![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've never quite bought in to the "horizontal component of lift"
explanation for what causes a plane to turn. I started this discussion talking about a "wings level skidding turn". There's no horizontal component of lift generated by the wings if the wings are level. There is however a couple comprising of the rightwards force from the rudder, and the induced leftwards force of wind resistance acting further forward along the fuselage. It's the couple which causes the plane to turn. I can also generate a substantial amount of horizontal force from the wings without the plane turning (think forward slip); it just moves sideways through the air. I believe what causes a plane to turn is the couple comprised of opposing forces which aren't aligned. For example, in a coordinated left turn, the wings generate a horizontal force to the left. The tail generates a horizontal force to the right. The forces aren't aligned, so a couple is generated, and the airplane turns left. Without a force to the right, the "horizontal component of lift" to the left generated by the banked wings would merely cause the plane to move left -- it wouldn't turn. Just my $0.10 worth, and I'll happily listen to contradictory arguments. Tim. On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 20:52:00 -0400, Stubby wrote: What causes a plane to turn is the horizontal component of the lift vector. It certainly does not depend on the turn coordinator. What counts is the center of gravity of the plane, not the tail. Tim Auckland wrote: Stubby, Thanks, I think I've got it now. As the turn is initiated, the tail has to go right (this is what causes the plane to turn) and my guess is that the ball initially goes very slightly left. However, once a constant-radius turn has been achieved, the ball will be on the right (outside) of the turn. Tim. On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:28:28 -0400, Stubby wrote: I don't think so. My understanding is the ball rests in a slightly curved tube, arranged so that gravity tends to center it. Centrifugal force tries to move it to the outside of the skid, up the curved tube. Neither of these forces depends on where you mount the turn coordinator. Tim Auckland wrote: (Things are so slow in this group at the moment, I thought I'd post this to get your input on something I've been mulling over...) If you put a plane into a skidding left turn (wings level) with left rudder, the ball on the panel goes to the right. However, I've been trying to work out what would happen to the ball if it was mounted on the tail. The rudder is pushing the tail of the plane to the right, so I think the ball would go to the left. Can anyone confirm this? Tim. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I started this discussion talking about a "wings level skidding turn".
There's no horizontal component of lift generated by the wings if the wings are level. There is however a couple comprising of the rightwards force from the rudder, and the induced leftwards force of wind resistance acting further forward along the fuselage. It's the couple which causes the plane to turn. There is also the fact that the thrust vector is more aligned with the direction of desired flight. I believe what causes a plane to turn is the couple comprised of opposing forces which aren't aligned. This is always true, for any acceleration not in the direct line of flight. There is no "one thing" which causes anything in aviation (except at the most fundamental level, where all flight is controlled by money). In a coordinated turn, there are several forces, as you pointed out. However, not all turns are coordinated. What makes a car turn? Are there analogs in aviation of these forces? Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 02:12:48 GMT, Jose
wrote: I started this discussion talking about a "wings level skidding turn". There's no horizontal component of lift generated by the wings if the wings are level. There is however a couple comprising of the rightwards force from the rudder, and the induced leftwards force of wind resistance acting further forward along the fuselage. It's the couple which causes the plane to turn. There is also the fact that the thrust vector is more aligned with the direction of desired flight. I believe what causes a plane to turn is the couple comprised of opposing forces which aren't aligned. This is always true, for any acceleration not in the direct line of flight. There is no "one thing" which causes anything in aviation (except at the most fundamental level, where all flight is controlled by money). In a coordinated turn, there are several forces, as you pointed out. However, not all turns are coordinated. What makes a car turn? Same thing that makes a plane turn: unbalanced forces not acting through the centre of gravity. (In the case of a car, the initial sideways forces are generated by the front tires.) By the way, I'm beginning to realize that it only takes one force to turn an object, as long as that force is not acting through the centre of gravity. Interestingly enough, if the "vertical component of lift" were the only sideways force acting on the plane, it would cause adverse yaw. The wing's centre of lift is behind the plane's centre of gravity, so a pull to the left would cause the plane to turn right. Are there analogs in aviation of these forces? Only when taxiing a tricycle(:-) Jose |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
By the way, I'm beginning to realize that it only takes one force to
turn an object, as long as that force is not acting through the centre of gravity. That's not quite true (unless by "turn" you mean "yaw"). A single force not through the CG will cause the object to rotate about the CG. To get an airplane to actually =turn= however requires also a change in direction, else the airplane would simply skid sideways the rest of the flight. Let's say you are flying straight and level, due North, and simply stomp on the (left) rudder pedal. The first thing is that the tail will swing to the right, because the force from the rudder is not through the CG. But then other things happen. As the tail swings, the right wing ends up going faster and the left wing slower through the air. So the right wing provides more lift, and the aircraft banks to the left. Since the airplane is still going due North, but pointing slightly west, the airflow on the side of the plane will push the airplane somewhat to the left, and the propeller (now pointing slightly west) will also help pull the airplane west. The bank also introduces some net leftward force. So, there's a lot going on. (and no, stomping on the rudder pedals isn't usually the best way to turn). Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 18:57:30 GMT, Jose
wrote: By the way, I'm beginning to realize that it only takes one force to turn an object, as long as that force is not acting through the centre of gravity. That's not quite true (unless by "turn" you mean "yaw"). Yes, when I made the "one force" statement, I was thinking of yaw. A single force not through the CG will cause the object to rotate about the CG. To get an airplane to actually =turn= however requires also a change in direction, else the airplane would simply skid sideways the rest of the flight. Let's say you are flying straight and level, due North, and simply stomp on the (left) rudder pedal. The first thing is that the tail will swing to the right, because the force from the rudder is not through the CG. But then other things happen. As the tail swings, the right wing ends up going faster and the left wing slower through the air. So the right wing provides more lift, and the aircraft banks to the left. In my original scenario, I stated a "skidding left turn (wings level)". I was picturing doing whatever is required with the ailerons to keep the wings level. Come to think of it, that'll mean down-aileron on the left side, which'll introduce more drag on the left, which may or may not be balanced by the increased drag from the faster moving right wing and up-aileron on the right side..... Since the airplane is still going due North, but pointing slightly west, the airflow on the side of the plane will push the airplane somewhat to the left, and the propeller (now pointing slightly west) will also help pull the airplane west. The bank also introduces some net leftward force. So, there's a lot going on. I agree absolutely. This isn't a simple issue. (and no, stomping on the rudder pedals isn't usually the best way to turn). but it can produce some interesting results (:-) Tim. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tim Auckland wrote:
The wing's centre of lift is behind the plane's centre of gravity, so Eh? If this were true, there would be a torque acting about the pitch axis and forcing the nose downward. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The wing's centre of lift is behind the plane's centre of gravity, so
Eh? If this were true, there would be a torque acting about the pitch axis and forcing the nose downward. There is. That's what the tail is for - it pushes down (behind the CG) providing the balancing torque. Canard aircraft are different, the main wing is behind the CG, and the canard is in front; both provide lift in the same (upward) direction. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 07/31/06 14:13, Dave Butler wrote:
Tim Auckland wrote: The wing's centre of lift is behind the plane's centre of gravity, so Eh? If this were true, there would be a torque acting about the pitch axis and forcing the nose downward. Isn't there? Isn't this what the downward force produced by the horizontal stabilizer is trying to equalize? -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane Cal Aggie Flying Farmers Sacramento, CA |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Most reliable homebuilt helicopter? | tom pettit | Home Built | 35 | September 29th 05 02:24 PM |
Tail flapper failure | Veeduber | Home Built | 2 | May 22nd 04 06:52 AM |
Rate of turn indicator on commercial jets (Boeing / Airbus) | Mark | Simulators | 1 | November 1st 03 10:35 AM |
IFR in the 1930's | Dick | Restoration | 26 | September 11th 03 07:42 PM |
Oshkosh Get together Roster - Sign in, please! | Bruce E. Butts | Home Built | 4 | July 26th 03 11:34 AM |