tonyplane(at)bellsouth.ne
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 12:33 pm Post subject: Hinge less ailerons (with autopilot) |
 |
|
No problem with the Trio EZ Pilot II auto-pilot and0 the hinge less ailerons. I did not adjust the autopilot factory set servo0 override force higher than when received. I can overpower the servo if0 needed and the existing servo force is more than sufficient to keep'er straight0 on course.
I have been previously involved in0 investigations a lot of aircraft component metal fatigue failures ((also0 other failures such as overstress, stress corrosion cracking0 in aluminum and stress corrosion/hydrogen embrittlement failures in hi-strength steels (used to be fun listening to the debates over which0 one occurred in high-strength steels - do not know if a way has yet been0 developed to positively determine this type failure if the part had been plated)) and have spent countless hours with metallurgists in the0 lab. Originally, I thought that the skin hinge could be prone to0 fatigue failure, but after reading Mr. Heinz's test, I had no concerns. 0 >From an aerodynamic stand point, I voted with my funds for the hinge less0 system.
Yes, the aileron stick0 force is heavy compared to the elevator stick force BUT 0 The hinge less system is a really neat discussion point with other airplane0 enthusiasts.
Tony Graziano
601XL; N493TG; 128 hrs
----------------
Time: 09:05:200 AM PST US
From: "Craig Payne" <[url=]craig(at)craigandjean.com[/url]>
Subject: RE: Hinge less0 ailerons
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"0 <[url=]craig(at)craigandjean.com[/url]>
If you look in the file archive for this list you can see0 examples of AP
servos installed in 601's:
[url=]www.matronics.com/photoshare/craig(at)craigandjean.com.02.11.2006/[/url]
These include servos from Navaid and Treo. I0 assume at least one of these
planes uses the "skin" hinges. Any of the owners0 should be able to comment
on their servo performance: Jeff Small, Tony0 Graziano or Pat Safford.
| Quote: | From my point of view I would bet that the0 force of the wind on the ailerons
generates much more counterforce than the0 "skin" hinge.
|
-- Craig
Subject: Hinge less ailerons
From: "John Hines" <[url=]John.Hines(at)craftontull.com[/url]>
--> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Hines"0 <[url=]John.Hines(at)craftontull.com[/url]>
I had an interesting conversation with Jim Younkin over the0 weekend
about the Zenith 601. For those that don't know, Jim Younkin0 is
credited with inventing the autopilot and he is the president0 of
Trutrak. When I told him I was building a 601XL, he rather0 gruffly
asked what kind of aileron hinge I was using. We then launched0 into the
normal conversation about how Zenith claims they last longer than0 a
piano hinge... He then said that questions of reliability weren't0 then
only reason he didn't like them. He said that flexing metal is not0 a
hinge, it is a spring. A spring requires more force to move than0 a
hinge. He talked about the CT2K having spring balanced ailerons and0 how
even though it was an LSA it required a bigger autopilot servo than0 a
Bonanza.
After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the0 demo plane. The
elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion0 was stiff. But
you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it0 didn't bother me.
Does the piano hinge give it better motion? How much0 weight does it
add?
All I know is that I'm a guy with no pilot's0 license and a completed
tail kit. Jim Younkin is a hell of a lot0 smarter than I am. It's hard
to argue with a guy with his0 credentials. What do you guys think?
John
www.johnsplane.com
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
