News:



  • March 28, 2024, 06:46:56 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?  (Read 2265 times)

Online Dennis Toth

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4208
Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« on: January 28, 2022, 04:04:35 PM »
Using Ted Fancher's Imitation numbers as base it has a Tail Volume Coefficient of 0.45. Question - what is a good range for this? What happens as you move lower and higher? What is better to change - tail moment length or tail area to adjust to be closer to the 0.45?

Best,    DennisT

Offline Howard Rush

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 7805
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #1 on: January 29, 2022, 06:07:53 PM »
Good questions.  Tail volume coefficient is kinda rule-of-thumby and leaves some stuff out even for static stability.   Here's a calculator, so you can measure some airplanes and make a chart.  Include the Max Bee.  It probably has a lot of it, and it's not excessive. 

As you increase tail volume, CG moves aft for the same static stability. 

For a given tail volume coefficient, making the tail longer and smaller:
1) will increase static stability a little bit because the rate of change of downwash with angle of attack is less
2) will give more maneuvering stability.  You'll need to increase elevator throw for a given loop radius. 
3) may reduce the maximum turn rate. 
4) will require more elevator/flap ratio as air density increases.

I've been doing some experiments to try to figure out what the tail does and to see if some sort of stabilator can do it better, although everybody knows it can't.
The Jive Combat Team
Making combat and stunt great again

Offline Mark wood

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 853
  • I'm here purely for the fun of it.
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #2 on: January 29, 2022, 06:19:59 PM »
Good questions.  Tail volume coefficient is kinda rule-of-thumby and leaves some stuff out even for static stability.   Here's a calculator, so you can measure some airplanes and make a chart.  Include the Max Bee.  It probably has a lot of it, and it's not excessive. 

As you increase tail volume, CG moves aft for the same static stability. 

For a given tail volume coefficient, making the tail longer and smaller:
1) will increase static stability a little bit because the rate of change of downwash with angle of attack is less
2) will give more maneuvering stability.  You'll need to increase elevator throw for a given loop radius. 
3) may reduce the maximum turn rate. 
4) will require more elevator/flap ratio as air density increases.

I've been doing some experiments to try to figure out what the tail does and to see if some sort of stabilator can do it better, although everybody knows it can't.

Cool spreadsheet Howard..
Life is good AMA 1488
Why do we fly? We are practicing, you might say, what it means to be alive...  -Richard Bach
“Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that’s not why we do it.” – Richard P. Feynman

Offline Trostle

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3338
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #3 on: January 29, 2022, 06:57:24 PM »


I've been doing some experiments to try to figure out what the tail does and to see if some sort of stabilator can do it better, although everybody knows it can't.

Hi Howard,

Some of the top combat guys seem to know a lot about stabilators.  Maybe they can help you.

Keith

Offline Ted Fancher

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2323
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2022, 09:49:19 PM »
Hi Howard,

Some of the top combat guys seem to know a lot about stabilators.  Maybe they can help you.

Keith
Oh my, Kernel.  That was rude! n1 n1 <=

Offline Trostle

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3338
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #5 on: January 30, 2022, 12:47:19 AM »
Oh my, Kernel.  That was rude! n1 n1 <=

My one chance to get one off on Howard and I get called for it.  Maybe it was not as clever as I thought.  ???

Offline Mark wood

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 853
  • I'm here purely for the fun of it.
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #6 on: January 30, 2022, 01:36:34 AM »
My one chance to get one off on Howard and I get called for it.  Maybe it was not as clever as I thought.  ???

I think the intended humor was missed. That's my trick.
Life is good AMA 1488
Why do we fly? We are practicing, you might say, what it means to be alive...  -Richard Bach
“Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that’s not why we do it.” – Richard P. Feynman

Offline bob whitney

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 2244
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #7 on: January 30, 2022, 06:28:58 AM »
Keith, i thought it was great.take em when u can get um
rad racer

Offline Joe Ed Pederson

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 471
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #8 on: January 30, 2022, 07:44:26 AM »
 This thread exemplifies one of the things I love about Control Line: the relationships that get built to the point that friends can harmlessly poke fun at one another.

And I love that contests are more like family reunions than anything else.

Joe Ed Pederson
Cuba, MO

Offline Howard Rush

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 7805
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #9 on: January 30, 2022, 11:33:10 AM »
Hi Howard,

Some of the top combat guys seem to know a lot about stabilators.  Maybe they can help you.

Keith

Good point. Those guys really know their stuff. They get all the girls, too.

Edited to fix spelling
« Last Edit: February 03, 2022, 10:19:31 PM by Howard Rush »
The Jive Combat Team
Making combat and stunt great again

Offline bob whitney

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 2244
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #10 on: January 30, 2022, 12:02:16 PM »
I knew i should have stayed with Combat
rad racer

Offline BillLee

  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1292
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #11 on: January 30, 2022, 04:32:39 PM »
I knew i should have stayed with Combat

Well, Bob, you should have stayed with Something!  😜
Bill Lee
AMA 20018

Offline Tim Wescott

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 12804
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #12 on: January 30, 2022, 04:53:35 PM »
Using Ted Fancher's Imitation numbers as base it has a Tail Volume Coefficient of 0.45. Question - what is a good range for this? What happens as you move lower and higher? What is better to change - tail moment length or tail area to adjust to be closer to the 0.45?

Best,    DennisT

I don't know what a good range is, but to answer that I'd take a look at the current machines that are winning and calculate their TVCs.  You run the risk of fulfilling the adage that if you take the average of the "numbers" on a bunch of stunt planes and build your own you probably won't hit an optimum -- instead, you'll have a plane no better than average!

(I'm reminded of a review in the 1990's of a 1970's book on sailplane design.  If you followed the authors rules on how to make the bestest sailplane ever, you ended up with a sailplane that flies like it's 1970.)

TVC probably has the strongest effect on the acceptable range of center of gravity that you can get away with.  So flying a slimer, you'd be motivated to go to higher TVC, so the change in CG doesn't affect the flying qualities as much.  I don't know if anyone has yet experimented with an electric that has a smaller tail -- it would be interesting.  Higher TVC also gives the tail more authority in turns, so if you went smaller you might need more elevator throw.

Making the tail moment arm longer and the tail smaller should give you roughly the same static stability, but because of circular airflow you'll need more elevator in the corners, and you may end up with a plane that's hard to get started rotating and hard to get stopped.

I suspect that evolution has given us airplanes that are close to optimal -- but people thought that in 1965, and look where we are now!  If anyone wants to experiment, a test dog that lets you bolt various tails on at various lengths could be very educational indeed -- but you'd need a really good pilot willing to put a lot of effort into the exercise.
AMA 64232

The problem with electric is that once you get the smoke generator and sound system installed, the plane is too heavy.

Offline Howard Rush

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 7805
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #13 on: January 30, 2022, 06:11:31 PM »
TVC probably has the strongest effect on the acceptable range of center of gravity that you can get away with.

Good point. If one was to design a plane for the masses, it should have a big tail to accommodate different engines and paint quantities.
The Jive Combat Team
Making combat and stunt great again

Offline Ted Fancher

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2323
Re: Tail Volume Coefficient - variations?
« Reply #14 on: January 30, 2022, 10:25:02 PM »
My one chance to get one off on Howard and I get called for it.  Maybe it was not as clever as I thought.  ???

Actually, Kernal.  That remark was supposed to be a witty needle at a dear friend.  Please accept my apology.

Ted


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here