X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 15:03:40 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.120] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.2) with ESMTP id 6139721 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:48:45 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.120; envelope-from=super_chipmunk@roadrunner.com X-Original-Return-Path: X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=XL2yuHdE c=1 sm=0 a=+kuJ7Sa7hUpxs7xJxzDFzQ==:17 a=AeF9CLZUGkAA:10 a=zTVDa7HKqxcA:10 a=doupyKFmAAAA:8 a=l-gFdSxyLacA:10 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=2pg1mtO0VTFQNwsuzy8A:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=_1HhdyPUkNK2nn7Y:21 a=dyaYypObC9KpwOBA:21 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=yMhMjlubAAAA:8 a=aiMX60jYAAAA:8 a=3jHKXB9HdQ3wvGJEZkIA:9 a=gKO2Hq4RSVkA:10 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=hTZeC7Yk6K0A:10 a=frz4AuCg-hUA:10 a=Q2UVl1ZxuYYA:10 a=TkDNfUER34DnLkX-:21 a=+kuJ7Sa7hUpxs7xJxzDFzQ==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Authenticated-User: X-Originating-IP: 76.179.81.18 Received: from [76.179.81.18] ([76.179.81.18:59825] helo=WilliamHP) by cdptpa-oedge04.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.3.46 r()) with ESMTP id 39/C5-25887-AB170515; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 15:48:11 +0000 X-Original-Message-ID: <273B1D5AEF384A1990B64037FBF6DB3A@WilliamHP> From: "Bill Wade" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Aileron balancing X-Original-Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:48:09 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0027_01CE294E.9F3176D0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3555.308 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3555.308 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0027_01CE294E.9F3176D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Joe- I got bit by that one myself and went through the entire = travel adjustment process before realizing I had done it backwards. If = you look at the lower LH side of the drawing there=E2=80=99s a notation = about the top skin, plus directional arrows. They figured the wing would = be upside down at that point- unfortunately mine was right side up. If = you read 8-31 the correct travel limits are spelled out. Again, note = they assume the wing is upside down. I haven=E2=80=99t attached the wing tips yet- thanks for the tip. I = think because I likely have more potential travel than most I may be = able to tweak things later on to adjust performance. Reflexed ailerons! BTW, you might try rotating your weight end-for-end. That might allow = the thick part to be cantilevered while keeping the same angle with the = tab. =E2=80=93Bill Wade From: Joe Trepicone=20 Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 10:11 AM To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Subject: [LML] Re: Aileron balancing Wade, I called Lancair and asked how I should determine neutral aileron = position. They said neutral is determined from the wing tip or = winglet=E2=80=A6. Out board in. They also said the top of the flap may = or may not be exactly neutral. Frankly, I thought that the top of the = flap, aileron and winglet should all be at the same level but it appears = =E2=80=93in my case- there is about an 1/8=E2=80=9D or so discrepancy = between the top flap and top of neutral aileron. Also the full travel = of the aileron was to be 20 degrees down and 14 degrees up as indicated = in the build manual Figure 8:D:6. What I thought was going to be a = simple process turned out to be quite difficult. Joe Trepicone From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = Bill Wade Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 6:02 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Re: Aileron balancing =20 =20 =20 I did a reality check today and in my situation the Lancair = orientation that Joe pictured worked best. Like others I had tried = flipping the weight 180 degrees (flat side on the aileron tab) because = it seemed logical that the mass should be as far forward as possible. It = just didn=E2=80=99t work for me, and the pictures show why. =20 The two photos show the weight clearance near the inboard hinge, RH = wing. It wasn=E2=80=99t easy to take the pictures and the quality = isn=E2=80=99t great but the first one shows that there=E2=80=99s about = 1/16=E2=80=9D clearance at full UP travel, 20 degrees. What shows is the = carbon tab (with the screw head). The weight surface is parallel to the = pocket interior. If the weight was flipped over or on the bottom of the = tab there wouldn=E2=80=99t be nearly enough travel. The second is harder = to make out but I=E2=80=99d say there=E2=80=99s 1/8=E2=80=9D+ clearance, = and you can see the tab/ weight relationship better. The aileron there = is at 16 degrees DN, 2 degrees more than required. The manual = doesn=E2=80=99t specify how to align the aileron, at least as far as I = could find, so I decided to set neutral centered on the flap. If others = chose to set the aileron top flush with the top of the flap, that would = bias the travel downward, gaining more clearance in the UP direction and = using some of the extra clearance I have downward. Maybe that=E2=80=99s = why I seem to differ from other posters. How did others set their = neutral position? =20 Perhaps the best way to start would be to try different weight = positions, see what the travel is and look into the pocket to get an = idea where and how the weight is hitting. Then choose the way that looks = best and go for it. Just use the same holes in the aileron tab- unused = holes in the weight can easily be filled with solder. -Bill Wade ------=_NextPart_000_0027_01CE294E.9F3176D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Joe-
            = I got=20 bit by that one myself and went through the entire travel adjustment = process=20 before realizing I had done it backwards. If you look at the lower LH = side of=20 the drawing there=E2=80=99s a notation about the top skin, plus = directional arrows. They=20 figured the wing would be upside down at that point- unfortunately mine = was=20 right side up. If you read 8-31 the correct travel limits are spelled = out.=20 Again, note they assume the wing is upside down.
 
  I haven=E2=80=99t attached the wing tips yet- thanks for the = tip. I think=20 because I likely have more potential travel than most I may be able to = tweak=20 things later on to adjust performance. Reflexed ailerons!
 
  BTW, you might try rotating your weight end-for-end. That = might=20 allow the thick part to be cantilevered while keeping the same angle = with the=20 tab. =E2=80=93Bill Wade
 
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 10:11 AM
Subject: [LML] Re: Aileron balancing
 

Wade,  I called = Lancair and=20 asked how I should determine neutral aileron position.  They said = neutral=20 is determined from the wing tip or winglet=E2=80=A6. Out board = in.   They also=20 said the top of the flap may or may not be exactly neutral.  = Frankly, I=20 thought that the top of the flap, aileron and winglet should all be at = the same=20 level but it appears =E2=80=93in my case- there is about an 1/8=E2=80=9D = or so discrepancy=20 between the top flap and top of neutral aileron.  Also the full = travel of=20 the aileron was to be 20 degrees down and 14 degrees up as indicated in = the=20 build manual Figure 8:D:6.  What I thought was going to be a simple = process=20 turned out to be quite difficult.  Joe = Trepicone

From: Lancair = Mailing=20 List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Bill=20 Wade
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 6:02 PM
To:=20 lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: Aileron=20 balancing

 

 

 

  =20 I did a reality check today and in my situation the Lancair orientation = that Joe=20 pictured worked best. Like others I had tried flipping the weight 180 = degrees=20 (flat side on the aileron tab) because it seemed logical that the mass = should be=20 as far forward as possible. It just didn=E2=80=99t work for me, and the = pictures show=20 why.

 

The=20 two photos show the weight clearance near the inboard hinge, RH wing. It = wasn=E2=80=99t=20 easy to take the pictures and the quality isn=E2=80=99t great but the = first one shows=20 that there=E2=80=99s about 1/16=E2=80=9D clearance at full UP travel, 20 = degrees. What shows is=20 the carbon tab (with the screw head). The weight surface is parallel to = the=20 pocket interior. If the weight was flipped over or on the bottom of the = tab=20 there wouldn=E2=80=99t be nearly enough travel. The second is harder to = make out but I=E2=80=99d=20 say there=E2=80=99s 1/8=E2=80=9D+ clearance, and you can see the tab/ = weight relationship=20 better. The aileron there is at 16 degrees DN, 2 degrees more than = required. The=20 manual doesn=E2=80=99t specify how to align the aileron, at least as far = as I could=20 find, so I decided to set neutral centered on the flap. If others chose = to set=20 the aileron top flush with the top of the flap, that would bias the = travel=20 downward, gaining more clearance in the UP direction and using some of = the extra=20 clearance I have downward. Maybe that=E2=80=99s why I seem to differ = from other posters.=20 How did others set their neutral position?

 

 =20 Perhaps the best way to start would be to try different weight = positions, see=20 what the travel is and look into the pocket to get an idea where and how = the=20 weight is hitting. Then choose the way that looks best and go for it. = Just use=20 the same holes in the aileron tab- unused holes in the weight can easily = be=20 filled with solder.  -Bill Wade

------=_NextPart_000_0027_01CE294E.9F3176D0--