Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 Its has to able to generate more lift than it weighs. That's it, no other rules! BEB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Masher Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 Can highly recommend this book from Peter Miller, available elsewhere too Edited By Masher on 19/02/2018 14:12:06 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 "Its has to able to generate more lift than it weighs. That's it, no other rules!" I'd suggest we could have another one involving structural integrity. Anything else is probably a 'nice to have'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 There's always the "empirical" school of design - if it looks right, it should fly right... Most aircraft are built to a reasonably standardised layout and duplicating this within reasonable limits with your own outline should produce a flying model. Pay attention to rigging angles - define a datum line and set the thrust line, wing incidence (say around 1 degree positive) and tailplane relative to this. Downthrust is dependent on the layout - more will be required for a high wing, for instance but if you get it wrong most designs can allow for adjustment of the engine position or you can simply use a throttle to elevator mix to trim out undesirable pitch changes with power. It's not so long ago that many full size aircraft used to be adorned with all sorts of tabs and adornments to correct design weaknesses so you will be in good company if you find some fine tuning necessary! It's important to "add lightness" wherever possible but don't under-engineer structural components - development this way can be a long and frustrating road! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Chaddock Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 supertigerfan Don't get too hung up on figures and parameters. Most of model 'own design' comes from experience rather than a set of rules. The truth of the matter is there are so many variables that there is no absolute right or wrong but just various degrees of attributes that suit your personal preference. A plane that you may like to build and fly may not suit another pilot. Just a point but 'own designing' a full size scale subject does have the advantage that all the major dimensions are already determined by somebody else! You just set the size. One way to gain own 'design' experience is to build a scale kit and fly it. Then apply the same construction techniques to a different but broadly similar size scale subject. You learn a lot about scaling dimensions and adjusting structures to suit. You also get to find out how to set it up and whether it actually flies better or worse. I suspect this is how most own designers started - I certainly did back in the Keil Kraft days and I am still learning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 " it is by no means necessary and some designs will stay in the air with no lift" Should we mention helicopters and/or multirotors at this point? Anyway. David is right on the money with the WCL calculation, it is remarkably simple in its application and worthwhile to understand. "Most aircraft are built to a reasonably standardised layout" That they are. "My" average aircraft... Wing aspect ratio between 5 and 6. Fuselage around 80% wingspan. About 2/3 of which is behind CG, 1/3 in front. Tail between 20% and 25% of wing area. Less area equals longer fuselage needed. Fin/rudder around 40% tailplane. Ailerons 10% of wing area. Elevator 25% of tailplane. Rudder about 50% (or more) of fin/rudder area. Wing section is not critical for power models. A "semi symmetrical" NACA 2415 (Pete M's favourite I believe) for sport types, or a NACA 0012 for "proper aerobatic stuff". Both of which hail from the 1930's I think - there's nothing much new in the world of aerodynamics at our scales and speeds*. * fashion choices of various contest classes aside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 Posted by David Mellor on 19/02/2018 16:49:03: And....whilst it can be a good idea to create lift equal to the weight, it is by no means necessary and some designs will stay in the air with no lift and no forward speed. But they, of course, rely on pure thrust (3-D planes and flat LAR wings working in post-stalled condition, often at ludicrously high alpha). In that case the thrust is not thrust - its lift. Heavier than air aircraft cannot stay in the air with no lift. Period. The lift may not be from a classical wing - but if it is the force opposing the weight then it is the lift - whereever its coming from! In the case of a helicopter/MR - it still has lift - via a rotary wing that's all. BEB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kc Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 There are no rules! however there have been several articles which show the 'ideal' proportions for own design sports models. Articles by Chuck Cunningham and Ken Willard published in the late lamented RC Modeler magazine ( USA ) seem what you need. A sketch shows proportions relative to the span i.e tailplane is one third wingspan and tailplane chord is 1/3 tailplane span etc etc. The articles used to be online but no longer. However send me a PM with your e-mail address and i will let you have the relevant pdf file. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 I suspect the supertigrefan is a bit more confused than he was after this lot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kc Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 The short answer and a way to avoid all the calculations is to find an existing design to restyle to your own requirements. Keeping the same proportions and building to a similar weight to the original could produce a model that flys nearly as well. However you are unlikely to improve on the best designs! It would appear that the best designs have got the balance of all the different parts just right. It will take a lot of experimenting to improve on them. No doubt lots of experiments has got the control movements just right too. However you might manage to improve on the actual construction using modern materials and modern power systems. Still awaiting a Personal Message with your e-mail addressSupertigrefan if you want the pdf files....... Edited By kc on 19/02/2018 19:22:34 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 Sorry David but I'm not incorrect. The lift is whatever force is opposing the weight - however it generated, wing, rotor, makes no difference. Lift does not have to be aerodynamically generated true, but its still lift. To state that any heavier than air aircraft can stay in the air without lift is just nonsense liable to confuse people. Sorry but that's the bottom line. BEB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jez Saunders Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 So does a rocket fly ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.