Date   

Re: New file uploaded to main@Q-List.groups.io

Larry Severson
 

Yes, this plane could be made to spin, but it has 5 different combination s of controls and power to get out of a stall. This is a bit more than the average plane. The independent control of fore and aft flaps is only part of the features.

Also, according to X-Plane it is actually faster than the Q2 with any sized comparable engine because of having laminar flow wings fore and aft..

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2019 5:49 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] New file uploaded to main@Q-List.groups.io

 

From a standpoint of safety the "no stall/spin" part is a great asset.  If however you hold back on the stick during the porpoise it quickly get accelerated greatly.  The oscillation becomes bigger and bigger.  Not a good thing at landing and slowing down to much.

 

Scott Swing and i were talking once and he mentioned someone should make the Quickie a light sport aircraft with different wings etc.  You certainly couldn't spin it (however someone in the past noted a guy got it into some sort of spin or wild gyration that was pretty scary.  And that's all I know about that.)  Still the new model would need some other mods to improve it.  Different motor mounts would help to isolate the engine pulses and sound on the firewall.  It would most likely be slower than the ancestry Quickies.

 

Richard Kasmarec showed a print out of a 4 place Quickie at Oshkosh this year.  Which is kind of exciting!

Lots of  new technical build availability since the inception of the original 1 seat Quickie.

You never know.  Just "Brainstorming".

Bruce 

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "main@Q-List.groups.io Notification" <main+notification@Q-List.groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] New file uploaded to main@Q-List.groups.io
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 09:29:34 -0800

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that the following files have been uploaded to the Files area of the main@Q-List.groups.io group.

Uploaded By: larry severson <larry2@...>

Description:
Create a safety LSA plane from a Q2 hull.

Cheers,
The Groups.io Team

 


Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

charlie
 

Way back in the mid '80s when I was building my Q1 with the first customer LS1 airfoil. I built the sparrow Strainers on hinges and drove then with model servos.
Intention was for this to be the trim system.
Being we have not flown this plane yet I have no clue how well this would work. Seems right thought.
CharlieN


Re: New file uploaded to main@Q-List.groups.io

Bruce Crain
 

From a standpoint of safety the "no stall/spin" part is a great asset.  If however you hold back on the stick during the porpoise it quickly get accelerated greatly.  The oscillation becomes bigger and bigger.  Not a good thing at landing and slowing down to much.
 
Scott Swing and i were talking once and he mentioned someone should make the Quickie a light sport aircraft with different wings etc.  You certainly couldn't spin it (however someone in the past noted a guy got it into some sort of spin or wild gyration that was pretty scary.  And that's all I know about that.)  Still the new model would need some other mods to improve it.  Different motor mounts would help to isolate the engine pulses and sound on the firewall.  It would most likely be slower than the ancestry Quickies.
 
Richard Kasmarec showed a print out of a 4 place Quickie at Oshkosh this year.  Which is kind of exciting!
Lots of  new technical build availability since the inception of the original 1 seat Quickie.
You never know.  Just "Brainstorming".
Bruce 


---------- Original Message ----------
From: "main@Q-List.groups.io Notification" <main+notification@Q-List.groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] New file uploaded to main@Q-List.groups.io
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 09:29:34 -0800

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that the following files have been uploaded to the Files area of the main@Q-List.groups.io group.

Uploaded By: larry severson <larry2@...>

Description:
Create a safety LSA plane from a Q2 hull.

Cheers,
The Groups.io Team




New file uploaded to main@Q-List.groups.io

main@Q-List.groups.io Notification <main+notification@...>
 

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that the following files have been uploaded to the Files area of the main@Q-List.groups.io group.

Uploaded By: larry severson <larry2@...>

Description:
Create a safety LSA plane from a Q2 hull.

Cheers,
The Groups.io Team


Re: Safety Plane

Sam Hoskins
 

This would be an appropriate topic for the Q-Performance list, which is right here: https://q-list.groups.io/g/Q-Performance/


Safety Plane

Larry Severson
 

For anyone who wishes to see how a Q2 hull can be turned into a light sport safety plane, please contact me directly. The information is placed in a fairly long PDF telling how and why it works. This was a submittal to the EAA contest for designs to prevent loss of control.

 

Larry Severson

18242 Peters Ct

Fountain Valley, CA  92708

(714) 968-9852

Larry2@...

 

The solution to a problem simply works,

But the correct solution works simply.

 


Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

Bruce Crain
 

Not sure they would work on tape very well.  Shoulda coulda woulda.  I already ordered the tape on line.  Thanks Michael!
Bruce


---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Michael" <dunningme@...>
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 18:09:04 -0800

If you're in a hurry, Walmart sells turbulator tape scissors in the craft aisle; seems they think that they're "pinking shears" for some reason 😉

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Fabric-Stainless-Steel-Dressmaking-Pinking-Shears-Craft-Zig-Zag-Cut-Scissors/846245971

--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)




Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

Michael Dunning
 

If you're in a hurry, Walmart sells turbulator tape scissors in the craft aisle; seems they think that they're "pinking shears" for some reason 😉

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Fabric-Stainless-Steel-Dressmaking-Pinking-Shears-Craft-Zig-Zag-Cut-Scissors/846245971

--
-MD
#2827 (still thinking about planning on visualizing how to finish building)


Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

Bruce Crain
 

I changed my mind on applying the Vortex Generators for now in leu of trying the zig zag turbulator tape as Scott Swing offered.  I like to approach things slowly and if I can get the zig zag to work it seems that there would be less drag on the sparrow strainers.  Will be a  few days before they are delivered so stay tuned for data.
Bruce



Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

Bruce Crain
 

This reminds me of something Scott Swing and I conversed about.  Scott said someone flew the LS1 without a sparrow strainer because the absence of it created less drag for a race he had entered.  Huge stick pressure but at higher airspeed the pressure (I think) was less because of more lift on the canard.  (could have misunderstood Scott on this).
So the higher the Mach number the less forward pressure on the stick.  regular_smile
Bruce

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Jay Scheevel" <jay@...>
To: <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 09:09:58 -0700

Thanks for the cool tuft study data, Bruce. My nerdiness must be rubbing off on you, or maybe you are just retired and want something time consuming to do.

 

Seriously, That is an interesting observation. Ideally, you would like your “trim” surfaces, such as the sparrow strainer to be well behaved under all flight conditions, but you have demonstrated that this is not the case. The sparrow strainer flies at a high AOA (negative) all the time, so as to apply a large load to the trailing edge of the elevator, push it into an accelerated condition and boom, you get it to stall. The need for them is entirely the because the aft-1/3 of the LS-1 airfoil has a significant camber on the underside. This camber is by design yielding favorable characteristics when incorporated on a non-articulated airfoil, but when you incorporate an articulated trailing edge (elevator), then the asymmetric force becomes torque on the torque tube and stick deflection instead of into a forward pitching component applied to the rigid wing structure. By countering this effect with the sparrow strainer you actually loose some of the positive characteristics of the pitching moment, and you add a lot of drag. If you could manage it as a pilot, and this is not recommended, the LS-1 would fly better and be more efficient if you could hold the elevator neutral with the stick. But this would require always be pulling lots of aft stick-force. The stick force would be very large in full cruise, and you would never find a hands off condition. It gives you an appreciation for the force that the sparrow strainer supports are experiencing constantly in flight, and why one might potentially depart the aircraft….requiring above average flying skills to recover.

 

I have modeled the forces on the LS-1 elevator and have also designed a modified LS-1 airfoil with the rear portion of the camber removed, where the forces on the redesigned elevator are balanced, (so the sparrow strainer would not be required). I have thought that sometime I would like to build a new set of these redesigned elevators and put them on my plane, but I am just getting comfortable flying with the plans design. On the redesigned airfoil, the lift profile and polars are essentially identical to the LS-1, but what is the big unknown is how the redesigned elevator would impact that stall behavior. Small changes at the trailing edge can be quite impactful on stall, and my modeling method cannot model the complexity of airflow at stall.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2019 9:32 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

Hi Jay!

Not sure I really care to know.  Either way I will still be aviating in both and won't put any more sound insulation in either one.  (more weight)

 

On a side note I have been doing some tuft testing which might be more informational.  I have found out that if I pull up the nose and then unload it by pushing forward on the stick my sparrow strainers are stalling on the bottom side.  My TriQ will not recover in most instances until I stall out or slow down the airspeed a bunch so that I can pull the stick enough for the strainers to reattach the air underneath them.  I just received some vortex generators to put on the bottom of the strainers to do more testing and will hopefully have them in place this week to test.

 

I have noticed in the past that when I do an aileron roll this happens.  I have been all though the elevators and ailerons to make sure they were tight and they now are very solid.  So then I thought that maybe the wingtip vortices were coming up from the canard and rolling down on the main wing.  That never really looked like a good theory.  So I installed yarn tufts to see just what was going on.  When I flew it started to dawn on me that the elevator was coming up every time I experienced the phenomenon.  So I had a good idea that something much simpler was happening and it kept pointing to the sparrow strainer.  After talking with Paul Fisher, Jerry Marstall, Sammy Hoskins, and even Scott Swing at Velocity I decided we were looking at a stall.  Sure enough when I went up with the tufts in place on the canard and the top and bottom of the sparrow strainers I thought "what if I just pull up and then push forward on the stick could I replicate the problem".  When I pulled up and then unloaded the canard by pushing over the sparrow strainers held for a bit and then they relaxed to stick forward an inch or so.  I looked out and saw the elevators up about and inch or so and videoed the tufts on the bottom of the strainer disappear and the tufts on the top tufts wrap around the back of the strainer and disappear forward under the strainer!  I spoke with Paul, Jerry and Scott again and Scott was freaked but agreed that was what is happening.

 

Bingo!  Now I have to fix it so that is where the vortex generator come in.  The strainers are a really sensitive trim from dealing with them in the past plus I have them mounted half way outboard on the elevator.  I also have 1.2 degrees incidence up on the canard and .8 degrees up on the main wing so we are talking apples to oranges.

 

Sure I could just fly the Q and not go negative on the elevator enough to stall them but I like to do aileron rolls when I am board. I believe you and I experienced the stall when you were getting time in my Q before your first flight.  So we educate and experiment and come out improving the species. 

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Jay Scheevel" <jay@...>
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 19:53:06 -0700

Hi Bruce,

 

If you have an iPhone it has an app available that measures abient noise level. You could give that a try.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID



Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

I have not noticed which one is quieter.  Will try to do that in the future.  Trouble is remembering how loud the other plane is between switches.

I will tell Charlie hello for you Dr Mike!

Bruce

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001@...>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:37:25 +0000 (UTC)

Hi Mike, 

 

My RV6A is noisy. I have a Clark headset modified for active noise reduction but my new Zulu 3 is quieter. I have a Lycoming O-320 E2D 150 with a metal Sensinich prop. I have problem believing a Quickie 200 is quieter.

 

Mike

 

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 7:33 PM, Mike Dwyer

<q200pilot@...> wrote:

I flew in a RV4 recently and I think the inside cockpit of the RV is a lot noisier than a Q200.  I'd expect the fiberglass sandwich to dampen some noise.  

Any other opinions?

Fly Safe,

Mike Dwyer

 

YouTube Videos: https://goo.gl/yKEHfK

Q200 Website: http://goo.gl/V8IrJF

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 8:14 PM Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

Sweet!  Hope you design a mach .5 airfoil for the Quickie guys  Wouldn't that be sweet!  

I still have my TriQ 200 but I went over to the "Dark Side" when my hanger mate Charlie Calivas sold me his RV 6 for a song and a dance and then proceeded to help me rebuild the engine!  My son Jake calls me "2 planes Crain"!  
Have a Merry Christmas!

Bruce and Honeylamb Crain
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 04:06:52 +0000 (UTC)

Bruce!

Good to hear from you as well. Things are great in Wichita. I'm still designing GA airfoils and flying my  RV6A and Cessna 120. I went through Emporia two weeks ago and it reminded me of when you, your son, and I got weathered in coming back from the Quickie fly-in at Ottawa. 

 

Great hearing from you! My thanks to the Q-List group for letting me "announce" our moving Shuck Airfoil from Yahoo! Groups to Groups.io !

 

Best wishes!

Mike Shuck

Wichita, KS

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 9:44 PM, Bruce Crain

<jcrain2@...> wrote:

Good to hear from you again Dr Shuck!  How are things in Wichita?

Bruce Crain

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 00:24:29 +0000 (UTC)

Just to let you know I am in process of moving the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil to:

 

 

I was late getting the mailing list moved over so I would be very thankful if you would post this as many

of the Shuck Airfoil group at Yahoo! Groups also were members of Q-List.

 

Many thanks!

 

Mike Shuck

Moderator of the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

David J. Gall
 

Jay,

 

The hinge pin on the Roncz canard elevator is not concentric with the elevator torque tube. It is approximately 0.1” from the inner surface of the torque tube at the extreme bottom of the tube, much closer to the lower surface of the elevator than depicted in your initial image. Those hot wire templates look legit, though I wouldn’t trust their dimensional accuracy enough to build anything from them….

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:19 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

From that most reliable of sources, “the internet” 😊

 

http://www.angelfire.com/on/dragonflyaircraft/airfoils.html

 

Look about midway down the page.

 

 

I think the elevator hinge location is accurate, at least according to these hotwire templates from the Canard Zone Forums

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 5:04 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

P.S.

 

  1. Where’d you find a picture of a Roncz R1145MS with a powered trim tab? THAT was never part of the Roncz canard plans.
  2. That depiction of the Roncz canard is actually incorrect. The elevator hinge line is in the wrong place. It also looks like it has a Jimmy Durante schnoz (bump on the nose)….

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 3:56 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

No, but you’re getting MUCH closer. Think full-span fixed trim tab. Like on the paper airplane you made as a kid: bend the trailing edge up a little bit. The million-dollar answer that makes guys like Roncz famous is to define “how much” to bend it up. So, go back to the Rutan Canard Pusher newsletters where Burt defines the criteria, then go get X-Foil or even Roncz’s own tool (the modified Eppler code) and solve the problem the same way Roncz did. It only took Roncz et. al four canards to get the whole thing right – you should be able to do this lesser task with just one (full-span) elevator, maybe one (full-span) elevator modified (slightly) a couple times to tweak it to perfection….

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 3:46 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

OK, re-read your note, and now I get it: Use Roncz anti-servo trim tab on the stock LS-1 elevator. Right? 

 

If so, you are saying mount a servo such as shown on the trailing edge below?

 

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:15 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

Nope. That’s not what I said. 

 

Not even close.

 

 

David “Jimmeh” Gall

 

On Dec 16, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:



Thanks David,

 

Am aware of the Roncz canard and its implementation on the EZ, but to directly convert the Quickie to that implementation would require re-engineering the elevator actuator. Could do that if starting my canard build over from scratch, but to retrofit on the existing Q2 with the LS-1 already installed would be difficult. The Roncz elevator solution is a sort of a fowler flap and would also require installation of the trailing edge trim. My design is a compromise to be sure, but could be directly retrofit in the existing slot with the same torque tube system as is currently in place and eliminate the sparrow strainer. Don’t know if that will ever happen, but it would be a doable retrofit.

 

Cheers,
Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 12:49 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

John Roncz came up with the solution to this many years ago. It’s called the “Roncz canard” in the Long-EZ community. It’s an excellent airfoil, but particularly important is what he did to the elevator. The same technique could be used on the LS-1 elevator to mitigate the elevator hinge moment. It can be modeled fairly accurately in X-foil or in Roncz’s modified Eppler airfoil code that he used back then (freely available on the internet). Just gotta tweak it so the elevator floating angle is stable and appropriate for the airplane’s approximate maximum range low cruise airspeed so that if the trim and elevator control systems accidentally disconnect in flight the airplane will be able to continue flight and land using engine power modulation (and reflex if installed) as primary pitch control. Rutan laid out all these requirements in one of the Canard Pusher newsletters in the 1980s.

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 8:10 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Thanks for the cool tuft study data, Bruce. My nerdiness must be rubbing off on you, or maybe you are just retired and want something time consuming to do.

 

Seriously, That is an interesting observation. Ideally, you would like your “trim” surfaces, such as the sparrow strainer to be well behaved under all flight conditions, but you have demonstrated that this is not the case. The sparrow strainer flies at a high AOA (negative) all the time, so as to apply a large load to the trailing edge of the elevator, push it into an accelerated condition and boom, you get it to stall. The need for them is entirely the because the aft-1/3 of the LS-1 airfoil has a significant camber on the underside. This camber is by design yielding favorable characteristics when incorporated on a non-articulated airfoil, but when you incorporate an articulated trailing edge (elevator), then the asymmetric force becomes torque on the torque tube and stick deflection instead of into a forward pitching component applied to the rigid wing structure. By countering this effect with the sparrow strainer you actually loose some of the positive characteristics of the pitching moment, and you add a lot of drag. If you could manage it as a pilot, and this is not recommended, the LS-1 would fly better and be more efficient if you could hold the elevator neutral with the stick. But this would require always be pulling lots of aft stick-force. The stick force would be very large in full cruise, and you would never find a hands off condition. It gives you an appreciation for the force that the sparrow strainer supports are experiencing constantly in flight, and why one might potentially depart the aircraft….requiring above average flying skills to recover.

 

I have modeled the forces on the LS-1 elevator and have also designed a modified LS-1 airfoil with the rear portion of the camber removed, where the forces on the redesigned elevator are balanced, (so the sparrow strainer would not be required). I have thought that sometime I would like to build a new set of these redesigned elevators and put them on my plane, but I am just getting comfortable flying with the plans design. On the redesigned airfoil, the lift profile and polars are essentially identical to the LS-1, but what is the big unknown is how the redesigned elevator would impact that stall behavior. Small changes at the trailing edge can be quite impactful on stall, and my modeling method cannot model the complexity of airflow at stall.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2019 9:32 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

Hi Jay!

Not sure I really care to know.  Either way I will still be aviating in both and won't put any more sound insulation in either one.  (more weight)

 

On a side note I have been doing some tuft testing which might be more informational.  I have found out that if I pull up the nose and then unload it by pushing forward on the stick my sparrow strainers are stalling on the bottom side.  My TriQ will not recover in most instances until I stall out or slow down the airspeed a bunch so that I can pull the stick enough for the strainers to reattach the air underneath them.  I just received some vortex generators to put on the bottom of the strainers to do more testing and will hopefully have them in place this week to test.

 

I have noticed in the past that when I do an aileron roll this happens.  I have been all though the elevators and ailerons to make sure they were tight and they now are very solid.  So then I thought that maybe the wingtip vortices were coming up from the canard and rolling down on the main wing.  That never really looked like a good theory.  So I installed yarn tufts to see just what was going on.  When I flew it started to dawn on me that the elevator was coming up every time I experienced the phenomenon.  So I had a good idea that something much simpler was happening and it kept pointing to the sparrow strainer.  After talking with Paul Fisher, Jerry Marstall, Sammy Hoskins, and even Scott Swing at Velocity I decided we were looking at a stall.  Sure enough when I went up with the tufts in place on the canard and the top and bottom of the sparrow strainers I thought "what if I just pull up and then push forward on the stick could I replicate the problem".  When I pulled up and then unloaded the canard by pushing over the sparrow strainers held for a bit and then they relaxed to stick forward an inch or so.  I looked out and saw the elevators up about and inch or so and videoed the tufts on the bottom of the strainer disappear and the tufts on the top tufts wrap around the back of the strainer and disappear forward under the strainer!  I spoke with Paul, Jerry and Scott again and Scott was freaked but agreed that was what is happening.

 

Bingo!  Now I have to fix it so that is where the vortex generator come in.  The strainers are a really sensitive trim from dealing with them in the past plus I have them mounted half way outboard on the elevator.  I also have 1.2 degrees incidence up on the canard and .8 degrees up on the main wing so we are talking apples to oranges.

 

Sure I could just fly the Q and not go negative on the elevator enough to stall them but I like to do aileron rolls when I am board. I believe you and I experienced the stall when you were getting time in my Q before your first flight.  So we educate and experiment and come out improving the species. 

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Jay Scheevel" <jay@...>
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 19:53:06 -0700

Hi Bruce,

 

If you have an iPhone it has an app available that measures abient noise level. You could give that a try.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID



Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

I have not noticed which one is quieter.  Will try to do that in the future.  Trouble is remembering how loud the other plane is between switches.

I will tell Charlie hello for you Dr Mike!

Bruce

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001@...>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:37:25 +0000 (UTC)

Hi Mike, 

 

My RV6A is noisy. I have a Clark headset modified for active noise reduction but my new Zulu 3 is quieter. I have a Lycoming O-320 E2D 150 with a metal Sensinich prop. I have problem believing a Quickie 200 is quieter.

 

Mike

 

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 7:33 PM, Mike Dwyer

<q200pilot@...> wrote:

I flew in a RV4 recently and I think the inside cockpit of the RV is a lot noisier than a Q200.  I'd expect the fiberglass sandwich to dampen some noise.  

Any other opinions?

Fly Safe,

Mike Dwyer

 

YouTube Videos: https://goo.gl/yKEHfK

Q200 Website: http://goo.gl/V8IrJF

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 8:14 PM Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

Sweet!  Hope you design a mach .5 airfoil for the Quickie guys  Wouldn't that be sweet!  

I still have my TriQ 200 but I went over to the "Dark Side" when my hanger mate Charlie Calivas sold me his RV 6 for a song and a dance and then proceeded to help me rebuild the engine!  My son Jake calls me "2 planes Crain"!  
Have a Merry Christmas!

Bruce and Honeylamb Crain
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 04:06:52 +0000 (UTC)

Bruce!

Good to hear from you as well. Things are great in Wichita. I'm still designing GA airfoils and flying my  RV6A and Cessna 120. I went through Emporia two weeks ago and it reminded me of when you, your son, and I got weathered in coming back from the Quickie fly-in at Ottawa. 

 

Great hearing from you! My thanks to the Q-List group for letting me "announce" our moving Shuck Airfoil from Yahoo! Groups to Groups.io !

 

Best wishes!

Mike Shuck

Wichita, KS

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 9:44 PM, Bruce Crain

<jcrain2@...> wrote:

Good to hear from you again Dr Shuck!  How are things in Wichita?

Bruce Crain

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 00:24:29 +0000 (UTC)

Just to let you know I am in process of moving the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil to:

 

 

I was late getting the mailing list moved over so I would be very thankful if you would post this as many

of the Shuck Airfoil group at Yahoo! Groups also were members of Q-List.

 

Many thanks!

 

Mike Shuck

Moderator of the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

David J. Gall
 

Jay,

 

BINGO! Again, you don’t want the float angle for cruise, you want the float angle for LOW cruise/max range or even a little slower. Remember, the worst-case scenario is that you are going to crash at that speed (out of options out of gas). The best case scenario is that you’re going to limp the rest of the way across the North Sea at ultra-slow cruise (but still have enough gas because you’re at max range speed) and then land at that speed (because you don’t have elevator to slow down or flare).

 

Yeah, yeah, it’s all a game of hypotheticals, but George Mead (one of Burt’s early employees and a very talented design engineer in his own right) apparently didn’t set up his elevators this way on the “Pugmobile” canard and it ended up killing him and three NASA engineers….

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:07 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Thanks for the clarification, David. Starting to sound kind of like what I did in my model. I modified the elevator portion of the LS-1 to neutralize the moment on the elevator at zero AOA (plans) . What I did not do is figure out what additional trailing edge modification was necessary to establish the float angle for cruise. I think we are coming into alignment now.

 

By the way, Martin Skiby did what you are describing, but on the fixed trailing edge portion of his main wing in order get the cruise AOA optimized for the two lifting surfaces (on his tri-Q)

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:56 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

No, but you’re getting MUCH closer. Think full-span fixed trim tab. Like on the paper airplane you made as a kid: bend the trailing edge up a little bit. The million-dollar answer that makes guys like Roncz famous is to define “how much” to bend it up. So, go back to the Rutan Canard Pusher newsletters where Burt defines the criteria, then go get X-Foil or even Roncz’s own tool (the modified Eppler code) and solve the problem the same way Roncz did. It only took Roncz et. al four canards to get the whole thing right – you should be able to do this lesser task with just one (full-span) elevator, maybe one (full-span) elevator modified (slightly) a couple times to tweak it to perfection….

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 3:46 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

OK, re-read your note, and now I get it: Use Roncz anti-servo trim tab on the stock LS-1 elevator. Right? 

 

If so, you are saying mount a servo such as shown on the trailing edge below?

 

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:15 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

Nope. That’s not what I said. 

 

Not even close.

 

 

David “Jimmeh” Gall

 

On Dec 16, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:



Thanks David,

 

Am aware of the Roncz canard and its implementation on the EZ, but to directly convert the Quickie to that implementation would require re-engineering the elevator actuator. Could do that if starting my canard build over from scratch, but to retrofit on the existing Q2 with the LS-1 already installed would be difficult. The Roncz elevator solution is a sort of a fowler flap and would also require installation of the trailing edge trim. My design is a compromise to be sure, but could be directly retrofit in the existing slot with the same torque tube system as is currently in place and eliminate the sparrow strainer. Don’t know if that will ever happen, but it would be a doable retrofit.

 

Cheers,
Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 12:49 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

John Roncz came up with the solution to this many years ago. It’s called the “Roncz canard” in the Long-EZ community. It’s an excellent airfoil, but particularly important is what he did to the elevator. The same technique could be used on the LS-1 elevator to mitigate the elevator hinge moment. It can be modeled fairly accurately in X-foil or in Roncz’s modified Eppler airfoil code that he used back then (freely available on the internet). Just gotta tweak it so the elevator floating angle is stable and appropriate for the airplane’s approximate maximum range low cruise airspeed so that if the trim and elevator control systems accidentally disconnect in flight the airplane will be able to continue flight and land using engine power modulation (and reflex if installed) as primary pitch control. Rutan laid out all these requirements in one of the Canard Pusher newsletters in the 1980s.

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 8:10 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Thanks for the cool tuft study data, Bruce. My nerdiness must be rubbing off on you, or maybe you are just retired and want something time consuming to do.

 

Seriously, That is an interesting observation. Ideally, you would like your “trim” surfaces, such as the sparrow strainer to be well behaved under all flight conditions, but you have demonstrated that this is not the case. The sparrow strainer flies at a high AOA (negative) all the time, so as to apply a large load to the trailing edge of the elevator, push it into an accelerated condition and boom, you get it to stall. The need for them is entirely the because the aft-1/3 of the LS-1 airfoil has a significant camber on the underside. This camber is by design yielding favorable characteristics when incorporated on a non-articulated airfoil, but when you incorporate an articulated trailing edge (elevator), then the asymmetric force becomes torque on the torque tube and stick deflection instead of into a forward pitching component applied to the rigid wing structure. By countering this effect with the sparrow strainer you actually loose some of the positive characteristics of the pitching moment, and you add a lot of drag. If you could manage it as a pilot, and this is not recommended, the LS-1 would fly better and be more efficient if you could hold the elevator neutral with the stick. But this would require always be pulling lots of aft stick-force. The stick force would be very large in full cruise, and you would never find a hands off condition. It gives you an appreciation for the force that the sparrow strainer supports are experiencing constantly in flight, and why one might potentially depart the aircraft….requiring above average flying skills to recover.

 

I have modeled the forces on the LS-1 elevator and have also designed a modified LS-1 airfoil with the rear portion of the camber removed, where the forces on the redesigned elevator are balanced, (so the sparrow strainer would not be required). I have thought that sometime I would like to build a new set of these redesigned elevators and put them on my plane, but I am just getting comfortable flying with the plans design. On the redesigned airfoil, the lift profile and polars are essentially identical to the LS-1, but what is the big unknown is how the redesigned elevator would impact that stall behavior. Small changes at the trailing edge can be quite impactful on stall, and my modeling method cannot model the complexity of airflow at stall.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2019 9:32 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

Hi Jay!

Not sure I really care to know.  Either way I will still be aviating in both and won't put any more sound insulation in either one.  (more weight)

 

On a side note I have been doing some tuft testing which might be more informational.  I have found out that if I pull up the nose and then unload it by pushing forward on the stick my sparrow strainers are stalling on the bottom side.  My TriQ will not recover in most instances until I stall out or slow down the airspeed a bunch so that I can pull the stick enough for the strainers to reattach the air underneath them.  I just received some vortex generators to put on the bottom of the strainers to do more testing and will hopefully have them in place this week to test.

 

I have noticed in the past that when I do an aileron roll this happens.  I have been all though the elevators and ailerons to make sure they were tight and they now are very solid.  So then I thought that maybe the wingtip vortices were coming up from the canard and rolling down on the main wing.  That never really looked like a good theory.  So I installed yarn tufts to see just what was going on.  When I flew it started to dawn on me that the elevator was coming up every time I experienced the phenomenon.  So I had a good idea that something much simpler was happening and it kept pointing to the sparrow strainer.  After talking with Paul Fisher, Jerry Marstall, Sammy Hoskins, and even Scott Swing at Velocity I decided we were looking at a stall.  Sure enough when I went up with the tufts in place on the canard and the top and bottom of the sparrow strainers I thought "what if I just pull up and then push forward on the stick could I replicate the problem".  When I pulled up and then unloaded the canard by pushing over the sparrow strainers held for a bit and then they relaxed to stick forward an inch or so.  I looked out and saw the elevators up about and inch or so and videoed the tufts on the bottom of the strainer disappear and the tufts on the top tufts wrap around the back of the strainer and disappear forward under the strainer!  I spoke with Paul, Jerry and Scott again and Scott was freaked but agreed that was what is happening.

 

Bingo!  Now I have to fix it so that is where the vortex generator come in.  The strainers are a really sensitive trim from dealing with them in the past plus I have them mounted half way outboard on the elevator.  I also have 1.2 degrees incidence up on the canard and .8 degrees up on the main wing so we are talking apples to oranges.

 

Sure I could just fly the Q and not go negative on the elevator enough to stall them but I like to do aileron rolls when I am board. I believe you and I experienced the stall when you were getting time in my Q before your first flight.  So we educate and experiment and come out improving the species. 

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Jay Scheevel" <jay@...>
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 19:53:06 -0700

Hi Bruce,

 

If you have an iPhone it has an app available that measures abient noise level. You could give that a try.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID



Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

I have not noticed which one is quieter.  Will try to do that in the future.  Trouble is remembering how loud the other plane is between switches.

I will tell Charlie hello for you Dr Mike!

Bruce

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001@...>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:37:25 +0000 (UTC)

Hi Mike, 

 

My RV6A is noisy. I have a Clark headset modified for active noise reduction but my new Zulu 3 is quieter. I have a Lycoming O-320 E2D 150 with a metal Sensinich prop. I have problem believing a Quickie 200 is quieter.

 

Mike

 

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 7:33 PM, Mike Dwyer

<q200pilot@...> wrote:

I flew in a RV4 recently and I think the inside cockpit of the RV is a lot noisier than a Q200.  I'd expect the fiberglass sandwich to dampen some noise.  

Any other opinions?

Fly Safe,

Mike Dwyer

 

YouTube Videos: https://goo.gl/yKEHfK

Q200 Website: http://goo.gl/V8IrJF

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 8:14 PM Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

Sweet!  Hope you design a mach .5 airfoil for the Quickie guys  Wouldn't that be sweet!  

I still have my TriQ 200 but I went over to the "Dark Side" when my hanger mate Charlie Calivas sold me his RV 6 for a song and a dance and then proceeded to help me rebuild the engine!  My son Jake calls me "2 planes Crain"!  
Have a Merry Christmas!

Bruce and Honeylamb Crain
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 04:06:52 +0000 (UTC)

Bruce!

Good to hear from you as well. Things are great in Wichita. I'm still designing GA airfoils and flying my  RV6A and Cessna 120. I went through Emporia two weeks ago and it reminded me of when you, your son, and I got weathered in coming back from the Quickie fly-in at Ottawa. 

 

Great hearing from you! My thanks to the Q-List group for letting me "announce" our moving Shuck Airfoil from Yahoo! Groups to Groups.io !

 

Best wishes!

Mike Shuck

Wichita, KS

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 9:44 PM, Bruce Crain

<jcrain2@...> wrote:

Good to hear from you again Dr Shuck!  How are things in Wichita?

Bruce Crain

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 00:24:29 +0000 (UTC)

Just to let you know I am in process of moving the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil to:

 

 

I was late getting the mailing list moved over so I would be very thankful if you would post this as many

of the Shuck Airfoil group at Yahoo! Groups also were members of Q-List.

 

Many thanks!

 

Mike Shuck

Moderator of the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

Jay Scheevel
 

From that most reliable of sources, “the internet” 😊

 

http://www.angelfire.com/on/dragonflyaircraft/airfoils.html

 

Look about midway down the page.

 

 

I think the elevator hinge location is accurate, at least according to these hotwire templates from the Canard Zone Forums

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 5:04 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

P.S.

 

  1. Where’d you find a picture of a Roncz R1145MS with a powered trim tab? THAT was never part of the Roncz canard plans.
  2. That depiction of the Roncz canard is actually incorrect. The elevator hinge line is in the wrong place. It also looks like it has a Jimmy Durante schnoz (bump on the nose)….

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 3:56 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

No, but you’re getting MUCH closer. Think full-span fixed trim tab. Like on the paper airplane you made as a kid: bend the trailing edge up a little bit. The million-dollar answer that makes guys like Roncz famous is to define “how much” to bend it up. So, go back to the Rutan Canard Pusher newsletters where Burt defines the criteria, then go get X-Foil or even Roncz’s own tool (the modified Eppler code) and solve the problem the same way Roncz did. It only took Roncz et. al four canards to get the whole thing right – you should be able to do this lesser task with just one (full-span) elevator, maybe one (full-span) elevator modified (slightly) a couple times to tweak it to perfection….

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 3:46 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

OK, re-read your note, and now I get it: Use Roncz anti-servo trim tab on the stock LS-1 elevator. Right? 

 

If so, you are saying mount a servo such as shown on the trailing edge below?

 

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:15 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

Nope. That’s not what I said. 

 

Not even close.

 

 

David “Jimmeh” Gall

 

On Dec 16, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:



Thanks David,

 

Am aware of the Roncz canard and its implementation on the EZ, but to directly convert the Quickie to that implementation would require re-engineering the elevator actuator. Could do that if starting my canard build over from scratch, but to retrofit on the existing Q2 with the LS-1 already installed would be difficult. The Roncz elevator solution is a sort of a fowler flap and would also require installation of the trailing edge trim. My design is a compromise to be sure, but could be directly retrofit in the existing slot with the same torque tube system as is currently in place and eliminate the sparrow strainer. Don’t know if that will ever happen, but it would be a doable retrofit.

 

Cheers,
Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 12:49 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

John Roncz came up with the solution to this many years ago. It’s called the “Roncz canard” in the Long-EZ community. It’s an excellent airfoil, but particularly important is what he did to the elevator. The same technique could be used on the LS-1 elevator to mitigate the elevator hinge moment. It can be modeled fairly accurately in X-foil or in Roncz’s modified Eppler airfoil code that he used back then (freely available on the internet). Just gotta tweak it so the elevator floating angle is stable and appropriate for the airplane’s approximate maximum range low cruise airspeed so that if the trim and elevator control systems accidentally disconnect in flight the airplane will be able to continue flight and land using engine power modulation (and reflex if installed) as primary pitch control. Rutan laid out all these requirements in one of the Canard Pusher newsletters in the 1980s.

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 8:10 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Thanks for the cool tuft study data, Bruce. My nerdiness must be rubbing off on you, or maybe you are just retired and want something time consuming to do.

 

Seriously, That is an interesting observation. Ideally, you would like your “trim” surfaces, such as the sparrow strainer to be well behaved under all flight conditions, but you have demonstrated that this is not the case. The sparrow strainer flies at a high AOA (negative) all the time, so as to apply a large load to the trailing edge of the elevator, push it into an accelerated condition and boom, you get it to stall. The need for them is entirely the because the aft-1/3 of the LS-1 airfoil has a significant camber on the underside. This camber is by design yielding favorable characteristics when incorporated on a non-articulated airfoil, but when you incorporate an articulated trailing edge (elevator), then the asymmetric force becomes torque on the torque tube and stick deflection instead of into a forward pitching component applied to the rigid wing structure. By countering this effect with the sparrow strainer you actually loose some of the positive characteristics of the pitching moment, and you add a lot of drag. If you could manage it as a pilot, and this is not recommended, the LS-1 would fly better and be more efficient if you could hold the elevator neutral with the stick. But this would require always be pulling lots of aft stick-force. The stick force would be very large in full cruise, and you would never find a hands off condition. It gives you an appreciation for the force that the sparrow strainer supports are experiencing constantly in flight, and why one might potentially depart the aircraft….requiring above average flying skills to recover.

 

I have modeled the forces on the LS-1 elevator and have also designed a modified LS-1 airfoil with the rear portion of the camber removed, where the forces on the redesigned elevator are balanced, (so the sparrow strainer would not be required). I have thought that sometime I would like to build a new set of these redesigned elevators and put them on my plane, but I am just getting comfortable flying with the plans design. On the redesigned airfoil, the lift profile and polars are essentially identical to the LS-1, but what is the big unknown is how the redesigned elevator would impact that stall behavior. Small changes at the trailing edge can be quite impactful on stall, and my modeling method cannot model the complexity of airflow at stall.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2019 9:32 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

Hi Jay!

Not sure I really care to know.  Either way I will still be aviating in both and won't put any more sound insulation in either one.  (more weight)

 

On a side note I have been doing some tuft testing which might be more informational.  I have found out that if I pull up the nose and then unload it by pushing forward on the stick my sparrow strainers are stalling on the bottom side.  My TriQ will not recover in most instances until I stall out or slow down the airspeed a bunch so that I can pull the stick enough for the strainers to reattach the air underneath them.  I just received some vortex generators to put on the bottom of the strainers to do more testing and will hopefully have them in place this week to test.

 

I have noticed in the past that when I do an aileron roll this happens.  I have been all though the elevators and ailerons to make sure they were tight and they now are very solid.  So then I thought that maybe the wingtip vortices were coming up from the canard and rolling down on the main wing.  That never really looked like a good theory.  So I installed yarn tufts to see just what was going on.  When I flew it started to dawn on me that the elevator was coming up every time I experienced the phenomenon.  So I had a good idea that something much simpler was happening and it kept pointing to the sparrow strainer.  After talking with Paul Fisher, Jerry Marstall, Sammy Hoskins, and even Scott Swing at Velocity I decided we were looking at a stall.  Sure enough when I went up with the tufts in place on the canard and the top and bottom of the sparrow strainers I thought "what if I just pull up and then push forward on the stick could I replicate the problem".  When I pulled up and then unloaded the canard by pushing over the sparrow strainers held for a bit and then they relaxed to stick forward an inch or so.  I looked out and saw the elevators up about and inch or so and videoed the tufts on the bottom of the strainer disappear and the tufts on the top tufts wrap around the back of the strainer and disappear forward under the strainer!  I spoke with Paul, Jerry and Scott again and Scott was freaked but agreed that was what is happening.

 

Bingo!  Now I have to fix it so that is where the vortex generator come in.  The strainers are a really sensitive trim from dealing with them in the past plus I have them mounted half way outboard on the elevator.  I also have 1.2 degrees incidence up on the canard and .8 degrees up on the main wing so we are talking apples to oranges.

 

Sure I could just fly the Q and not go negative on the elevator enough to stall them but I like to do aileron rolls when I am board. I believe you and I experienced the stall when you were getting time in my Q before your first flight.  So we educate and experiment and come out improving the species. 

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Jay Scheevel" <jay@...>
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 19:53:06 -0700

Hi Bruce,

 

If you have an iPhone it has an app available that measures abient noise level. You could give that a try.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID



Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

I have not noticed which one is quieter.  Will try to do that in the future.  Trouble is remembering how loud the other plane is between switches.

I will tell Charlie hello for you Dr Mike!

Bruce

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001@...>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:37:25 +0000 (UTC)

Hi Mike, 

 

My RV6A is noisy. I have a Clark headset modified for active noise reduction but my new Zulu 3 is quieter. I have a Lycoming O-320 E2D 150 with a metal Sensinich prop. I have problem believing a Quickie 200 is quieter.

 

Mike

 

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 7:33 PM, Mike Dwyer

<q200pilot@...> wrote:

I flew in a RV4 recently and I think the inside cockpit of the RV is a lot noisier than a Q200.  I'd expect the fiberglass sandwich to dampen some noise.  

Any other opinions?

Fly Safe,

Mike Dwyer

 

YouTube Videos: https://goo.gl/yKEHfK

Q200 Website: http://goo.gl/V8IrJF

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 8:14 PM Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

Sweet!  Hope you design a mach .5 airfoil for the Quickie guys  Wouldn't that be sweet!  

I still have my TriQ 200 but I went over to the "Dark Side" when my hanger mate Charlie Calivas sold me his RV 6 for a song and a dance and then proceeded to help me rebuild the engine!  My son Jake calls me "2 planes Crain"!  
Have a Merry Christmas!

Bruce and Honeylamb Crain
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 04:06:52 +0000 (UTC)

Bruce!

Good to hear from you as well. Things are great in Wichita. I'm still designing GA airfoils and flying my  RV6A and Cessna 120. I went through Emporia two weeks ago and it reminded me of when you, your son, and I got weathered in coming back from the Quickie fly-in at Ottawa. 

 

Great hearing from you! My thanks to the Q-List group for letting me "announce" our moving Shuck Airfoil from Yahoo! Groups to Groups.io !

 

Best wishes!

Mike Shuck

Wichita, KS

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 9:44 PM, Bruce Crain

<jcrain2@...> wrote:

Good to hear from you again Dr Shuck!  How are things in Wichita?

Bruce Crain

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 00:24:29 +0000 (UTC)

Just to let you know I am in process of moving the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil to:

 

 

I was late getting the mailing list moved over so I would be very thankful if you would post this as many

of the Shuck Airfoil group at Yahoo! Groups also were members of Q-List.

 

Many thanks!

 

Mike Shuck

Moderator of the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

Jay Scheevel
 

Thanks for the clarification, David. Starting to sound kind of like what I did in my model. I modified the elevator portion of the LS-1 to neutralize the moment on the elevator at zero AOA (plans) . What I did not do is figure out what additional trailing edge modification was necessary to establish the float angle for cruise. I think we are coming into alignment now.

 

By the way, Martin Skiby did what you are describing, but on the fixed trailing edge portion of his main wing in order get the cruise AOA optimized for the two lifting surfaces (on his tri-Q)

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:56 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

No, but you’re getting MUCH closer. Think full-span fixed trim tab. Like on the paper airplane you made as a kid: bend the trailing edge up a little bit. The million-dollar answer that makes guys like Roncz famous is to define “how much” to bend it up. So, go back to the Rutan Canard Pusher newsletters where Burt defines the criteria, then go get X-Foil or even Roncz’s own tool (the modified Eppler code) and solve the problem the same way Roncz did. It only took Roncz et. al four canards to get the whole thing right – you should be able to do this lesser task with just one (full-span) elevator, maybe one (full-span) elevator modified (slightly) a couple times to tweak it to perfection….

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 3:46 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

OK, re-read your note, and now I get it: Use Roncz anti-servo trim tab on the stock LS-1 elevator. Right? 

 

If so, you are saying mount a servo such as shown on the trailing edge below?

 

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:15 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

Nope. That’s not what I said. 

 

Not even close.

 

 

David “Jimmeh” Gall

 

On Dec 16, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:



Thanks David,

 

Am aware of the Roncz canard and its implementation on the EZ, but to directly convert the Quickie to that implementation would require re-engineering the elevator actuator. Could do that if starting my canard build over from scratch, but to retrofit on the existing Q2 with the LS-1 already installed would be difficult. The Roncz elevator solution is a sort of a fowler flap and would also require installation of the trailing edge trim. My design is a compromise to be sure, but could be directly retrofit in the existing slot with the same torque tube system as is currently in place and eliminate the sparrow strainer. Don’t know if that will ever happen, but it would be a doable retrofit.

 

Cheers,
Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 12:49 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

John Roncz came up with the solution to this many years ago. It’s called the “Roncz canard” in the Long-EZ community. It’s an excellent airfoil, but particularly important is what he did to the elevator. The same technique could be used on the LS-1 elevator to mitigate the elevator hinge moment. It can be modeled fairly accurately in X-foil or in Roncz’s modified Eppler airfoil code that he used back then (freely available on the internet). Just gotta tweak it so the elevator floating angle is stable and appropriate for the airplane’s approximate maximum range low cruise airspeed so that if the trim and elevator control systems accidentally disconnect in flight the airplane will be able to continue flight and land using engine power modulation (and reflex if installed) as primary pitch control. Rutan laid out all these requirements in one of the Canard Pusher newsletters in the 1980s.

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 8:10 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Thanks for the cool tuft study data, Bruce. My nerdiness must be rubbing off on you, or maybe you are just retired and want something time consuming to do.

 

Seriously, That is an interesting observation. Ideally, you would like your “trim” surfaces, such as the sparrow strainer to be well behaved under all flight conditions, but you have demonstrated that this is not the case. The sparrow strainer flies at a high AOA (negative) all the time, so as to apply a large load to the trailing edge of the elevator, push it into an accelerated condition and boom, you get it to stall. The need for them is entirely the because the aft-1/3 of the LS-1 airfoil has a significant camber on the underside. This camber is by design yielding favorable characteristics when incorporated on a non-articulated airfoil, but when you incorporate an articulated trailing edge (elevator), then the asymmetric force becomes torque on the torque tube and stick deflection instead of into a forward pitching component applied to the rigid wing structure. By countering this effect with the sparrow strainer you actually loose some of the positive characteristics of the pitching moment, and you add a lot of drag. If you could manage it as a pilot, and this is not recommended, the LS-1 would fly better and be more efficient if you could hold the elevator neutral with the stick. But this would require always be pulling lots of aft stick-force. The stick force would be very large in full cruise, and you would never find a hands off condition. It gives you an appreciation for the force that the sparrow strainer supports are experiencing constantly in flight, and why one might potentially depart the aircraft….requiring above average flying skills to recover.

 

I have modeled the forces on the LS-1 elevator and have also designed a modified LS-1 airfoil with the rear portion of the camber removed, where the forces on the redesigned elevator are balanced, (so the sparrow strainer would not be required). I have thought that sometime I would like to build a new set of these redesigned elevators and put them on my plane, but I am just getting comfortable flying with the plans design. On the redesigned airfoil, the lift profile and polars are essentially identical to the LS-1, but what is the big unknown is how the redesigned elevator would impact that stall behavior. Small changes at the trailing edge can be quite impactful on stall, and my modeling method cannot model the complexity of airflow at stall.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2019 9:32 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

Hi Jay!

Not sure I really care to know.  Either way I will still be aviating in both and won't put any more sound insulation in either one.  (more weight)

 

On a side note I have been doing some tuft testing which might be more informational.  I have found out that if I pull up the nose and then unload it by pushing forward on the stick my sparrow strainers are stalling on the bottom side.  My TriQ will not recover in most instances until I stall out or slow down the airspeed a bunch so that I can pull the stick enough for the strainers to reattach the air underneath them.  I just received some vortex generators to put on the bottom of the strainers to do more testing and will hopefully have them in place this week to test.

 

I have noticed in the past that when I do an aileron roll this happens.  I have been all though the elevators and ailerons to make sure they were tight and they now are very solid.  So then I thought that maybe the wingtip vortices were coming up from the canard and rolling down on the main wing.  That never really looked like a good theory.  So I installed yarn tufts to see just what was going on.  When I flew it started to dawn on me that the elevator was coming up every time I experienced the phenomenon.  So I had a good idea that something much simpler was happening and it kept pointing to the sparrow strainer.  After talking with Paul Fisher, Jerry Marstall, Sammy Hoskins, and even Scott Swing at Velocity I decided we were looking at a stall.  Sure enough when I went up with the tufts in place on the canard and the top and bottom of the sparrow strainers I thought "what if I just pull up and then push forward on the stick could I replicate the problem".  When I pulled up and then unloaded the canard by pushing over the sparrow strainers held for a bit and then they relaxed to stick forward an inch or so.  I looked out and saw the elevators up about and inch or so and videoed the tufts on the bottom of the strainer disappear and the tufts on the top tufts wrap around the back of the strainer and disappear forward under the strainer!  I spoke with Paul, Jerry and Scott again and Scott was freaked but agreed that was what is happening.

 

Bingo!  Now I have to fix it so that is where the vortex generator come in.  The strainers are a really sensitive trim from dealing with them in the past plus I have them mounted half way outboard on the elevator.  I also have 1.2 degrees incidence up on the canard and .8 degrees up on the main wing so we are talking apples to oranges.

 

Sure I could just fly the Q and not go negative on the elevator enough to stall them but I like to do aileron rolls when I am board. I believe you and I experienced the stall when you were getting time in my Q before your first flight.  So we educate and experiment and come out improving the species. 

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Jay Scheevel" <jay@...>
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 19:53:06 -0700

Hi Bruce,

 

If you have an iPhone it has an app available that measures abient noise level. You could give that a try.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID



Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

I have not noticed which one is quieter.  Will try to do that in the future.  Trouble is remembering how loud the other plane is between switches.

I will tell Charlie hello for you Dr Mike!

Bruce

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001@...>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:37:25 +0000 (UTC)

Hi Mike, 

 

My RV6A is noisy. I have a Clark headset modified for active noise reduction but my new Zulu 3 is quieter. I have a Lycoming O-320 E2D 150 with a metal Sensinich prop. I have problem believing a Quickie 200 is quieter.

 

Mike

 

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 7:33 PM, Mike Dwyer

<q200pilot@...> wrote:

I flew in a RV4 recently and I think the inside cockpit of the RV is a lot noisier than a Q200.  I'd expect the fiberglass sandwich to dampen some noise.  

Any other opinions?

Fly Safe,

Mike Dwyer

 

YouTube Videos: https://goo.gl/yKEHfK

Q200 Website: http://goo.gl/V8IrJF

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 8:14 PM Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

Sweet!  Hope you design a mach .5 airfoil for the Quickie guys  Wouldn't that be sweet!  

I still have my TriQ 200 but I went over to the "Dark Side" when my hanger mate Charlie Calivas sold me his RV 6 for a song and a dance and then proceeded to help me rebuild the engine!  My son Jake calls me "2 planes Crain"!  
Have a Merry Christmas!

Bruce and Honeylamb Crain
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 04:06:52 +0000 (UTC)

Bruce!

Good to hear from you as well. Things are great in Wichita. I'm still designing GA airfoils and flying my  RV6A and Cessna 120. I went through Emporia two weeks ago and it reminded me of when you, your son, and I got weathered in coming back from the Quickie fly-in at Ottawa. 

 

Great hearing from you! My thanks to the Q-List group for letting me "announce" our moving Shuck Airfoil from Yahoo! Groups to Groups.io !

 

Best wishes!

Mike Shuck

Wichita, KS

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 9:44 PM, Bruce Crain

<jcrain2@...> wrote:

Good to hear from you again Dr Shuck!  How are things in Wichita?

Bruce Crain

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 00:24:29 +0000 (UTC)

Just to let you know I am in process of moving the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil to:

 

 

I was late getting the mailing list moved over so I would be very thankful if you would post this as many

of the Shuck Airfoil group at Yahoo! Groups also were members of Q-List.

 

Many thanks!

 

Mike Shuck

Moderator of the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

David J. Gall
 

Jay,

 

P.S.

 

  1. Where’d you find a picture of a Roncz R1145MS with a powered trim tab? THAT was never part of the Roncz canard plans.
  2. That depiction of the Roncz canard is actually incorrect. The elevator hinge line is in the wrong place. It also looks like it has a Jimmy Durante schnoz (bump on the nose)….

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 3:56 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

No, but you’re getting MUCH closer. Think full-span fixed trim tab. Like on the paper airplane you made as a kid: bend the trailing edge up a little bit. The million-dollar answer that makes guys like Roncz famous is to define “how much” to bend it up. So, go back to the Rutan Canard Pusher newsletters where Burt defines the criteria, then go get X-Foil or even Roncz’s own tool (the modified Eppler code) and solve the problem the same way Roncz did. It only took Roncz et. al four canards to get the whole thing right – you should be able to do this lesser task with just one (full-span) elevator, maybe one (full-span) elevator modified (slightly) a couple times to tweak it to perfection….

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 3:46 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

OK, re-read your note, and now I get it: Use Roncz anti-servo trim tab on the stock LS-1 elevator. Right? 

 

If so, you are saying mount a servo such as shown on the trailing edge below?

 

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:15 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

Nope. That’s not what I said. 

 

Not even close.

 

 

David “Jimmeh” Gall

 

On Dec 16, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:



Thanks David,

 

Am aware of the Roncz canard and its implementation on the EZ, but to directly convert the Quickie to that implementation would require re-engineering the elevator actuator. Could do that if starting my canard build over from scratch, but to retrofit on the existing Q2 with the LS-1 already installed would be difficult. The Roncz elevator solution is a sort of a fowler flap and would also require installation of the trailing edge trim. My design is a compromise to be sure, but could be directly retrofit in the existing slot with the same torque tube system as is currently in place and eliminate the sparrow strainer. Don’t know if that will ever happen, but it would be a doable retrofit.

 

Cheers,
Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 12:49 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

John Roncz came up with the solution to this many years ago. It’s called the “Roncz canard” in the Long-EZ community. It’s an excellent airfoil, but particularly important is what he did to the elevator. The same technique could be used on the LS-1 elevator to mitigate the elevator hinge moment. It can be modeled fairly accurately in X-foil or in Roncz’s modified Eppler airfoil code that he used back then (freely available on the internet). Just gotta tweak it so the elevator floating angle is stable and appropriate for the airplane’s approximate maximum range low cruise airspeed so that if the trim and elevator control systems accidentally disconnect in flight the airplane will be able to continue flight and land using engine power modulation (and reflex if installed) as primary pitch control. Rutan laid out all these requirements in one of the Canard Pusher newsletters in the 1980s.

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 8:10 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Thanks for the cool tuft study data, Bruce. My nerdiness must be rubbing off on you, or maybe you are just retired and want something time consuming to do.

 

Seriously, That is an interesting observation. Ideally, you would like your “trim” surfaces, such as the sparrow strainer to be well behaved under all flight conditions, but you have demonstrated that this is not the case. The sparrow strainer flies at a high AOA (negative) all the time, so as to apply a large load to the trailing edge of the elevator, push it into an accelerated condition and boom, you get it to stall. The need for them is entirely the because the aft-1/3 of the LS-1 airfoil has a significant camber on the underside. This camber is by design yielding favorable characteristics when incorporated on a non-articulated airfoil, but when you incorporate an articulated trailing edge (elevator), then the asymmetric force becomes torque on the torque tube and stick deflection instead of into a forward pitching component applied to the rigid wing structure. By countering this effect with the sparrow strainer you actually loose some of the positive characteristics of the pitching moment, and you add a lot of drag. If you could manage it as a pilot, and this is not recommended, the LS-1 would fly better and be more efficient if you could hold the elevator neutral with the stick. But this would require always be pulling lots of aft stick-force. The stick force would be very large in full cruise, and you would never find a hands off condition. It gives you an appreciation for the force that the sparrow strainer supports are experiencing constantly in flight, and why one might potentially depart the aircraft….requiring above average flying skills to recover.

 

I have modeled the forces on the LS-1 elevator and have also designed a modified LS-1 airfoil with the rear portion of the camber removed, where the forces on the redesigned elevator are balanced, (so the sparrow strainer would not be required). I have thought that sometime I would like to build a new set of these redesigned elevators and put them on my plane, but I am just getting comfortable flying with the plans design. On the redesigned airfoil, the lift profile and polars are essentially identical to the LS-1, but what is the big unknown is how the redesigned elevator would impact that stall behavior. Small changes at the trailing edge can be quite impactful on stall, and my modeling method cannot model the complexity of airflow at stall.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2019 9:32 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

Hi Jay!

Not sure I really care to know.  Either way I will still be aviating in both and won't put any more sound insulation in either one.  (more weight)

 

On a side note I have been doing some tuft testing which might be more informational.  I have found out that if I pull up the nose and then unload it by pushing forward on the stick my sparrow strainers are stalling on the bottom side.  My TriQ will not recover in most instances until I stall out or slow down the airspeed a bunch so that I can pull the stick enough for the strainers to reattach the air underneath them.  I just received some vortex generators to put on the bottom of the strainers to do more testing and will hopefully have them in place this week to test.

 

I have noticed in the past that when I do an aileron roll this happens.  I have been all though the elevators and ailerons to make sure they were tight and they now are very solid.  So then I thought that maybe the wingtip vortices were coming up from the canard and rolling down on the main wing.  That never really looked like a good theory.  So I installed yarn tufts to see just what was going on.  When I flew it started to dawn on me that the elevator was coming up every time I experienced the phenomenon.  So I had a good idea that something much simpler was happening and it kept pointing to the sparrow strainer.  After talking with Paul Fisher, Jerry Marstall, Sammy Hoskins, and even Scott Swing at Velocity I decided we were looking at a stall.  Sure enough when I went up with the tufts in place on the canard and the top and bottom of the sparrow strainers I thought "what if I just pull up and then push forward on the stick could I replicate the problem".  When I pulled up and then unloaded the canard by pushing over the sparrow strainers held for a bit and then they relaxed to stick forward an inch or so.  I looked out and saw the elevators up about and inch or so and videoed the tufts on the bottom of the strainer disappear and the tufts on the top tufts wrap around the back of the strainer and disappear forward under the strainer!  I spoke with Paul, Jerry and Scott again and Scott was freaked but agreed that was what is happening.

 

Bingo!  Now I have to fix it so that is where the vortex generator come in.  The strainers are a really sensitive trim from dealing with them in the past plus I have them mounted half way outboard on the elevator.  I also have 1.2 degrees incidence up on the canard and .8 degrees up on the main wing so we are talking apples to oranges.

 

Sure I could just fly the Q and not go negative on the elevator enough to stall them but I like to do aileron rolls when I am board. I believe you and I experienced the stall when you were getting time in my Q before your first flight.  So we educate and experiment and come out improving the species. 

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Jay Scheevel" <jay@...>
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 19:53:06 -0700

Hi Bruce,

 

If you have an iPhone it has an app available that measures abient noise level. You could give that a try.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID



Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

I have not noticed which one is quieter.  Will try to do that in the future.  Trouble is remembering how loud the other plane is between switches.

I will tell Charlie hello for you Dr Mike!

Bruce

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001@...>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:37:25 +0000 (UTC)

Hi Mike, 

 

My RV6A is noisy. I have a Clark headset modified for active noise reduction but my new Zulu 3 is quieter. I have a Lycoming O-320 E2D 150 with a metal Sensinich prop. I have problem believing a Quickie 200 is quieter.

 

Mike

 

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 7:33 PM, Mike Dwyer

<q200pilot@...> wrote:

I flew in a RV4 recently and I think the inside cockpit of the RV is a lot noisier than a Q200.  I'd expect the fiberglass sandwich to dampen some noise.  

Any other opinions?

Fly Safe,

Mike Dwyer

 

YouTube Videos: https://goo.gl/yKEHfK

Q200 Website: http://goo.gl/V8IrJF

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 8:14 PM Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

Sweet!  Hope you design a mach .5 airfoil for the Quickie guys  Wouldn't that be sweet!  

I still have my TriQ 200 but I went over to the "Dark Side" when my hanger mate Charlie Calivas sold me his RV 6 for a song and a dance and then proceeded to help me rebuild the engine!  My son Jake calls me "2 planes Crain"!  
Have a Merry Christmas!

Bruce and Honeylamb Crain
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 04:06:52 +0000 (UTC)

Bruce!

Good to hear from you as well. Things are great in Wichita. I'm still designing GA airfoils and flying my  RV6A and Cessna 120. I went through Emporia two weeks ago and it reminded me of when you, your son, and I got weathered in coming back from the Quickie fly-in at Ottawa. 

 

Great hearing from you! My thanks to the Q-List group for letting me "announce" our moving Shuck Airfoil from Yahoo! Groups to Groups.io !

 

Best wishes!

Mike Shuck

Wichita, KS

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 9:44 PM, Bruce Crain

<jcrain2@...> wrote:

Good to hear from you again Dr Shuck!  How are things in Wichita?

Bruce Crain

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 00:24:29 +0000 (UTC)

Just to let you know I am in process of moving the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil to:

 

 

I was late getting the mailing list moved over so I would be very thankful if you would post this as many

of the Shuck Airfoil group at Yahoo! Groups also were members of Q-List.

 

Many thanks!

 

Mike Shuck

Moderator of the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

David J. Gall
 

Jay,

 

No, but you’re getting MUCH closer. Think full-span fixed trim tab. Like on the paper airplane you made as a kid: bend the trailing edge up a little bit. The million-dollar answer that makes guys like Roncz famous is to define “how much” to bend it up. So, go back to the Rutan Canard Pusher newsletters where Burt defines the criteria, then go get X-Foil or even Roncz’s own tool (the modified Eppler code) and solve the problem the same way Roncz did. It only took Roncz et. al four canards to get the whole thing right – you should be able to do this lesser task with just one (full-span) elevator, maybe one (full-span) elevator modified (slightly) a couple times to tweak it to perfection….

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 3:46 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

OK, re-read your note, and now I get it: Use Roncz anti-servo trim tab on the stock LS-1 elevator. Right? 

 

If so, you are saying mount a servo such as shown on the trailing edge below?

 

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:15 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

Nope. That’s not what I said. 

 

Not even close.

 

 

David “Jimmeh” Gall

 

On Dec 16, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:



Thanks David,

 

Am aware of the Roncz canard and its implementation on the EZ, but to directly convert the Quickie to that implementation would require re-engineering the elevator actuator. Could do that if starting my canard build over from scratch, but to retrofit on the existing Q2 with the LS-1 already installed would be difficult. The Roncz elevator solution is a sort of a fowler flap and would also require installation of the trailing edge trim. My design is a compromise to be sure, but could be directly retrofit in the existing slot with the same torque tube system as is currently in place and eliminate the sparrow strainer. Don’t know if that will ever happen, but it would be a doable retrofit.

 

Cheers,
Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 12:49 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

John Roncz came up with the solution to this many years ago. It’s called the “Roncz canard” in the Long-EZ community. It’s an excellent airfoil, but particularly important is what he did to the elevator. The same technique could be used on the LS-1 elevator to mitigate the elevator hinge moment. It can be modeled fairly accurately in X-foil or in Roncz’s modified Eppler airfoil code that he used back then (freely available on the internet). Just gotta tweak it so the elevator floating angle is stable and appropriate for the airplane’s approximate maximum range low cruise airspeed so that if the trim and elevator control systems accidentally disconnect in flight the airplane will be able to continue flight and land using engine power modulation (and reflex if installed) as primary pitch control. Rutan laid out all these requirements in one of the Canard Pusher newsletters in the 1980s.

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 8:10 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Thanks for the cool tuft study data, Bruce. My nerdiness must be rubbing off on you, or maybe you are just retired and want something time consuming to do.

 

Seriously, That is an interesting observation. Ideally, you would like your “trim” surfaces, such as the sparrow strainer to be well behaved under all flight conditions, but you have demonstrated that this is not the case. The sparrow strainer flies at a high AOA (negative) all the time, so as to apply a large load to the trailing edge of the elevator, push it into an accelerated condition and boom, you get it to stall. The need for them is entirely the because the aft-1/3 of the LS-1 airfoil has a significant camber on the underside. This camber is by design yielding favorable characteristics when incorporated on a non-articulated airfoil, but when you incorporate an articulated trailing edge (elevator), then the asymmetric force becomes torque on the torque tube and stick deflection instead of into a forward pitching component applied to the rigid wing structure. By countering this effect with the sparrow strainer you actually loose some of the positive characteristics of the pitching moment, and you add a lot of drag. If you could manage it as a pilot, and this is not recommended, the LS-1 would fly better and be more efficient if you could hold the elevator neutral with the stick. But this would require always be pulling lots of aft stick-force. The stick force would be very large in full cruise, and you would never find a hands off condition. It gives you an appreciation for the force that the sparrow strainer supports are experiencing constantly in flight, and why one might potentially depart the aircraft….requiring above average flying skills to recover.

 

I have modeled the forces on the LS-1 elevator and have also designed a modified LS-1 airfoil with the rear portion of the camber removed, where the forces on the redesigned elevator are balanced, (so the sparrow strainer would not be required). I have thought that sometime I would like to build a new set of these redesigned elevators and put them on my plane, but I am just getting comfortable flying with the plans design. On the redesigned airfoil, the lift profile and polars are essentially identical to the LS-1, but what is the big unknown is how the redesigned elevator would impact that stall behavior. Small changes at the trailing edge can be quite impactful on stall, and my modeling method cannot model the complexity of airflow at stall.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2019 9:32 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

Hi Jay!

Not sure I really care to know.  Either way I will still be aviating in both and won't put any more sound insulation in either one.  (more weight)

 

On a side note I have been doing some tuft testing which might be more informational.  I have found out that if I pull up the nose and then unload it by pushing forward on the stick my sparrow strainers are stalling on the bottom side.  My TriQ will not recover in most instances until I stall out or slow down the airspeed a bunch so that I can pull the stick enough for the strainers to reattach the air underneath them.  I just received some vortex generators to put on the bottom of the strainers to do more testing and will hopefully have them in place this week to test.

 

I have noticed in the past that when I do an aileron roll this happens.  I have been all though the elevators and ailerons to make sure they were tight and they now are very solid.  So then I thought that maybe the wingtip vortices were coming up from the canard and rolling down on the main wing.  That never really looked like a good theory.  So I installed yarn tufts to see just what was going on.  When I flew it started to dawn on me that the elevator was coming up every time I experienced the phenomenon.  So I had a good idea that something much simpler was happening and it kept pointing to the sparrow strainer.  After talking with Paul Fisher, Jerry Marstall, Sammy Hoskins, and even Scott Swing at Velocity I decided we were looking at a stall.  Sure enough when I went up with the tufts in place on the canard and the top and bottom of the sparrow strainers I thought "what if I just pull up and then push forward on the stick could I replicate the problem".  When I pulled up and then unloaded the canard by pushing over the sparrow strainers held for a bit and then they relaxed to stick forward an inch or so.  I looked out and saw the elevators up about and inch or so and videoed the tufts on the bottom of the strainer disappear and the tufts on the top tufts wrap around the back of the strainer and disappear forward under the strainer!  I spoke with Paul, Jerry and Scott again and Scott was freaked but agreed that was what is happening.

 

Bingo!  Now I have to fix it so that is where the vortex generator come in.  The strainers are a really sensitive trim from dealing with them in the past plus I have them mounted half way outboard on the elevator.  I also have 1.2 degrees incidence up on the canard and .8 degrees up on the main wing so we are talking apples to oranges.

 

Sure I could just fly the Q and not go negative on the elevator enough to stall them but I like to do aileron rolls when I am board. I believe you and I experienced the stall when you were getting time in my Q before your first flight.  So we educate and experiment and come out improving the species. 

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Jay Scheevel" <jay@...>
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 19:53:06 -0700

Hi Bruce,

 

If you have an iPhone it has an app available that measures abient noise level. You could give that a try.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID



Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

I have not noticed which one is quieter.  Will try to do that in the future.  Trouble is remembering how loud the other plane is between switches.

I will tell Charlie hello for you Dr Mike!

Bruce

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001@...>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:37:25 +0000 (UTC)

Hi Mike, 

 

My RV6A is noisy. I have a Clark headset modified for active noise reduction but my new Zulu 3 is quieter. I have a Lycoming O-320 E2D 150 with a metal Sensinich prop. I have problem believing a Quickie 200 is quieter.

 

Mike

 

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 7:33 PM, Mike Dwyer

<q200pilot@...> wrote:

I flew in a RV4 recently and I think the inside cockpit of the RV is a lot noisier than a Q200.  I'd expect the fiberglass sandwich to dampen some noise.  

Any other opinions?

Fly Safe,

Mike Dwyer

 

YouTube Videos: https://goo.gl/yKEHfK

Q200 Website: http://goo.gl/V8IrJF

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 8:14 PM Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

Sweet!  Hope you design a mach .5 airfoil for the Quickie guys  Wouldn't that be sweet!  

I still have my TriQ 200 but I went over to the "Dark Side" when my hanger mate Charlie Calivas sold me his RV 6 for a song and a dance and then proceeded to help me rebuild the engine!  My son Jake calls me "2 planes Crain"!  
Have a Merry Christmas!

Bruce and Honeylamb Crain
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 04:06:52 +0000 (UTC)

Bruce!

Good to hear from you as well. Things are great in Wichita. I'm still designing GA airfoils and flying my  RV6A and Cessna 120. I went through Emporia two weeks ago and it reminded me of when you, your son, and I got weathered in coming back from the Quickie fly-in at Ottawa. 

 

Great hearing from you! My thanks to the Q-List group for letting me "announce" our moving Shuck Airfoil from Yahoo! Groups to Groups.io !

 

Best wishes!

Mike Shuck

Wichita, KS

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 9:44 PM, Bruce Crain

<jcrain2@...> wrote:

Good to hear from you again Dr Shuck!  How are things in Wichita?

Bruce Crain

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 00:24:29 +0000 (UTC)

Just to let you know I am in process of moving the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil to:

 

 

I was late getting the mailing list moved over so I would be very thankful if you would post this as many

of the Shuck Airfoil group at Yahoo! Groups also were members of Q-List.

 

Many thanks!

 

Mike Shuck

Moderator of the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

Jay Scheevel
 

OK, re-read your note, and now I get it: Use Roncz anti-servo trim tab on the stock LS-1 elevator. Right? 

 

If so, you are saying mount a servo such as shown on the trailing edge below?

 

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 4:15 PM
To: main@q-list.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

Nope. That’s not what I said. 

 

Not even close.

 

 

David “Jimmeh” Gall



On Dec 16, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:



Thanks David,

 

Am aware of the Roncz canard and its implementation on the EZ, but to directly convert the Quickie to that implementation would require re-engineering the elevator actuator. Could do that if starting my canard build over from scratch, but to retrofit on the existing Q2 with the LS-1 already installed would be difficult. The Roncz elevator solution is a sort of a fowler flap and would also require installation of the trailing edge trim. My design is a compromise to be sure, but could be directly retrofit in the existing slot with the same torque tube system as is currently in place and eliminate the sparrow strainer. Don’t know if that will ever happen, but it would be a doable retrofit.

 

Cheers,
Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 12:49 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

John Roncz came up with the solution to this many years ago. It’s called the “Roncz canard” in the Long-EZ community. It’s an excellent airfoil, but particularly important is what he did to the elevator. The same technique could be used on the LS-1 elevator to mitigate the elevator hinge moment. It can be modeled fairly accurately in X-foil or in Roncz’s modified Eppler airfoil code that he used back then (freely available on the internet). Just gotta tweak it so the elevator floating angle is stable and appropriate for the airplane’s approximate maximum range low cruise airspeed so that if the trim and elevator control systems accidentally disconnect in flight the airplane will be able to continue flight and land using engine power modulation (and reflex if installed) as primary pitch control. Rutan laid out all these requirements in one of the Canard Pusher newsletters in the 1980s.

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 8:10 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Thanks for the cool tuft study data, Bruce. My nerdiness must be rubbing off on you, or maybe you are just retired and want something time consuming to do.

 

Seriously, That is an interesting observation. Ideally, you would like your “trim” surfaces, such as the sparrow strainer to be well behaved under all flight conditions, but you have demonstrated that this is not the case. The sparrow strainer flies at a high AOA (negative) all the time, so as to apply a large load to the trailing edge of the elevator, push it into an accelerated condition and boom, you get it to stall. The need for them is entirely the because the aft-1/3 of the LS-1 airfoil has a significant camber on the underside. This camber is by design yielding favorable characteristics when incorporated on a non-articulated airfoil, but when you incorporate an articulated trailing edge (elevator), then the asymmetric force becomes torque on the torque tube and stick deflection instead of into a forward pitching component applied to the rigid wing structure. By countering this effect with the sparrow strainer you actually loose some of the positive characteristics of the pitching moment, and you add a lot of drag. If you could manage it as a pilot, and this is not recommended, the LS-1 would fly better and be more efficient if you could hold the elevator neutral with the stick. But this would require always be pulling lots of aft stick-force. The stick force would be very large in full cruise, and you would never find a hands off condition. It gives you an appreciation for the force that the sparrow strainer supports are experiencing constantly in flight, and why one might potentially depart the aircraft….requiring above average flying skills to recover.

 

I have modeled the forces on the LS-1 elevator and have also designed a modified LS-1 airfoil with the rear portion of the camber removed, where the forces on the redesigned elevator are balanced, (so the sparrow strainer would not be required). I have thought that sometime I would like to build a new set of these redesigned elevators and put them on my plane, but I am just getting comfortable flying with the plans design. On the redesigned airfoil, the lift profile and polars are essentially identical to the LS-1, but what is the big unknown is how the redesigned elevator would impact that stall behavior. Small changes at the trailing edge can be quite impactful on stall, and my modeling method cannot model the complexity of airflow at stall.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2019 9:32 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

Hi Jay!

Not sure I really care to know.  Either way I will still be aviating in both and won't put any more sound insulation in either one.  (more weight)

 

On a side note I have been doing some tuft testing which might be more informational.  I have found out that if I pull up the nose and then unload it by pushing forward on the stick my sparrow strainers are stalling on the bottom side.  My TriQ will not recover in most instances until I stall out or slow down the airspeed a bunch so that I can pull the stick enough for the strainers to reattach the air underneath them.  I just received some vortex generators to put on the bottom of the strainers to do more testing and will hopefully have them in place this week to test.

 

I have noticed in the past that when I do an aileron roll this happens.  I have been all though the elevators and ailerons to make sure they were tight and they now are very solid.  So then I thought that maybe the wingtip vortices were coming up from the canard and rolling down on the main wing.  That never really looked like a good theory.  So I installed yarn tufts to see just what was going on.  When I flew it started to dawn on me that the elevator was coming up every time I experienced the phenomenon.  So I had a good idea that something much simpler was happening and it kept pointing to the sparrow strainer.  After talking with Paul Fisher, Jerry Marstall, Sammy Hoskins, and even Scott Swing at Velocity I decided we were looking at a stall.  Sure enough when I went up with the tufts in place on the canard and the top and bottom of the sparrow strainers I thought "what if I just pull up and then push forward on the stick could I replicate the problem".  When I pulled up and then unloaded the canard by pushing over the sparrow strainers held for a bit and then they relaxed to stick forward an inch or so.  I looked out and saw the elevators up about and inch or so and videoed the tufts on the bottom of the strainer disappear and the tufts on the top tufts wrap around the back of the strainer and disappear forward under the strainer!  I spoke with Paul, Jerry and Scott again and Scott was freaked but agreed that was what is happening.

 

Bingo!  Now I have to fix it so that is where the vortex generator come in.  The strainers are a really sensitive trim from dealing with them in the past plus I have them mounted half way outboard on the elevator.  I also have 1.2 degrees incidence up on the canard and .8 degrees up on the main wing so we are talking apples to oranges.

 

Sure I could just fly the Q and not go negative on the elevator enough to stall them but I like to do aileron rolls when I am board. I believe you and I experienced the stall when you were getting time in my Q before your first flight.  So we educate and experiment and come out improving the species. 

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Jay Scheevel" <jay@...>
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 19:53:06 -0700

Hi Bruce,

 

If you have an iPhone it has an app available that measures abient noise level. You could give that a try.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID



Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

I have not noticed which one is quieter.  Will try to do that in the future.  Trouble is remembering how loud the other plane is between switches.

I will tell Charlie hello for you Dr Mike!

Bruce

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001@...>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:37:25 +0000 (UTC)

Hi Mike, 

 

My RV6A is noisy. I have a Clark headset modified for active noise reduction but my new Zulu 3 is quieter. I have a Lycoming O-320 E2D 150 with a metal Sensinich prop. I have problem believing a Quickie 200 is quieter.

 

Mike

 

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 7:33 PM, Mike Dwyer

<q200pilot@...> wrote:

I flew in a RV4 recently and I think the inside cockpit of the RV is a lot noisier than a Q200.  I'd expect the fiberglass sandwich to dampen some noise.  

Any other opinions?

Fly Safe,

Mike Dwyer

 

YouTube Videos: https://goo.gl/yKEHfK

Q200 Website: http://goo.gl/V8IrJF

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 8:14 PM Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

Sweet!  Hope you design a mach .5 airfoil for the Quickie guys  Wouldn't that be sweet!  

I still have my TriQ 200 but I went over to the "Dark Side" when my hanger mate Charlie Calivas sold me his RV 6 for a song and a dance and then proceeded to help me rebuild the engine!  My son Jake calls me "2 planes Crain"!  
Have a Merry Christmas!

Bruce and Honeylamb Crain
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 04:06:52 +0000 (UTC)

Bruce!

Good to hear from you as well. Things are great in Wichita. I'm still designing GA airfoils and flying my  RV6A and Cessna 120. I went through Emporia two weeks ago and it reminded me of when you, your son, and I got weathered in coming back from the Quickie fly-in at Ottawa. 

 

Great hearing from you! My thanks to the Q-List group for letting me "announce" our moving Shuck Airfoil from Yahoo! Groups to Groups.io !

 

Best wishes!

Mike Shuck

Wichita, KS

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 9:44 PM, Bruce Crain

<jcrain2@...> wrote:

Good to hear from you again Dr Shuck!  How are things in Wichita?

Bruce Crain

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 00:24:29 +0000 (UTC)

Just to let you know I am in process of moving the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil to:

 

 

I was late getting the mailing list moved over so I would be very thankful if you would post this as many

of the Shuck Airfoil group at Yahoo! Groups also were members of Q-List.

 

Many thanks!

 

Mike Shuck

Moderator of the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

David J. Gall
 

Jay,

Nope. That’s not what I said. 

Not even close.


David “Jimmeh” Gall

On Dec 16, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:



Thanks David,

 

Am aware of the Roncz canard and its implementation on the EZ, but to directly convert the Quickie to that implementation would require re-engineering the elevator actuator. Could do that if starting my canard build over from scratch, but to retrofit on the existing Q2 with the LS-1 already installed would be difficult. The Roncz elevator solution is a sort of a fowler flap and would also require installation of the trailing edge trim. My design is a compromise to be sure, but could be directly retrofit in the existing slot with the same torque tube system as is currently in place and eliminate the sparrow strainer. Don’t know if that will ever happen, but it would be a doable retrofit.

 

Cheers,
Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of David J. Gall
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 12:49 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Jay,

 

John Roncz came up with the solution to this many years ago. It’s called the “Roncz canard” in the Long-EZ community. It’s an excellent airfoil, but particularly important is what he did to the elevator. The same technique could be used on the LS-1 elevator to mitigate the elevator hinge moment. It can be modeled fairly accurately in X-foil or in Roncz’s modified Eppler airfoil code that he used back then (freely available on the internet). Just gotta tweak it so the elevator floating angle is stable and appropriate for the airplane’s approximate maximum range low cruise airspeed so that if the trim and elevator control systems accidentally disconnect in flight the airplane will be able to continue flight and land using engine power modulation (and reflex if installed) as primary pitch control. Rutan laid out all these requirements in one of the Canard Pusher newsletters in the 1980s.

 

David J. Gall

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 8:10 AM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: [Q-List] Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

 

Thanks for the cool tuft study data, Bruce. My nerdiness must be rubbing off on you, or maybe you are just retired and want something time consuming to do.

 

Seriously, That is an interesting observation. Ideally, you would like your “trim” surfaces, such as the sparrow strainer to be well behaved under all flight conditions, but you have demonstrated that this is not the case. The sparrow strainer flies at a high AOA (negative) all the time, so as to apply a large load to the trailing edge of the elevator, push it into an accelerated condition and boom, you get it to stall. The need for them is entirely the because the aft-1/3 of the LS-1 airfoil has a significant camber on the underside. This camber is by design yielding favorable characteristics when incorporated on a non-articulated airfoil, but when you incorporate an articulated trailing edge (elevator), then the asymmetric force becomes torque on the torque tube and stick deflection instead of into a forward pitching component applied to the rigid wing structure. By countering this effect with the sparrow strainer you actually loose some of the positive characteristics of the pitching moment, and you add a lot of drag. If you could manage it as a pilot, and this is not recommended, the LS-1 would fly better and be more efficient if you could hold the elevator neutral with the stick. But this would require always be pulling lots of aft stick-force. The stick force would be very large in full cruise, and you would never find a hands off condition. It gives you an appreciation for the force that the sparrow strainer supports are experiencing constantly in flight, and why one might potentially depart the aircraft….requiring above average flying skills to recover.

 

I have modeled the forces on the LS-1 elevator and have also designed a modified LS-1 airfoil with the rear portion of the camber removed, where the forces on the redesigned elevator are balanced, (so the sparrow strainer would not be required). I have thought that sometime I would like to build a new set of these redesigned elevators and put them on my plane, but I am just getting comfortable flying with the plans design. On the redesigned airfoil, the lift profile and polars are essentially identical to the LS-1, but what is the big unknown is how the redesigned elevator would impact that stall behavior. Small changes at the trailing edge can be quite impactful on stall, and my modeling method cannot model the complexity of airflow at stall.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

From: main@Q-List.groups.io <main@Q-List.groups.io> On Behalf Of Bruce Crain
Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2019 9:32 PM
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

Hi Jay!

Not sure I really care to know.  Either way I will still be aviating in both and won't put any more sound insulation in either one.  (more weight)

 

On a side note I have been doing some tuft testing which might be more informational.  I have found out that if I pull up the nose and then unload it by pushing forward on the stick my sparrow strainers are stalling on the bottom side.  My TriQ will not recover in most instances until I stall out or slow down the airspeed a bunch so that I can pull the stick enough for the strainers to reattach the air underneath them.  I just received some vortex generators to put on the bottom of the strainers to do more testing and will hopefully have them in place this week to test.

 

I have noticed in the past that when I do an aileron roll this happens.  I have been all though the elevators and ailerons to make sure they were tight and they now are very solid.  So then I thought that maybe the wingtip vortices were coming up from the canard and rolling down on the main wing.  That never really looked like a good theory.  So I installed yarn tufts to see just what was going on.  When I flew it started to dawn on me that the elevator was coming up every time I experienced the phenomenon.  So I had a good idea that something much simpler was happening and it kept pointing to the sparrow strainer.  After talking with Paul Fisher, Jerry Marstall, Sammy Hoskins, and even Scott Swing at Velocity I decided we were looking at a stall.  Sure enough when I went up with the tufts in place on the canard and the top and bottom of the sparrow strainers I thought "what if I just pull up and then push forward on the stick could I replicate the problem".  When I pulled up and then unloaded the canard by pushing over the sparrow strainers held for a bit and then they relaxed to stick forward an inch or so.  I looked out and saw the elevators up about and inch or so and videoed the tufts on the bottom of the strainer disappear and the tufts on the top tufts wrap around the back of the strainer and disappear forward under the strainer!  I spoke with Paul, Jerry and Scott again and Scott was freaked but agreed that was what is happening.

 

Bingo!  Now I have to fix it so that is where the vortex generator come in.  The strainers are a really sensitive trim from dealing with them in the past plus I have them mounted half way outboard on the elevator.  I also have 1.2 degrees incidence up on the canard and .8 degrees up on the main wing so we are talking apples to oranges.

 

Sure I could just fly the Q and not go negative on the elevator enough to stall them but I like to do aileron rolls when I am board. I believe you and I experienced the stall when you were getting time in my Q before your first flight.  So we educate and experiment and come out improving the species. 

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Jay Scheevel" <jay@...>
To: main@Q-List.groups.io
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 19:53:06 -0700

Hi Bruce,

 

If you have an iPhone it has an app available that measures abient noise level. You could give that a try.

 

Cheers,

Jay

 

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID



Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

I have not noticed which one is quieter.  Will try to do that in the future.  Trouble is remembering how loud the other plane is between switches.

I will tell Charlie hello for you Dr Mike!

Bruce

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001@...>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:37:25 +0000 (UTC)

Hi Mike, 

 

My RV6A is noisy. I have a Clark headset modified for active noise reduction but my new Zulu 3 is quieter. I have a Lycoming O-320 E2D 150 with a metal Sensinich prop. I have problem believing a Quickie 200 is quieter.

 

Mike

 

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 7:33 PM, Mike Dwyer

<q200pilot@...> wrote:

I flew in a RV4 recently and I think the inside cockpit of the RV is a lot noisier than a Q200.  I'd expect the fiberglass sandwich to dampen some noise.  

Any other opinions?

Fly Safe,

Mike Dwyer

 

YouTube Videos: https://goo.gl/yKEHfK

Q200 Website: http://goo.gl/V8IrJF

 

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 8:14 PM Bruce Crain <jcrain2@...> wrote:

Sweet!  Hope you design a mach .5 airfoil for the Quickie guys  Wouldn't that be sweet!  

I still have my TriQ 200 but I went over to the "Dark Side" when my hanger mate Charlie Calivas sold me his RV 6 for a song and a dance and then proceeded to help me rebuild the engine!  My son Jake calls me "2 planes Crain"!  
Have a Merry Christmas!

Bruce and Honeylamb Crain
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 04:06:52 +0000 (UTC)

Bruce!

Good to hear from you as well. Things are great in Wichita. I'm still designing GA airfoils and flying my  RV6A and Cessna 120. I went through Emporia two weeks ago and it reminded me of when you, your son, and I got weathered in coming back from the Quickie fly-in at Ottawa. 

 

Great hearing from you! My thanks to the Q-List group for letting me "announce" our moving Shuck Airfoil from Yahoo! Groups to Groups.io !

 

Best wishes!

Mike Shuck

Wichita, KS

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 9:44 PM, Bruce Crain

<jcrain2@...> wrote:

Good to hear from you again Dr Shuck!  How are things in Wichita?

Bruce Crain

---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Mike Shuck via Groups.Io" <mikeshuck2001=yahoo.com@groups.io>
To: "main@Q-List.groups.io" <main@Q-List.groups.io>
Subject: [Q-List] Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2019 00:24:29 +0000 (UTC)

Just to let you know I am in process of moving the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil to:

 

 

I was late getting the mailing list moved over so I would be very thankful if you would post this as many

of the Shuck Airfoil group at Yahoo! Groups also were members of Q-List.

 

Many thanks!

 

Mike Shuck

Moderator of the former Yahoo! Groups Shuck Airfoil

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

Jeffrey Bevilacqua <jlbevila@...>
 

Thanks Charlie and Jay. Im now set up for my new Dragonfly account.

On Monday, December 16, 2019, 12:48:17 PM PST, One Sky Dog via Groups.Io <oneskydog@...> wrote:


Jeff,

I make the side plates with a notch > that fits over the trailing edge of th=
e elevator 1/8=E2=80=9D or so. That loads the adhesive in compression and sh=
ear like it is supposed to be loaded. Just gluing them on the bottom puts th=
e adhesive in peeling tension. Glue is not strong in peel.

Clean the surface , use fine sandpaper to sand to the glass on the elevator b=
ottom, use structural epoxy filled with flox for no drip fillets to bond the=
m on.

There is a Dragonfly group=20

https://dragonflylist.groups.io/g/main/photos?p=3Dcreated,,,20,2,80,0

Charlie Johnson


On Dec 16, 2019, at 10:23 AM, Jeffrey Bevilacqua via Groups.Io <jlbevila@...> wrote:

Justa quick question. Can anyone recommend a reliable adhesive to attach the Sparrow Strainers to the elevator considering the constant high loads. Thanks.
Jeff Bevilacqua DF MK H.

On Monday, December 16, 2019, 09:15:41 AM PST, One Sky Dog via Groups.Io <oneskydog@...> wrote:


Bruce roll the RV problem solved.

I know Tex Johnson rolled a 707 so why not a Q?

Milk stool pilot


On Dec 16, 2019, at 9:09 AM, Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:

Thanks for the cool tuft study data, Bruce. My nerdiness must be rubbing off on you, or maybe you are just retired and want something time consuming to do.



Re: Bruce's tuft study on sparrow strainers

One Sky Dog
 

Jeff,

I make the side plates with a notch > that fits over the trailing edge of th=
e elevator 1/8=E2=80=9D or so. That loads the adhesive in compression and sh=
ear like it is supposed to be loaded. Just gluing them on the bottom puts th=
e adhesive in peeling tension. Glue is not strong in peel.

Clean the surface , use fine sandpaper to sand to the glass on the elevator b=
ottom, use structural epoxy filled with flox for no drip fillets to bond the=
m on.

There is a Dragonfly group=20

https://dragonflylist.groups.io/g/main/photos?p=3Dcreated,,,20,2,80,0

Charlie Johnson


On Dec 16, 2019, at 10:23 AM, Jeffrey Bevilacqua via Groups.Io <jlbevila@...> wrote:

Justa quick question. Can anyone recommend a reliable adhesive to attach the Sparrow Strainers to the elevator considering the constant high loads. Thanks.
Jeff Bevilacqua DF MK H.

On Monday, December 16, 2019, 09:15:41 AM PST, One Sky Dog via Groups.Io <oneskydog@...> wrote:


Bruce roll the RV problem solved.

I know Tex Johnson rolled a 707 so why not a Q?

Milk stool pilot


On Dec 16, 2019, at 9:09 AM, Jay Scheevel <jay@...> wrote:

Thanks for the cool tuft study data, Bruce. My nerdiness must be rubbing off on you, or maybe you are just retired and want something time consuming to do.


7181 - 7200 of 55668