CG with tank FULL or EMPTY
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: s. windsor,
CT
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CG with tank FULL or EMPTY
I just completed an Andrews MiniMaster .25 powered sport flier. Great kit... fun to build!!
The suggested CG location is shown on the plans, but it doesn't say if that is for fuel tank full or empty.
With a 4 oz. tank, that can be almost 1/2" difference (3 1/3# all-up weight), or 5% chord!!I
I guess for the initial T/O, it would be best to use the more forward CG location (balanced with empty tank).
Balanced with a full tank might result in a stability problem with the fuel burned off.....
I just don't know what Lou Andrews assumed with his CG location.
Anybody have any ideas? .... similar experience??
The suggested CG location is shown on the plans, but it doesn't say if that is for fuel tank full or empty.
With a 4 oz. tank, that can be almost 1/2" difference (3 1/3# all-up weight), or 5% chord!!I
I guess for the initial T/O, it would be best to use the more forward CG location (balanced with empty tank).
Balanced with a full tank might result in a stability problem with the fuel burned off.....
I just don't know what Lou Andrews assumed with his CG location.
Anybody have any ideas? .... similar experience??
#3
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Calgary,
AB, CANADA
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I set the Centre of the tank on the cg, this way the plane flies with the proper cg through all tank levels. I use a Bladder tank so the the blader does not allow fuel to slosh about or foam up.
#5
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Calgary,
AB, CANADA
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are unable to set up with the tank on the cg, move it as close to CG as reasonable and measure cg with tank empty as Marzy69 suggested nose heavy is more predictable than tail heavy.
wkevinm
wkevinm
#7
On the very rare occasions when the fuel tank is at the rear of the model, you go for the worst case (aft-most CG). You would balance with a rear mounted tank full, UNLESS (as in the case of the Northstar) the plan gives a CG for an empty tank, in which case an allowance has been made for the CG shift when it is filled.
#8
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: ToowoombaQLD, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
15 Posts
You may never have a problem with drawing fuel that far with an unpumped .25 depeding on how you intend to fly, but if you do have tuning issues be prepared to move the tank as close to the firewall as possible as a possible fix...
#9
For proper pitch and yaw stability, the aerodynamic center of the airplane must be aft the point in which the weight is concentrated (just like in any arrow).
As the fuel is consumed and the nose gets lighter, the center of mass or weight relocates closer to the aerodynamic center, but it will not reach it if you follow the designer recommendations.
#11
Senior Member
You balance for landing. This implies that the tank will be empty in most cases.
The real exception is an electric powered model, since the balance does not change. (Unless the battery or something else
is moving around.) Obviously, it's better to be slightly nose heavy than tail heavy.
I've flown in full size A/C that required fuel management by using tanks in an order that prevented tail heavy or excessive nose heavy
conditions. Even some light A/C require that you periodically switch tanks to maintain reasonable balance, usually side to side.
There is a "sanity check" that says that the balance point should be about 25% of the cord with straight wings.
The real exception is an electric powered model, since the balance does not change. (Unless the battery or something else
is moving around.) Obviously, it's better to be slightly nose heavy than tail heavy.
I've flown in full size A/C that required fuel management by using tanks in an order that prevented tail heavy or excessive nose heavy
conditions. Even some light A/C require that you periodically switch tanks to maintain reasonable balance, usually side to side.
There is a "sanity check" that says that the balance point should be about 25% of the cord with straight wings.
Last edited by chuckk2; 03-02-2014 at 05:18 AM.
#12
I just completed an Andrews MiniMaster .25 powered sport flier. Great kit... fun to build!!
The suggested CG location is shown on the plans, but it doesn't say if that is for fuel tank full or empty.
With a 4 oz. tank, that can be almost 1/2" difference (3 1/3# all-up weight), or 5% chord!!I
I guess for the initial T/O, it would be best to use the more forward CG location (balanced with empty tank).
Balanced with a full tank might result in a stability problem with the fuel burned off.....
I just don't know what Lou Andrews assumed with his CG location.
Anybody have any ideas? .... similar experience??
The suggested CG location is shown on the plans, but it doesn't say if that is for fuel tank full or empty.
With a 4 oz. tank, that can be almost 1/2" difference (3 1/3# all-up weight), or 5% chord!!I
I guess for the initial T/O, it would be best to use the more forward CG location (balanced with empty tank).
Balanced with a full tank might result in a stability problem with the fuel burned off.....
I just don't know what Lou Andrews assumed with his CG location.
Anybody have any ideas? .... similar experience??
I assume you are a solo-qualified RC flier. In that vein I strongly suggest two items for your model.
1. Balance your model at 25% (+/- 2%) of the CG using the Mean Aerodynamic Chord with dry tanks. Once you are well sure of the model, then adjust to whatever you wish to do with the model.
2. Do one of two things: Trim those ailerons to ZERO at the wing tip from 2-3" from their tip. Best yet is to cut the ailerons at 2-3" and reglue the short tips UP about 3-5 degrees. Makes for one "L" of a better TO and Landing on initial TO and short-final.
#14
C.G. will be slowly moving back as the fuel is burned off. IMO you need to stick with your quad-copters.
#15
Sounds like he does'nt know where the proper c.g. is? I was just getting him in the Ball Park? I suppose you know where the chord line is on a Plane you've never seen?That matters too? I don't do Quad copters They work on Thrust alone!They use c.g. about as much as a Frisbe
Last edited by charlie111; 07-06-2014 at 07:23 PM. Reason: spelling
#16
Sounds like he does'nt know where the proper c.g. is? I was just getting him in the Ball Park? I suppose you know where the chord line is on a Plane you've never seen?That matters too? I don't do Quad copters They work on Thrust alone!They use c.g. about as much as a Frisbe
Now if you don't do quad-copters, well SIR, you are my kind of man. Thanks for the reply.
#17
I just completed an Andrews MiniMaster .25 powered sport flier. Great kit... fun to build!!
The suggested CG location is shown on the plans, but it doesn't say if that is for fuel tank full or empty.
With a 4 oz. tank, that can be almost 1/2" difference (3 1/3# all-up weight), or 5% chord!!I
I guess for the initial T/O, it would be best to use the more forward CG location (balanced with empty tank).
Balanced with a full tank might result in a stability problem with the fuel burned off.....
I just don't know what Lou Andrews assumed with his CG location.
Anybody have any ideas? .... similar experience??
The suggested CG location is shown on the plans, but it doesn't say if that is for fuel tank full or empty.
With a 4 oz. tank, that can be almost 1/2" difference (3 1/3# all-up weight), or 5% chord!!I
I guess for the initial T/O, it would be best to use the more forward CG location (balanced with empty tank).
Balanced with a full tank might result in a stability problem with the fuel burned off.....
I just don't know what Lou Andrews assumed with his CG location.
Anybody have any ideas? .... similar experience??
Bob
Last edited by sensei; 07-07-2014 at 02:53 AM.
#18
I am 61 and have been Building Models since I was a child! In most cases the Tank is slightly forward.Making it slightly Nose Heavy with a Full Tank.Balancing out as it burns off Fuel.The c.g. is going to move around a Bit in Climbing or Nose down situations.I have never noticed any differance in Control with these Minor changes.If it made a Differance in controlling the Plane.They would probably have put baffles in the Tanks?I'm not saying it's not Important (it is)But it will change slightly when Fuel Moves around.Good Luck getting through your next Tank Full!!
#19
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chilliwack, BC, CANADA
Posts: 12,425
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes
on
19 Posts
Dksnyder, as some have said you ALWAYS set the balance with an empty tank. You simply live with a slightly more nose heavy trim when it's full.
As you gain more flights on the model you can consider moving the CG back in small increments and test flying to see where you hit the spot you like.
As for the first flight CG position Lew Andrews, who designed and kitted this model, was a long time flyer and excellent designer. He's got a fleet of great flying models to his credit that made it as kits and made many of us happy. So if he says "put it here" then you do what it says.
I know the rest of you are trying to be helpful but when the plan shows a CG location it's pure folly to second guess this and try something else. Any designer of a model like this is going to show a range of CG locations or a single spot which produces a safe first flight.
Last edited by BMatthews; 07-07-2014 at 06:28 PM.
#20
My Feedback: (2)
When it comes to CG, I think this point is key - " Any designer of a model like this is going to show a range of CG locations or a single spot which produces a safe first flight."
I think many people forget that the directions are talking about "first flight" and believe they are locked in to this location for the life of the plane - or else!
I think many people forget that the directions are talking about "first flight" and believe they are locked in to this location for the life of the plane - or else!
#21
"SNIP" "SNIP"
I know the rest of you are trying to be helpful but when the plan shows a CG location it's pure folly to second guess this and try something else. Any designer of a model like this is going to show a range of CG locations or a single spot which produces a safe first flight.
I know the rest of you are trying to be helpful but when the plan shows a CG location it's pure folly to second guess this and try something else. Any designer of a model like this is going to show a range of CG locations or a single spot which produces a safe first flight.
Some years ago I acquired a 100" wing-span Eindecker kit. (SP ?) The plans showed a CG point at 33%+ for the "balance point". I knew that was wrong so I set it up to use just aft of 30% thinking that maybe I was "...loosing it!" Well on the first test flight I was doing 3-D and I can't even spell 3-D! I kept it going for a bit then shut down and went back to workshop. At 30% of MAC it flew much better but still a handful. Then up to 28% and even better, so I finally did the standard 25%. For some years now the Eindecker makes several big bird meets a year. Very easy to bore holes in the sky and Take-Offs and Landings are very easy with some rudder help along with the ailerons being about 1/4" raised. My documents are for a rebuild that had real ailerons which I liked.
I have taken rubber power kits and plans in the 50" +/- w/s size and made very nice RC models using 25-35 engines. Use the designer in your heads guys. Lots of good modeling there if you will use it.
#22
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chilliwack, BC, CANADA
Posts: 12,425
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes
on
19 Posts
Yep, the idea of moving the CG to suit the flyer is a good one. Some like a little more positive pitch stability and others find they like a more minimal amount. Shifting the CG and doing the associated elevator re-trim is a great way to set the amount of pitch stability to suit the taste of the pilot. So I'm going to go along with ahicks on this.
Hossfly, the Eindecker in scale version has such a small horizontal tail that even with the long tail length I'm shocked that the company would suggest that far back a CG location. I guess that not all of them get things right. If I were to run the measurements for a proper small scale size tail through some of the CG calculators I'd fully expect them to come back to me with a CG location at something like 23 to 25%.
But for some other designs with a large horizontal tail on a good length fuselage a 33% position isn't out of the question at all. It's just a shame that they messed up that Eindecker plan with the wrong position.
Still, you and the model survived..... How was it to fly once you got things dialed in? And just how faithfully scale is it?
Hossfly, the Eindecker in scale version has such a small horizontal tail that even with the long tail length I'm shocked that the company would suggest that far back a CG location. I guess that not all of them get things right. If I were to run the measurements for a proper small scale size tail through some of the CG calculators I'd fully expect them to come back to me with a CG location at something like 23 to 25%.
But for some other designs with a large horizontal tail on a good length fuselage a 33% position isn't out of the question at all. It's just a shame that they messed up that Eindecker plan with the wrong position.
Still, you and the model survived..... How was it to fly once you got things dialed in? And just how faithfully scale is it?
#23
dksnyder... That is great looking plane with long moments so I think it will be quite forgiving on where you park the CG. I fly my Carl Goldberg Tiger 2 with the CG at 38%, tank empty. If I use up the tank, I get some slight porpoising on final if I let it get too slow but otherwise it is still quite tame. I tend to avoid forward CG positions as it makes slowing the airplane down for landing a lot more difficult.
#24
My Feedback: (6)
the Eindecker in scale version has such a small horizontal tail that even with the long tail length I'm shocked that the company would suggest that far back a CG location. I guess that not all of them get things right. If I were to run the measurements for a proper small scale size tail through some of the CG calculators I'd fully expect them to come back to me with a CG location at something like 23 to 25%.
#25
My Feedback: (7)
Balance with empty tank. You will be nose heavy on the first takeoff because you have added the weight of the fuel forward of the CG. As you fly the first flight and burn off fuel there is no way the CG can shift aft into a tail heavy situation. If you balance with a full tank you will not be tail heavy on takeoff but as you fly around you will burn off fuel making the first landing in a tail heavy condition. Balancing with an empty tank means that you can never get into a tail heavy condition.