to the base, the base being 62mm long.? It is
riveted to the Elevator Center Channel (6T3-2) with three A5 rivets; to the Upper
Elevator Horn (6T3-4) base leg with? an AS5 (stainless steel) rivet and to
the base leg of the Lower Elevator Horn (6T3-5) with an AS5 rivet. Let me know
if you need more information.
Jay in Dallas
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: JAPhillipsGA@aol.com
Sent: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 5:13 pm
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
What strap? What modification?? I have not heard of this. Please inform me. Bill
**************
Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news &ir=http://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001)
________________________________________________________________________
Email message sent from CompuServe - visit us today at http://www.cs.com
Message 24
| 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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
Actually, it was a new prop, it broke off after 2 hours of operation,
A manufactures defect caused it to flutter (for a while) then fatigue and
break
Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Juan Vega
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 8:13 AM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
next time balance the prop, people tend to forget that little part.
-----Original Message-----
>From: Roger & Lina Hill <hills@sunflower.com>
>Sent: Nov 12, 2008 7:10 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>
>My 601HDS propeller fluttered too !!!!
>
>Then it broke off.
>
>
>
>
>
>Roger
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
>From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of J.T. Machin
>Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:49 AM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>
>
>
>
>Sabrina,
>
>I have to agree with Wade. Every aircraft's control system is different
and
>and the fact that the ailerons have a balance cable really does not impact
>its flutter characteristics because flutter is not really a control surface
>deflection that originates from the stick. The deflection comes from a
>flexing of the system that then stores the spring energy. This flexing and
>storing of energy and then releasing that energy as the surface unflexes is
>a primary driver in the creation of the flutter effect. That is why
stiffer
>is better when it comes to control systems.
>
>That being said, a flutter situation can occur in any of the control
>surfaces. As the XL has had several reported instances of aileron flutter,
>it seems to be the most prevalent flutter mode. I have not heard of any
>report instances of elevator flutter. Also, any additional weight at the
>trailing edge of a control surface will absolutely reduce the flutter
speed.
>I'm not saying that the XL with aileron trim is unsafe, but it does have
>less flutter margin than one without the trim system.
>
>I decided to go with a bungee type trim if required for the the ailerons.
>
>Jim Machin
>601XL, 0-200
>Almost done!
>
>--- On Wed, 11/12/08, Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com> wrote:
>
>From: Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>
>Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 8:24 AM
>
>
>
><chicago2paris@msn.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>"I did use elevator trim."
>
>
>
>
>
>Wade,
>
>
>
>
>
>Personally, the elevator trim weight bothered me more than
> the aileron trim.
>
>
>The ailerons, by their nature of one being up and one down, should, if
>properly
>
>
>tensioned, be easier to dampen in flight than a fluttering elevator. So
>too, a
>
>
>builder can easily adjust an XL's horizontal stabilizer for proper cruise
>
>
>configuration since it sits so high off the longerons. The aileron trim
>was a
>
>
>much easier call for me than the elevator trim. If no aileron trim under
>Par.
>
>
>4-36, why elevator trim?
>
>
>
>
>
>As to Par 4-36(c) was it the Cardinal that used foam in the elevator trim
>tab
>
>
>that took on water/ice and threw it off balance?
>
>
>
>
>
>Has anyone had to drill a weep hole in their elevator trim tab to make sure
>ice
>
>
>does not build up? I ended up gust-locking my elevator in the up position
>
>
>rather than down to keep the ice out.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Read this topic online
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 25
| 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: | Heavy engine and Horiz. stab |
Ya, I know this perfect world, and they all fly canards.
Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dirk Zahtilla
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 9:41 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab
Yup, you are on the right track here. the horiz stab is used to change pitch
angle. If you are nose heavy it must be counteracted by down force on the
horiz stab/ elevator, efectively doubling the weight that is off balance. In
a perfect world there would be 0lbs. of downforce in straight and level
flight. Our job is to come as close as we can by balancing the weight before
flight.
Dirk
----- Original Message -----
From: "Grant Corriveau" <grant.corriveau@TELUS.NET>
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 7:17 AM
Subject: Zenith-List: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab
> <grant.corriveau@telus.net>
>
> I'm confused by the comments regarding the engine mass and the horizontal
> stab installed angle.
>
> Isn't the engine mass counter-balanced during the construction by final
> placement of the battery(s) to maintain the Weight & Balance inside the
> acceptable envelope? Once this is accomplished there is no need to
> consider "adjusting" the horizontal stab to account for the engine
> weight, is there?
>
> Curious in Canada
> Grant
> 601 HDS / CAM100 (heavy but worth it)
>
>
>
Message 26
| 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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
OK, OK, help me get off the Zenith list and onto the 701 list!
The problem I'm having is I click on the list I'm interested in,I get the
verification e-mail where I'm supposed to click on the link. Problem is it is
not bold? or blue? like other links I've seen. I click on it anyway, and
nothing happens. Yes,"disable links" is "off"
Phil
In a message dated 11/13/2008 7:12:49 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
hills@sunflower.com writes:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Roger & Lina Hill" <hills@sunflower.com>
Actually, it was a new prop, it broke off after 2 hours of operation,
A manufactures defect caused it to flutter (for a while) then fatigue and
break
Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Juan Vega
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 8:13 AM
Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
--> Zenith-List message posted by: Juan Vega <amyvega2005@earthlink.net>
next time balance the prop, people tend to forget that little part.
-----Original Message-----
>From: Roger & Lina Hill <hills@sunflower.com>
>Sent: Nov 12, 2008 7:10 PM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>
>My 601HDS propeller fluttered too !!!!
>
>Then it broke off.
>
>
>
>
>
>Roger
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
>From: owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-zenith-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of J.T. Machin
>Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:49 AM
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>
>
>
>
>Sabrina,
>
>I have to agree with Wade. Every aircraft's control system is different
and
>and the fact that the ailerons have a balance cable really does not impact
>its flutter characteristics because flutter is not really a control surface
>deflection that originates from the stick. The deflection comes from a
>flexing of the system that then stores the spring energy. This flexing and
>storing of energy and then releasing that energy as the surface unflexes is
>a primary driver in the creation of the flutter effect. That is why
stiffer
>is better when it comes to control systems.
>
>That being said, a flutter situation can occur in any of the control
>surfaces. As the XL has had several reported instances of aileron flutter,
>it seems to be the most prevalent flutter mode. I have not heard of any
>report instances of elevator flutter. Also, any additional weight at the
>trailing edge of a control surface will absolutely reduce the flutter
speed.
>I'm not saying that the XL with aileron trim is unsafe, but it does have
>less flutter margin than one without the trim system.
>
>I decided to go with a bungee type trim if required for the the ailerons.
>
>Jim Machin
>601XL, 0-200
>Almost done!
>
>--- On Wed, 11/12/08, Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com> wrote:
>
>From: Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>
>Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
>To: zenith-list@matronics.com
>Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 8:24 AM
>
>--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Sabrina"
>
>
><chicago2paris@msn.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>"I did use elevator trim."
>
>
>
>
>
>Wade,
>
>
>
>
>
>Personally, the elevator trim weight bothered me more than
> the aileron trim.
>
>
>The ailerons, by their nature of one being up and one down, should, if
>properly
>
>
>tensioned, be easier to dampen in flight than a fluttering elevator. So
>too, a
>
>
>builder can easily adjust an XL's horizontal stabilizer for proper cruise
>
>
>configuration since it sits so high off the longerons. The aileron trim
>was a
>
>
>much easier call for me than the elevator trim. If no aileron trim under
>Par.
>
>
>4-36, why elevator trim?
>
>
>
>
>
>As to Par 4-36(c) was it the Cardinal that used foam in the elevator trim
>tab
>
>
>that took on water/ice and threw it off balance?
>
>
>
>
>
>Has anyone had to drill a weep hole in their elevator trim tab to make sure
>ice
>
>
>does not build up? I ended up gust-locking my elevator in the up position
>
>
>rather than down to keep the ice out.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Read this topic online
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
**************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news &
p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001)
Message 27
| 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: Cable Tensions for 601XL? |
Noo to worry, in the 1950 we were going to put it in aircrafts.
-----Original Message-----
From: Sabrina <chicago2paris@msn.com>
Sent: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 10:56 pm
Subject: Zenith-List: Re: Cable Tensions for 601XL?
One word: WOW... do you guys know that General Atomic came this >< close to
producing atomic propulsed space craft in the 1960s.
Paul... sorry about the no-brainer comment. I actually mis-drilled the first
aluminum part I touched. When I put the cylinders on my engine, I actually left
a sealing ring off. It is such a terrible feeling to put your engine together
and have extra parts afterwords.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=213883#213883
Message 28
| 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: | Heavy engine and Horiz. stab |
A heavy engine does not require more down force on the elevator if the plan
e is balanced correctly.. A properly balanced standard configuration airpl
ane needs a center of mass ahead of the center of lift=2C which would produ
ce a nose down pitching force if there were no force applied from the horiz
ontal stabilizer and elevator. The Horizontal empennage surfaces provide a
downward force in order to keep rotational forces in balance. When that f
orce is diminished the nose pitches downward=2C which is what happens to a
stable airplane in a stall. The center of mass should always be in a range
relataive to the datum which keeps the Center of Mass in front of the cent
er of lift by a small margin. Too great a margin will mean that the plane w
ill be difficult to fly and may not even rotate for takeoff. Further=2C th
e stall speed is raised as the Center of Mass moves forward=2C because the
lifting surface must offset the downward force at the tail.
You need to build your airplane so the Center of Mass is within the designe
r's specs. You can do that by moving the engine closer to the firewall=2C
if possible=2C or by putting wieghts in the rear of the aircraft. It is be
tter that the weight come from equipment=2C but the weight could also come
from mere ballast. If you move your engine back=2C you may need to add som
e kind of spacer for the propeller for better handling and performance.
In my opinion it would be dangerous for a non-expert simply to make the tai
l surfaces larger=2C or to pitch them at a steeper downward angle=2C to off
set the weight of an engine. If you intend to do something like that pleas
e consult with Zenith first=2C for your own safety.> Date: Thu=2C 13 Nov 20
08 09:54:09 -0800> To: zenith-list@matronics.com> From: psm@att.net> Subjec
t: Re: Zenith-List: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab> > --> Zenith-List message
posted by: Paul Mulwitz <psm@att.net>> > Hi Grant=2C> > What a great quest
ion!> > After scratching my head for a while and reading a half dozen or so
> responses=2C I have to come down on the side that a heavy engine does >
indeed require more down force from the elevator rigging.> > The reason is
only partly because of the heavy engine. You are > correct that the balance
issue is resolved by repositioning the > battery and other equipment. Stil
l=2C a heavier engine means a heavier > empty weight. If you hold the rest
of the plane to the same weight > (a crazy idea=2C but I don't know how to
handle any other > assumption) then the lift must be more to fly level and
the elevator > must cause a higher angle of attack to get this.> > Paul> XL
getting close> > At 07:17 AM 11/13/2008=2C you wrote:> > >I'm confused by
the comments regarding the engine mass and the> >horizontal stab installed
angle.> >> >Isn't the engine mass counter-balanced during the construction
by> >final placement of the battery(s) to maintain the Weight & Balance> >i
nside the acceptable envelope? Once this is accomplished there is> >no need
to consider "adjusting" the horizontal stab to account for> >the engine we
ight=2C is there?> >> >Curious in Canada> >Grant> >601 HDS / CAM100 (heavy
=====================> > >
_________________________________________________________________
See how Windows=AE connects the people=2C information=2C and fun that are p
art of your life
Message 29
| 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: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab |
Flying wings normally have a reflexed airfoil to counteract the rotating
moment of the airfoil. One of the flying surfaces of an airplane such as the
flying flea provides this.
Balance is a different issue altogether. Moving the angle of the stab to
counterbalance an out of balance airplane is not possible. The airframe has
to be balanced statically about the CG, by balancing the mass of the
airframe, this is typically at 30% chord on a parallel chord such as the CH701.
If
the wings have taper then the CG is typically at the Mean Aerodynamic Chord
point. This is how the CG of a flying wing would be calculated.
John Read
Phone: 303-648-3261
Fax: 303-648-3262
Cell: 719-494-4567
In a message dated 11/13/2008 9:20:48 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,
notsew_evets@frontiernet.net writes:
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "steve" <notsew_evets@frontiernet.net>
But, But, but what about flying wings ? These dont have a horizontal
stablizer....
My son has a EZE that doest have a H.S. It has two flying surfaces. So
does the flying flea from the 1930s....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dirk Zahtilla" <ideaz1@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: Zenith-List: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab
>
> Yup, you are on the right track here. the horiz stab is used to change
> pitch angle. If you are nose heavy it must be counteracted by down force
> on the horiz stab/ elevator, efectively doubling the weight that is off
> balance. In a perfect world there would be 0lbs. of downforce in straight
> and level flight. Our job is to come as close as we can by balancing the
> weight before flight.
> Dirk
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Grant Corriveau" <grant.corriveau@TELUS.NET>
> To: <zenith-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 7:17 AM
> Subject: Zenith-List: Heavy engine and Horiz. stab
>
>
>> <grant.corriveau@telus.net>
>>
>> I'm confused by the comments regarding the engine mass and the
>> horizontal stab installed angle.
>>
>> Isn't the engine mass counter-balanced during the construction by final
>> placement of the battery(s) to maintain the Weight & Balance inside the
>> acceptable envelope? Once this is accomplished there is no need to
>> consider "adjusting" the horizontal stab to account for the engine
>> weight, is there?
>>
>> Curious in Canada
>> Grant
>> 601 HDS / CAM100 (heavy but worth it)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
**************Get movies delivered to your mailbox. One month free from
blockbuster.com
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! --
|