X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com ([171.71.176.71] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.9) with ESMTP id 2085235 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 11:03:40 -0400 Received-SPF: softfail receiver=logan.com; client-ip=171.71.176.71; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com Received: from sj-dkim-3.cisco.com ([171.71.179.195]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Jun 2007 07:59:02 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.16,386,1175497200"; d="scan'208"; a="377256909:sNHT44141626" Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-3.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l55Ex2Lt003394 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 07:59:02 -0700 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l55Ex1aK007991 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 14:59:02 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.21]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 5 Jun 2007 10:58:24 -0400 Received: from [64.102.38.132] ([64.102.38.132]) by xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 5 Jun 2007 10:58:24 -0400 Message-ID: <46657A10.9090901@nc.rr.com> Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 10:58:24 -0400 From: Ernest Christley Reply-To: echristley@nc.rr.com User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070403) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Single rotor video References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jun 2007 14:58:24.0398 (UTC) FILETIME=[F73DA2E0:01C7A781] Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-3; header.From=echristley@nc.rr.com; dkim=neutral wrjjrs@aol.com wrote: > Rusty, > You may be getting something that was studied with dirt bike singles > and narrow angle v-twins (Harleys). These engines worked well in > getting traction on dirt tracks due to their firing order. If I recall > it was called climb and retreat by the guys actually studying it. It > would apply to a prop very well. Your prop has at the very least some > flexibility in the blades. The power pulse hits and forces the blade > forward violently, followed by a lull. Think of it like driving a long > screw into wood. Every 1/2 turn you must re-position your grip. Any > twist in the shaft of the screwdriver is released until you start > turning again. The fore and aft movement might be caused by the large > power pulse of the single rotor. This may be a totally natural event. > OF course I've been wrong before, YMMV etc... > Bill Jepson > > Another dynamic factor will be that when you hit the prop with that pulse, will it make the blade twist? That will be wholly dependent on the mass distribution around the blade chord at each station. There's no way to make the blade 100% stiff, but I think composite blades would be more flexible than other types. So, the pulse hits (hard) and produces a slight twist in the blade which increases the angle of attack. Producing more lift on the blade, which is already being stressed by the power pulse, causing it to flex forward. The pulse goes away, or even negative, and the blade snaps back like a loaded spring. You might want to consider finding a way to extend the prop further out away from your trailer before you try any more experiments. Then see if maybe you can borrow a few different props and see what sort of reaction they give you. You might find that a different prop will have a different mass distribution that doesn't exhibit the problem. Or maybe you can make one yourself that has extra material to resist warping.