Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > RC Jets
Reload this Page >

balancing a full flying stab

Notices
RC Jets Discuss RC jets in this forum plus rc turbines and ducted fan power systems

balancing a full flying stab

Old 07-21-2009, 04:14 AM
  #1  
i3dm
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (51)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Reut,Israel
Posts: 4,346
Received 21 Likes on 18 Posts
Default balancing a full flying stab

Guys,

in continue to this problem:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=8870937

i consulted my friend and he adviced i need to check the balance (CG) of the full flying elevon stabs, and when hanged by the pivot point, the stab should be about level and even slightly nose down.

can you express your thoughts about this matter ?

thanks.
Old 07-21-2009, 04:40 AM
  #2  
HarryC
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: private, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes on 15 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

In balance is best. If not in balance then there is a constant load on the servo to hold it in position and the servo will be buzzing and drawing current. The weight of any imbalance is proportional to the G load so if the servo is having to hold against a weight of X ounces in level flight then it has to hold against a load of 6 times X ounces in a 6G turn/loop, so what may be a couple of ounces of pull to hold it in level flight becomes almost a pound of pull from the servo in a 6G loop, just to hold the weight imbalance. Also any imbalance can come as flutter when the plane is disturbed by gusts and turbulence which is why many full size have mass balances on control surfaces - if you shake the plane up and down a balanced surface stays level giving no flutter or load on the servo, if the surface is not balanced it will flap about causing a load on the servo and flutter if the frequency hits the right rate.
Old 07-21-2009, 04:41 AM
  #3  
DelGatoGrande
My Feedback: (23)
 
DelGatoGrande's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: ATHENS, , GREECE
Posts: 3,001
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes on 11 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

Goodmorning Lior! ...cant see you online in MSN..[8D]

i hope this posts will help you about stab balancing : http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_68...%2Cstab/tm.htm

stab balancing takes out the force from the waith of the sufrace to the servo..so only airpresure force is left for the servo to control .
also less mass to hold in center while moving and on hard landings no force stress servo gears and servo base
..


my 2 c
Old 07-21-2009, 05:15 AM
  #4  
madmodelman
 
madmodelman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Corby, Northants, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 2,232
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

Harry, surely in normal level flight at X mph aerodynamic forces would take any inbalace loads out of the equation. It's only when its static and low speeds that there is any load on the servo.
Old 07-21-2009, 05:42 AM
  #5  
HarryC
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: private, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes on 15 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

ORIGINAL: madmodelman

Harry, surely in normal level flight at X mph aerodynamic forces would take any inbalace loads out of the equation. It's only when its static and low speeds that there is any load on the servo.
The ideal location of the pivot is at the aerodynamic centre. That way, the stab generates no aerodynamic load even at full deflection. It has no tendency to be blown back to neutral by the airflow and therefore no aerodynamic force to help cancel the imbalanced weight. On the full size light plane I fly with all moving tail this causes a problem in that the elevator would have no feel, the stick could be moved to any location and it would stay there, it would have no neutral, it would not get progressively harder to pull more and more elevator, so the tail has an anti-servo tab on its trailing edge that deflects like an elevator to generate a progressive force in order to give some feel and a neutralising tendency. In a model we have powered controls with no direct link from stick to surface, the feel and the neutralising comes from the springs in the tx. Thus the ideal all moving stab is pivoted at its AC and mass balanced, that way it presents barely any load to the servo at any position, except for when you move the control the servo has to accelerate the mass.

If you put the pivot point behind the AC then the stab becomes unstable and will try to flip backwards, generating huge forces on the servo. If the pivot is ahead of the AC the stab will be stable and yes the airflow will try to centre it thus helping to counter any weight imbalance, but the aerodynamic force will increase with the amount of travel and with airspeed and requires a stronger and stronger servo and linkages to overcome it.

H

PS the above applies to a stab which has a symmetrical section. If it is non symmetrical then it will generate a rotating force around the AC. For example, the F-4 Phantom and Tornado are inverted sections which will generate a leading edge upwards rotation, the amount of torque being dependent upon airspeed so even if mass balanced they will create a force for the servo even at neutral which gets strogner as you go faster.
Old 07-21-2009, 06:17 AM
  #6  
madmodelman
 
madmodelman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Corby, Northants, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 2,232
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

Understood.
Old 07-21-2009, 07:48 AM
  #7  
RAPPTOR
My Feedback: (41)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: WEST PALM BEACH, FL
Posts: 1,773
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

this guy knows his stuff.. said it perfect!!!!!!!
Old 07-21-2009, 09:55 AM
  #8  
i3dm
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (51)
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Reut,Israel
Posts: 4,346
Received 21 Likes on 18 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

So how would you guys recommend balancing the stab ? shall i let it pivot freely on the shaft by using a bearing of some sort, and then add lead weight in the root of the stab in the leading or trailing edge until the CG is right on the pivot ? or is there some other way ?

Shall the CG be right on the pivot or slightly in front of it towards the leading edge ?
Old 07-21-2009, 10:01 AM
  #9  
HarryC
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: private, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes on 15 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

Add weight in the root. Balance it at the pivot, not in front.
Old 07-21-2009, 10:41 AM
  #10  
1Eye
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
 
1Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Mesquite, Nevada
Posts: 1,106
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab


ORIGINAL: HarryC

Add weight in the root. Balance it at the pivot, not in front.
I didn't see anybody mention the need to determine MAC (mean aerodynamic chord) yet. I've found the "sweet spot" for the pivot (and therefore balance) point is around 27% relative to the MAC.
Old 07-21-2009, 01:14 PM
  #11  
Bob.R
My Feedback: (2)
 
Bob.R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Canyon Lake, TX
Posts: 793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

1Eye, could you explain how you found that 27% is best? I've read that the neutral point (assuming a symmetric airfoil) is typically at 25% of MAC. I ask because I'm considering a flying stab for a future project. Thanks
Old 07-21-2009, 02:00 PM
  #12  
HarryC
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: private, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes on 15 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab


ORIGINAL: 1Eye


I didn't see anybody mention the need to determine MAC (mean aerodynamic chord) yet. I've found the ''sweet spot'' for the pivot (and therefore balance) point is around 27% relative to the MAC.
ORIGINAL: HarryC

The ideal location of the pivot is at the aerodynamic centre.
The aerodynamic centre is 25% of MAC, give or take a percent depending upon the section. Any point aft of that such as 27% is moving into instability.
Old 07-21-2009, 06:01 PM
  #13  
jetnuno
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Lisbon, PORTUGAL
Posts: 1,145
Received 15 Likes on 12 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

Hi

A while back I was sent an .xls file to find the center of the rotating axis of a flying stab (or canard). Still I am flying my F18 with unbalanced stabs and I have over 50 flights now. The buzz in the servos is big when the plane is in the ground and I was planning to find the rotating axis with that file.

Although, what is buzzing me is that the rotating axis is not the pressure center during flight and that is what kept me from balancing the stabs. In the end - I just don't know where to balance.

I want to balance in the pressure center and not in the c.g. of the stab. The PC, should be backwards of the rotating axis and the actual stab pivot of the F18 flying stab, is too much forward of both PC and rotating axis.

Imputs welcomed

[b]Rowing width 600 mm
Root rib [c] 500 mm
Outer rib [a] 300 mm
Edges rear differential [d] 100mm

Output data
t/4 plus 5% 322 mm
Spin axis of the root trailing edge rib [e] 276mm

Note: d is at angles> 90 ° is positive, at 90 ° is equal to 0, with <90 ° is negative, eg. -100


Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Li21040.jpg
Views:	54
Size:	15.1 KB
ID:	1241265  
Old 07-22-2009, 03:02 AM
  #14  
HarryC
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: private, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes on 15 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab


ORIGINAL: jetnuno
Still I am flying my F18 with unbalanced stabs and I have over 50 flights now.

I want to balance in the pressure center and not in the c.g. of the stab.

The PC, should be backwards of the rotating axis and the actual stab pivot of the F18 flying stab, is too much forward of both PC and rotating axis.
I have flown my F-86 with unbalanced stab for 400 flights and it is fine, but it would be better balanced! It would draw less current and put less stress and wear on the servo.

I think you mean the Aerodynamic Centre, the Centre of Pressure is a different thing, it is a combination of lift and pitching and it moves about a lot. The AC of a stab or a canard is the same as for a wing, roughly at 25% of the MAC. The exact point of the AC depends on the wing section being used, if you plot the AC position for a lot of sections you find the majority clustered close around 25%, a few out around 24 or 26% and a very few out near 23 and 27%. Thus for model flying purposes it works to use the approximation of 25%

A model may replicate the position of the pivot and balance of the full size but that may be totally unsuitable for a model! We have to remember that aircraft like the full size F-18 will be operating in the transonic and supersonic regions where airflows and centres of pressure change enormously compared to our strictly subsonic models. The full size will have some features designed to cope with the dramatic changes that we will not eno****er. It could well be optimised for cruising in the transonic region and therefore be utterly wrong shape for our subsonic flight. Also the full-size is designed by very clever professionals with super computers, ours are designed by amateurs using rule-of-thumb approximations, so the full-size can do things quite differently because they have calculated exactly what is happening while we are guessing. And finally the full size is destabilised and as a result is fly by wire, whereas although our model is the same shape our model is most definitely stable with amuch more forward CG and does not have the luxury of fly-by-wire.

So if we make a model of Spitfire which operates in the same subsonic region as us and has the same classic controls, we can make our model using the same rules. But when we model something that is supersonic and destabilised and fly-by-wire, but we still have to use the same Spitfire rules of subsonic, stable and classic control, we are going to see things that look bizarre to us and wonder if we should emulate the pivot point and balance of the full-size.

H
Old 07-22-2009, 03:35 AM
  #15  
olnico
 
olnico's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston, Texas.
Posts: 4,120
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes on 9 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

Hi Nuno,

Could you send me this excel sheet ?
I'd like to see if it gives good results.

I have balanced the F-18F stab at 25% MAC. However I have determined the MAC empirically.
I'd be interested be look at the formula.

Thank you.

P.S: The balancing I have done is working perfectly on the F-18F BTW.
Old 07-22-2009, 07:50 AM
  #16  
Gary Jefferson
My Feedback: (167)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Lebanon OH
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

I don't know about all of the math that goes into calculating the balance point but I can tell you from my building and flying experience with planes that incorporate full flying stabs (which include a Tamjets F-18, two 1/8 f-16's, an F-100, and a Scorpion) that most manufacturers do not recommend fully balancing the stabs. Let them slightly fall down at the front of the stab when they are sitting in the fuselage and you will not have any issues. All of mine have been balanced in this manner and all work well. All of mine have the lead added at the leading edge of the stab at the root.

Gary
Old 07-22-2009, 01:13 PM
  #17  
1Eye
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
 
1Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Mesquite, Nevada
Posts: 1,106
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab


ORIGINAL: Bob R2

1Eye, could you explain how you found that 27% is best? I've read that the neutral point (assuming a symmetric airfoil) is typically at 25% of MAC. I ask because I'm considering a flying stab for a future project. Thanks
I went back and double-checked my last example (an old Top Gun F-15 with tailerons only) and reverified: the stabs (tailerons) were pivoted/balanced at 25% MAC. I'm sorry about the error in my original post; hopefully HarryC will forgive me. [X(] Good luck with your project.
Old 07-22-2009, 01:50 PM
  #18  
AndyAndrews
 
AndyAndrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 6,147
Received 8 Likes on 6 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab


ORIGINAL: HarryC


ORIGINAL: jetnuno
Still I am flying my F18 with unbalanced stabs and I have over 50 flights now.

I want to balance in the pressure center and not in the c.g. of the stab.

The PC, should be backwards of the rotating axis and the actual stab pivot of the F18 flying stab, is too much forward of both PC and rotating axis.
I have flown my F-86 with unbalanced stab for 400 flights and it is fine, but it would be better balanced! It would draw less current and put less stress and wear on the servo.

I think you mean the Aerodynamic Centre, the Centre of Pressure is a different thing, it is a combination of lift and pitching and it moves about a lot. The AC of a stab or a canard is the same as for a wing, roughly at 25% of the MAC. The exact point of the AC depends on the wing section being used, if you plot the AC position for a lot of sections you find the majority clustered close around 25%, a few out around 24 or 26% and a very few out near 23 and 27%. Thus for model flying purposes it works to use the approximation of 25%

A model may replicate the position of the pivot and balance of the full size but that may be totally unsuitable for a model! We have to remember that aircraft like the full size F-18 will be operating in the transonic and supersonic regions where airflows and centres of pressure change enormously compared to our strictly subsonic models. The full size will have some features designed to cope with the dramatic changes that we will not eno****er. It could well be optimised for cruising in the transonic region and therefore be utterly wrong shape for our subsonic flight. Also the full-size is designed by very clever professionals with super computers, ours are designed by amateurs using rule-of-thumb approximations, so the full-size can do things quite differently because they have calculated exactly what is happening while we are guessing. And finally the full size is destabilised and as a result is fly by wire, whereas although our model is the same shape our model is most definitely stable with amuch more forward CG and does not have the luxury of fly-by-wire.

So if we make a model of Spitfire which operates in the same subsonic region as us and has the same classic controls, we can make our model using the same rules. But when we model something that is supersonic and destabilised and fly-by-wire, but we still have to use the same Spitfire rules of subsonic, stable and classic control, we are going to see things that look bizarre to us and wonder if we should emulate the pivot point and balance of the full-size.

H
400 flights why bother? Why add extra weight to your jet if it doesn't really make any noticable difference, especially if the factories don't even recommend it in most cases?
Old 07-22-2009, 03:43 PM
  #19  
Bob.R
My Feedback: (2)
 
Bob.R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Canyon Lake, TX
Posts: 793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

1Eye, thanks for checking. I'm sure HarryC will forgive.
Old 07-22-2009, 04:57 PM
  #20  
Captainbob
My Feedback: (4)
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

Guys!

I've been flying a BVM F-100 for Years (same one) no balance on the stab what so ever. It has never been an issue.
Old 07-22-2009, 05:14 PM
  #21  
HarryC
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: private, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes on 15 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

ORIGINAL: AndyAndrews
400 flights why bother? Why add extra weight to your jet if it doesn't really make any noticable difference, especially if the factories don't even recommend it in most cases?
Because the servo is always buzzing against the weight, which means that it is drawing unnecessary current, and must be buzzing back and forth a tiny amount on the pot which will add to its wear on one spot. As it happens that model would benefit from a slight rearward shift in the balance so a spot of weight at the tail would be good. otoh there is the question of just how much weight has to be put into the stab to balance it, because the servo has to accelerate that mass. With a highly swept stab it could be a lot of weight. The large increase in inertia when trying to move the stab rapidly might neutralise or even outweigh any advantage from balancing it. It's one of those aspects that full-size do lots of calculations on to determine the best compromise, we just judge each for ourselves which system we feel most comfy with!

There's a huge difference between a factory not making any recommendation, and making a recommendation not to. I suspect most brands are simply not mentioning it? My AD F-100 instructions do mention it, it says to drill into the l/e of the stabs and put in lead to balance them both.

H.
Old 07-22-2009, 06:02 PM
  #22  
Gary Jefferson
My Feedback: (167)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Lebanon OH
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

My AD F-100 instructions do mention it, it says to drill into the l/e of the stabs and put in lead to balance them both.
Harry, that is what the instructions say but they are incorrectly written. I had someone check with the factory when I built mine and what they actually recommended to us is that you balance them to neutral and then remove 25% of the weight that it takes to fully balance the stabs to neutral.

This is the same process that was recommended by BVM in the manual they produced for Tam's F-18 when they were selling that model. BVM specifically recommended that the stabs should not be fully balanced on the F-18. I don't think Tam ever balances any of his flying stabs when he builds planes.

I don't know the reasoning behind not fully balancing the stabs in models but this is why I have always let mine fall forward a little. I figured they know something I don't I guess...




Old 07-23-2009, 02:06 AM
  #23  
HarryC
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: private, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 0
Received 25 Likes on 15 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab


ORIGINAL: Gary Jefferson

they actually recommended to us is that you balance them to neutral and then remove 25% of the weight

this is why I have always let mine fall forward a little.
If you remove weight from the l/e won't it fall backwards?

H
Old 07-23-2009, 02:30 AM
  #24  
BaldEagel
 
BaldEagel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kent, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 9,669
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

C-ARF say nothing about ballancing the all flying stabs on the Rookie or the Eurofighter, they are very light though and don't cause any buzz on the servo's in neutral, in flight the aerodynamic loading would diminish the stab loading when trimmed correctly with the C of G set at the optimum point, this all changes if you have the C of G a long way back for 3D flight when you would be carrying some down trim on the stab wich increase's the loading accordingly in straight and level flight, but how long does a airframe designed for 3D fly straight and level? LOL

Mike
Old 07-23-2009, 03:28 AM
  #25  
DelGatoGrande
My Feedback: (23)
 
DelGatoGrande's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: ATHENS, , GREECE
Posts: 3,001
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes on 11 Posts
Default RE: balancing a full flying stab

..i was thinking if the elevon servo could be placed in the l.e. !??????

..this way we dont end up tail heavy each time by the extra waith we add to balance the stab...[&o]

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.