 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
air.guerner(at)orange.fr
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 1:34 am Post subject: tail plane balancing |
 |
|
I agree that balancing the tail plane outside the aircraft is a lot better than doing it in situ. Doing it that way, I discovered that my tail planes were significantly overbalanced. I removed a total of <?xml:namespace prefix = noxml /><?xml:namespace prefix = st1 />365 grams from the mass balance, part of which was due to the heavier Mod 70 balance arm. It is always nice to have an opportunity to reduce your airplane weight.<?xml:namespace prefix = o />
Remi Guerner
F-PGKL, XS S/N395 monowheel, 912S, Airmaster, 493 hours
Carl
I could be corrected too but imho because the rest of the pitch control
system only moves fore and aft it won't influence balance, so I would
think balancing disconnected is OK. The rest of system will affect
natural resonant frequency but not the initial response due to G loading.
Tell me if I' wrong?
Graham
Carl Pattinson wrote:
[quote] Roger,
I am willing to stand corrected but my understanding is that the
balancing should be done with the torque tube "in situ" and with the
rest of the control system connected.
The control system forward of the torque tube horn will have a bearing
on the overall balance of the pitch installation. Disconnecting this
IMHO will give a less than optimum setup.
Carl Pattinson
G-LABS
3. While the tailplanes and torque tube were out of the aircraft I
decided to do a check of the mass balance and was surprised to find
the assembly 78g too heavy at the weight end. I genuinely thought I
had achieved a good re-balance in situ after mod 70 but the friction
in the control system was enough to mask the imbalance. How many
more Europas are like this and might it have contributed to the
accident?
Since correct mass balance is so critical and removal of the torque
tube (albeit a pain) takes less than a day's work, it might be worth
doing this at the same time as mod 73 - giving the advantage of
peace of mind and also being able to use your own torque tube for a
better layup than wrapping tape around plastic pipe as some have
suggested?
Hope this helps!
Roger Mills [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Europa-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
grahamsingleton(at)btinte
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 5:14 am Post subject: tail plane balancing |
|
|
Remi
I forgot the weight of the trim tab control arm does affect tailplane
balance, so balancing outside the fuselage is not quite so simple.
Graham
RĂ©mi Guerner wrote:
| Quote: |
I agree that balancing the tail plane outside the aircraft is a lot
better than doing it in situ. Doing it that way, I discovered that my
tail planes were significantly overbalanced. I removed a total of 365
grams from the mass balance, part of which was due to the heavier Mod 70
balance arm. It is always nice to have an opportunity to reduce your
airplane weight.
Remi Guerner
F-PGKL, XS S/N395 monowheel, 912S, Airmaster, 493 hours
Carl
I could be corrected too but imho because the rest of the pitch control
system only moves fore and aft it won't influence balance, so I would
think balancing disconnected is OK. The rest of system will affect
natural resonant frequency but not the initial response due to G loading.
Tell me if I' wrong?
Graham
|
| | - The Matronics Europa-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
air.guerner(at)orange.fr
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 12:08 am Post subject: Tail plane balancing |
|
|
Graham,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
You are right. I forgot the effect of T bar weight too. I still believe the corresponding error is less than the error caused by the slightest bearing friction. The weight to be added to accurately compensate for the missing T-bar error could be easily calculated. As the T-bar cannot be removed from a completed aircraft, could any one in the early building stage provide me with the weight and CG of the trim tab T-bar, ?
Remi
Remi
I forgot the weight of the trim tab control arm does affect tailplane
balance, so balancing outside the fuselage is not quite so simple.
Graham
Rmi Guerner wrote:
[quote]
I agree that balancing the tail plane outside the aircraft is a lot
better than doing it in situ. Doing it that way, I discovered that my
tail planes were significantly overbalanced. I removed a total of 365
grams from the mass balance, part of which was due to the heavier Mod 70
balance arm. It is always nice to have an opportunity to reduce your
airplane weight.
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Europa-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
