RCU Forums - View Single Post - CG calculation by weight
View Single Post
Old 04-14-2015, 06:48 PM
  #29  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Happy Valley, Oregon
Posts: 9,515
Received 176 Likes on 151 Posts
Default

Charles thanks for the complement and taking the time for the explanation. I did know that you are able to figure out exactly where you want to place your CG and easily make the adjustment. This is of course dependent that you know where it should be. Lets continue to use my Extra as an example. By making some quick measurements I was able to figure out that the wing tube is at 33% MAC. Initially I set my CG at the forward edge of the wing tube. After a few initial test flights it was apparent that I needed to move the CG forward. What I observed was that with the application of rudder to either direction the airplane wanted to tuck towards the gear. This would happen in horizontal, vertical and knife edge flight. As this airplane is intended to be flown in IMAC contests this trim situation needed to be corrected. What was happening is that down trim was being used to compensate for the rearward CG. For whatever reason when rudder is applied it makes that down trim more effective. The solution is to move the CG forward. Question is how much? there are a few things that will influence this. Cowl shape, how much % area is the stab in relation to the wing. Stab height, fuselage shape all are contributors. At that point one must resort to trial and error. In my case I moved the dual 5000 mah RX batteries forward 8" and got very good results but moving them an additional 2" got me spot on. Now the tuck is all but gone and a TX mix removes it completely. I could have gone farther forward with the CG and removed it 100% that way but then other flight attitudes would have suffered. Trimming is always a balance, take or add here and it affects something else. Larry commented on his 182 having a rough landing. It would be a nice experiment to know where his CG placement is. I have found in almost all cases a nose heavy airplane is more difficult to land then one with the CG placed closer to a neutral point. In Larry's case if the airplane is landing a bit fast and requires a fair amount of elevator on final and flair then he sould experiment with moving the CG back a small amount at a time.