F.Imbriaco

My Feedback: (56)

For the BUILDERS out there, a question :
From what I've been told . carbon veil covering on wings and tail feathers can cause radio interference. I'm wondering if anyone out there was either brave/dumb enough or smart enough, depending upon which way you look at it, to give it a try and the results.
I recently covered my new E- Powered U/C Stunter with .02 Carbon Veil and found it to be easy to apply with dope , lightweight and super strong. I detest the current crop of film coverings, all of them, as they wrinkle in the sun and are a maintenance issue. The old stuff was way superior.
Spraying the entire ship like we did back in the day may seem old school to some, but with this material, aircraft weight can be further reduced by virtue of the fact that using it allows for the use of lighter foam wings , stabs , elevators and rudder. Using silkspan is an option;albeit structurally weaker and more difficult to apply.

iflyrctoo

I've been using carbon veil on my wings for the past 5 or 6 years and never had a problem. The carbon is applied between the foam core and the 1/16th in. sheeting.

Joe Dunnaway.

cdodom

The Black Magic VF3 that Mike Hester Built for me to use in the NATS this past year had Carbon Veil on the Wings. I am using Airtronics gear and have had no problems ( knock on wood)

thank you,
Chris

JCINTEXAS

A few questions please.
What is "carbon veil"?
Where do you get it?
How is it applied? (What adhesive is used?)
JCINTEXAS

rcpattern

My Feedback: (45)

I actually did some testing with my old VF3 with a full carbon canopy. I actually put the receiver inside the top of the canopy and then range tested with no issues, and even flew it in this configuration just to see if there were any issues. I never had any issues, so I don't think with the new radio technology that it is a major problem, especially vail in the wings here it is just strips and separated from the RC.

Arch

MTK

Carbon veil is a very thin mat of random carbon fibers. The 0.2 oz material is better than the 0.5 oz material for our purposes. It simple to apply using silk and dope techniques. I have written fairly extensively here on RCU about its use and application and sent my instructions yeras ago to several guys including Hester and Hebert and guys that build classic pattern planes. One can apply it either under the balsa skin or over the balsa skin, or, as in my case on the last set of wings, both sides of the balsa. The veil was used only on the wings so there was no issue at all with RFI (2.4 gig). Frank was actually there at my Aesthesis maiden and subsequent flights last year....

I am developing a new method of application that should prove even lighter. I will be discussing the techique in my Derivative thread

Carbon makes the balsa skin stiffer so your wings come out stiff and light. With care, the applied material is very light, on par with plastic film, however it takes time and maybe a couple wings to get the techique to that level of perfection

ACP and CST sales both are good sources

F.Imbriaco

My Feedback: (56)

Airtronics 72 or 2.4 ?
I use the SD-10G

rcpattern

My Feedback: (45)

Chris flies the SD-10G which is on 2.4.

Arch

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Carbon can and will block 2.4. It can effect 72 MHZ too but to a lesser degree. The sailplane guys have been up against this issue for some time now however some of their construction methods are full carbon layups. As for now some sailplanes are offered as " 2.4 friendly " that usually means a slightly heavier fiberglass layup. IMO if there is enough CF in your construction for you to worry about it, mount your antenna(s) outside the airplane. Of course always do a good range check from multiple angles with and without the motor/engine running.

wind junkie

My Feedback: (1)

In the sailplane world, a "2.4 friendly" fuselage has a glass nose, with little if any carbon reinforcement surrounding the immediate area where the RX antenna whiskers are.

The best way to deal with large areas of carbon is to have your antenna(s) nowhere near them so they can't be blanked or shadowed in various orientations.

I never really feel confident in any setup with a lot of carbon (or metal, or ignition noise) until I've flown a few flights with a data logger to count frame holds so I know I'm getting the range I need. That's a spektrum accessory but I assume you Futaba guys have a similar feature.

grcourtney

My Feedback: (1)

Never experienced any issue with 72 or 2.4 with carbon veil wings or carbon composite fuse construction. Range could be an issue with carbon sail planes as the distance out is greater than we (I) try to fly in pattern.. Although I think I did get scored on site #1 in Muncie last year while flying off site #3 ..

Gary

JRgraham

My Feedback: (1)

It is a Myth.

Ihave a build thread on classic pattern forum of the Zeus 1.20. Ihave referenced to a specific post where you can see the fuse is 100% carbon fiber woven cloth.

These were created in the 90's, and were flown before 2.4 came out, with antenna wire running through the interior of the fuse. Never was there any interference.
Ihave flown these with both 72 and 2.4 systems with rock solid performance.

Dont take my word for it though.. ask TonyF. He had a couple of these as well, and nearly certain at least one of them was full carbon layup as well.

For anyone that looks at that first post of my thread mentioned, the 89 Nats picture of Clayton Foster holding a Zeus, full Carbon fuselage, flew that for years with not one strange radio glitch he can speak of. (with a 72 mHz system((futaba pcm 1024)), antenna ran interior of fuse)

rcpattern

My Feedback: (45)

Yea, you were comfortably in the box on site 1

Arch

wind junkie

My Feedback: (1)

I don't want to start any trouble here, but if you're flying a PCM system, how do you know how well your radio is performing? One could argue the hold of "last known position" feature masks any "glitches."

2.4 systems today act just like PCM did in the masking regard, so any failure in the RX link is not going to be "felt" unless it's really bad.

Also keep in mind the thickness and orientation of the carbon in relation to the antenna will have effects on reception. I suspect the carbon veil which started this thread probably isn't thick enough to notice a reduction in range.

I've flown a 3M glass nosed sailplane that went into "full hold" one day at nearly the limit of my eyesight. I was sitting down on the side of a big hill, and when I stood up it luckily regained reception. I landed immediately and noticed the RX antennas had accidentally been folded under the batteries and the remote had slid behind a large area of carbon. Those two culprits caused me to sit up and take notice right away that in my reality carbon blocking is real.

This prompted me to do an exhaustive set of tests with carbon blocking. Documented here:

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=670356

and here:

http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_5738685/tm.htm

I've had similar issues with ignition noise on giant scale installations.

Just saying to not rely on hearsay or lack of "myths." "Keep it real." Do some tests yourself and verify your own installation. It's not that difficult to do a few range checks against a control (out of the airplane situation) and worth not crashing in my opinion.

Joe

petec

My Feedback: (58)

CF can and will shadow and block RF. CF density, power of RF broadcast, relation of CF to RX antenna and it's relation to the TX and RX sensitivity all play major roles in this. Think of it as RF from the TX being water and the CF being screen with varying sized holes in between the TX and the RX with the denser the CF the finer the holes until you finally wind up with enough CF to act as an solid obstruction..

I would not worry about the CF veil being an issue as it's density is not much.

MTK

Doing the wings only is no problem. That's what Frank wanted to know at the beginning of the thread. I think I discussed that with him last year but he musta forgot...

petec

My Feedback: (58)

Exactly, the veil is very low density.

JRgraham

My Feedback: (1)

Yeah, never mind what Isaid.. Ireally dont exist at all. figment and such.

nonstoprc

My Feedback: (90)

Why not build a small box covered with carbon veil of same thickness and perform a radio range test first?

protectedpilot

[Quote]
I actually did some testing with my old VF3 with a full carbon canopy. I actually put the receiver inside the top of the canopy and then range tested with no issues, and even flew it in this configuration just to see if there were any issues. I never had any issues, so I don't think with the new radio technology that it is a major problem, especially vail in the wings here it is just strips and separated from the RC.

Arch
[ end quote]


Hereby proving you are not only a very good pilot, but brave as well

Brian

bjr_93tz

Not quite that simple, otherwise your domestic microwave would have a solid metal front door and not a glass window with a conductive mesh of very carefully sized and spaced holes for the light to come out and the microwaves to stay in.

But I agree that for our purposes, the less carbon around the RX the better is a good rule of thumb.

petec

My Feedback: (58)

No its not but it was the easiest way for me to describe it. As for the microwave oven, the mesh and the open interior size and shape play a part in keeping the radiation in the oven but there is still some emission and a solid metal door would be the most efficient blockage to that but then you wouldn't be able to watch your potato explode

At any rate, we are in agreement.

nonstoprc

My Feedback: (90)

On the design of the microwave oven door, I would want to challenge anybody to look at the light bulb in close distance, when the oven is on. Your eyes will tell you the hollowed design would allow some radiations to leak out :-)

F.Imbriaco

My Feedback: (56)

Thanks for the many opinions.
My plan is to use .02 vail on wings, stab, elevator and rudder , only. Many composite molded fuses employ carbon fiber weave strips along seams , several one inch internal ring bands around the fuse for rigidity, sheet / laminate firewalls, gear plates of several variations( sandwich end grain balsa, weave on ply, etc.) for the servo & battery tray .

I don't feel that fuses of that type will have an issue and I believe that actual use history has proven that so.

If I get up the ambition, I'd like to remove the film from the flying surfaces of my old ride( Brio). Sand, dope , vail cover ( no final finish) and fly it with the 2.4 Airtronics RX wire outside the fuse ( probably unnecessary, but for good measure) and see what happens. The ship has served me well for 5 years and if it's lost due to interference, that won't be too devastating.

Because I just converted it from IC to electric, I'm planning to get some trim and reacquaintance flights on it beforehand.