Has anyone experimented with tying the canard into the elivons (Left/Right canard independent)
Roll & pitch?
Goal of increasing roll rate

I have seen a few canard mixing threads but none for independent mixing

I haven't seen it done with a canard... but I've seen independent elevators to increase roll.

If your canard is really light, it might work. If it is heavy, the canard surface will already be highly loaded, just supporting the front end of the airplane. You could stall out one side real easy and be in trouble.

I think that he intends to use elevons for the primary pitch control, with the canard being used to augment the primary controls, so I don't think he intends to have much of the load on the canard to start with.
All in all an interesting approach given the design I think he is working on!

It'll only help if the canards are greater than 1/2 the wing span.

A while back a guy with a very low aspect ratio biplane foamie tried to avoid the need for ailerons by using the elevator surfaces on his very large stabilizer that was about 1/2 span. The model was controllable but totally lacked the sort of aerobatic response he was after. He said something about it barely being trainer like and called it a dismal failure.

They do this on modern jet fighters where the stabilators are mounted well out from the center line but in most cases it's in addition to regular ailerons so I suspect it's as much for drag reduction as anything else.

No matter what the weight of the airplane, the load on either an aft located stab/elevator or a forward located canard will be a function of the CG location versus the center of lift of the wing. The demands on them may be greater for pitch changes, but the load isn't going to automatically be greater.

My thoughts concerning the independently controlled canard are basically this.

Explore the use of independent control of canard as follows:

Fly fixed baseline canard & observe roll rates (main wing control only)
Configure the same aircraft with independently controlled canards & observe effect

It should be a fun experiment in control

On a side note:
The FSW pitch oscillations were basically due to lack of control surface, with the addition of control area, the plane settled down nicely.

Bmattews, I think you nailed it well… I am speculating that the effect of having independently controlled canards will be minimal due to the lack of moment arm of the control surface (rotating axis).. at best... I feel it will be fun to explore the concept.

If I can take away a visual improvement in rate I think the experiment will be a success

The problem is that a typical canard will have a cg that puts a big lifting load on the front surface, in order to be stabile in flight without computer control, while the typical aft stab does not have this kind of issue at all. So the the canard surface, for stability, must be running at a considerably greater wing loading than the main wing.
This doesn't allow much reserve for other functions, like roll control

Allenflowers…
Please keep in mind that the aircraft under test had severe lack/poor control authority.
I scratched my head on that issue for some time.
I speculated the wing tips were bending, inducing pitch oscillations (installed a robust spar.. Did nothing)
I speculated the canard was stalling (increased the cord thickness, minimal at best improvement)
When I added the elevator to the main wing I honestly did not know what the outcome was going to be.
I did speculate the control would improve but would it be to much… my control surface area guess was right on.
It was amazing the control that was achieved after this change (excellent control authority)
Knowing this, one can draw the conclusion that the aircraft that we flew with a canard can only give you so much pitch authority (poor at best by itself).
The big boys it may make a difference, I do not honestly know, but the aircraft I/we tested it only makes a small impression on performance
I can tell you what it does well... & it is truly amazing to watch (control line). To cool….
From Level flight:
Command max pitch up
Aircraft pitches up/stops (HARD) hovers (never stalls hangs on the prop) The aircraft walks at a HIGH AOA
This thing can stop FWD flight in just a few feet
Command pitch over & the aircraft levels off nicely (I have never seen an aircraft recover from what looks to be stalled flight like this thing). IT IS TRUELY AMAZING…
Oh… It is very audible the prop is operating in very disturbed air when you do this maneuver.

Enjoy

Interesting....
So are you going to try the rc version?

Not yet...
We are working on the vectored thrust mount & expect to bench check it this week.
The vector thrust mount that is to be tested is truely amazing.
We will test the mount @ 3-5 degrees deflection then move up, so max pitch gives about 5 deg motor vector
If things go well... aircraft #2 will have vector thrust/canard/elelator/no spar


Aircraft #1 is a pig & will meet the dumpster soon but we still want to get some max canard throw data points.

It was my understanding that the design had to insure the canard would stall sooner, not that it had to carry a large percentage of the load.

Yes that is true using a canard as the sole pitch control, but he is throwing vectored thrust into the mix too, as well as elevons on the main body.

3 to five deg. sounds like a good place to start, I have been trying to find out what a good place to start with vectored thrust myself.
I have tried to find out what others considered a good starting place for vectored thrust but have not seen much definitive. I figure the Osprey type uses 90 deg. of thrust but they are trying for helicopter type of performance. I am looking for a max of 45 deg deflection with an ultra stable (in pitch) shape of a forward swept delta. The glide test have worked well so now I am working on the deflectors for the ducted fan part.
Sounds like you have gotten some interesting results thus far.
I am curious about no spar, stressed skin?

A model with a stable cg location (not relying on fly-by-wire computer flight controls) will carry a larger load, PER UNIT OF AREA, than the main wing. This is how it is done to insure it will lose lift first. So if your main wing is carrying 20oz/ft, the canard surface will be carrying more, probably 25 or more. This greatly reduces the "reserve" for roll control, etc.