wing loading
01-30-2002, 06:13 PM
#2
Senior Member
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Huntersville,
NC
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wing loading
Not exactly sure what your asking for but...
Wing loading = weight in ounces (oz) / wing area (sq ft)
Thrust Required = 75% of total aircraft weight min. (this is just a rule of thumb I go by when powering an airplane)
Wing loading = weight in ounces (oz) / wing area (sq ft)
Thrust Required = 75% of total aircraft weight min. (this is just a rule of thumb I go by when powering an airplane)
01-30-2002, 07:21 PM
#3
Senior Member
wing loading
Wing loading is not a good indicator or how well an airplane will fly. A large plane like most 1/4 scale types will be floaters when they have a 28 to 32 oz./sq.ft loading while a 1/2 A will be a lead sled with a 14oz./sq.ft. loading. A much better measure is wing volume loading. rod
01-30-2002, 11:23 PM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Punta Gorda, FL
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engine Size
Engine size is determined by the gross weight of the plane and the type of performance you want. Wing loading will determine how slowly you can land and how nimbly the plane will maneuver.
Some typical power loadings given by Andy Lennon in "R/C Model Airplane Design" are:
2-stroke Engine Displacement , Power Loading (oz./cu. in.)
.15, 253
.30, 213
.60, 217
1.20, 215
In other words, the more the plane weighs, the bigger the engine you need.
For unlimited vertical performance smaller power loading is needed. For a powered glider, greater power loading is practical.
Some typical power loadings given by Andy Lennon in "R/C Model Airplane Design" are:
2-stroke Engine Displacement , Power Loading (oz./cu. in.)
.15, 253
.30, 213
.60, 217
1.20, 215
In other words, the more the plane weighs, the bigger the engine you need.
For unlimited vertical performance smaller power loading is needed. For a powered glider, greater power loading is practical.
01-31-2002, 06:36 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Anchorage,
AK
Posts: 2,565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wing loading and other design factors
One of the best ways to do this research (besides reading some good books) is to collect information from successful designs.
Years ago, I wrote a computer program for design, which began by doing this:
Using either paper or a computer spreadsheet, collect all the information you can on designs that you like, that were also good flyers. You might start with those models for which you have actual plans. Later, you can separate them into categories by weight, performance type, engine size, etc. This will account for factors such as wing loading differences. (A .20 size plane will have a lower wing loading than a huge scale model, obviously, but both can fly quite well.)
When you've collected a LOT of design information, such as length, span of both wings and tail surfaces, fin area, engine and tank size, prop size, overall weight, etc., you can average them to come up with some numbers that will get you quite close to a "criteria". Be careful in your averaging that you don't let a "radical" design throw your numbers out of whack.
There's a wealth of information available to us today, especially at places like this forum, and the many web sites that modelers are producing. I learn a lot here!
Years ago, I wrote a computer program for design, which began by doing this:
Using either paper or a computer spreadsheet, collect all the information you can on designs that you like, that were also good flyers. You might start with those models for which you have actual plans. Later, you can separate them into categories by weight, performance type, engine size, etc. This will account for factors such as wing loading differences. (A .20 size plane will have a lower wing loading than a huge scale model, obviously, but both can fly quite well.)
When you've collected a LOT of design information, such as length, span of both wings and tail surfaces, fin area, engine and tank size, prop size, overall weight, etc., you can average them to come up with some numbers that will get you quite close to a "criteria". Be careful in your averaging that you don't let a "radical" design throw your numbers out of whack.
There's a wealth of information available to us today, especially at places like this forum, and the many web sites that modelers are producing. I learn a lot here!
