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
|
|||
|
|||
Wing aspect ratio vs. airspeed ?
Today I did some volunteer work, screening potential entries into a
high school science fair. Lots of interesting experiments, but one in particular caught my eye: The student had created an RC plane out of styrofoam, balsa wood and an electrical pusher prop. Now the experiment consisted of clocking the time it takes for said plane to cover a distance of 100 yards, but with two different sets of wings. Both wing sets are planar triangles (no camber) and have the same surface area. One however had a wider wingspan than the other. Thus one configuration looked more like a delta wing than the other. Interestingly enough the result was that the delta wing with shorter wingspan travelled more slowly than the other wing. I thought D-wings are generally less stable but faster, no !? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Wing aspect ratio vs. airspeed ?
wrote in message oups.com... Today I did some volunteer work, screening potential entries into a high school science fair. Lots of interesting experiments, but one in particular caught my eye: The student had created an RC plane out of styrofoam, balsa wood and an electrical pusher prop. Now the experiment consisted of clocking the time it takes for said plane to cover a distance of 100 yards, but with two different sets of wings. Both wing sets are planar triangles (no camber) and have the same surface area. One however had a wider wingspan than the other. Thus one configuration looked more like a delta wing than the other. Interestingly enough the result was that the delta wing with shorter wingspan travelled more slowly than the other wing. I thought D-wings are generally less stable but faster, no !? Shorter span would typically have more induced drag so, for the same power would fly slower. Another difference would be exactly where the Mean Aerodynamic Chord and Center of Gravity aligned with each wing - one might be trimmed up a little different which will change the speed at which it flys. A little warp or flex in the wings (I would expect the two sets to flex differently) would also affect the speed that it will fly with no other trim. If the chord of one wing is significantly shorter than the other, then there are Reynolds number effects. I'd say with a little effort, you could make either fly faster. -- Geoff the sea hawk at wow way d0t com remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail Spell checking is left as an excercise for the reader. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Wing aspect ratio vs. airspeed ?
wrote in message oups.com... Today I did some volunteer work, screening potential entries into a high school science fair. Lots of interesting experiments, but one in particular caught my eye: The student had created an RC plane out of styrofoam, balsa wood and an electrical pusher prop. Now the experiment consisted of clocking the time it takes for said plane to cover a distance of 100 yards, but with two different sets of wings. Both wing sets are planar triangles (no camber) and have the same surface area. One however had a wider wingspan than the other. Thus one configuration looked more like a delta wing than the other. Interestingly enough the result was that the delta wing with shorter wingspan travelled more slowly than the other wing. I thought D-wings are generally less stable but faster, no !? There are too many factors that have to be considered, before you could tell what is happening here. There is the question of if the delta's wing area is appropriate for the weight, and the thrust is what would be appropriate for that. If there was little thrust available, for example, the high aspect ratio would be more efficient, and go further. -- Jim in NC |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Wing aspect ratio vs. airspeed ?
"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com wrote in message
... Shorter span would typically have more induced drag so, for the same power would fly slower. But it will have less parasitic drag. It sounds as though, at least in this case, the increase in induced drag is greater than the decrease in parasitic drag. But the result is by no means applicable to all wings. As you point out, there are other differences that are relevant as well. It's hard to say, knowing only that one wing has greater wingspan than the other, what accounts for the actual difference in total drag. One hopes that the student with the science fair project has accounted for those differences, but you never know. Pete |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Wing aspect ratio vs. airspeed ?
Where are the Wright brothers when you need them...
denny |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Wing aspect ratio vs. airspeed ?
Thanks for the ideas. The student in question only compared total
travel time between the two wings. I suggested that he try out throttling the motor to check performance in different flight regimes. My hypothesis is that the increased length of the leading edge increases parasitic drag and that at the airspeed he was using this rather than induced drag was the limiting factor. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Wing aspect ratio vs. airspeed ?
wrote in message
oups.com... Thanks for the ideas. The student in question only compared total travel time between the two wings. I suggested that he try out throttling the motor to check performance in different flight regimes. My hypothesis is that the increased length of the leading edge increases parasitic drag and that at the airspeed he was using this rather than induced drag was the limiting factor. Parasitic drag should be related to wing surface area, not solely to frontal cross-section (ie increased length of the leading edge). Of all the possible explanations, that seems the least compelling to me. I agree that throttling the motor is important. If the student did not control for the motor's power output, then the two trials are not comparable. I still agree with the issues raised by Geoff, the CG in particular. A stable airplane configuration results from CG forward of the center of lift, and a down-force aft of the center of lift (usually from some sort of horizontal stabilizer and/or elevator). It's not clear from the information provided how this test aircraft was designed, but unless the airplane was 100% unstable (CG and center of lift at the same position), the CG needs to be taken into account (I would do so simply by ensuring that the CG and center of lift are the same distance apart in both trials, resulting in the same total lift and stabilizing downforce for both trials). It should go without saying that unless both flights have perfectly level flight paths, then any climb or descent must be accounted for as well (and preferably eliminated so that a true comparison can be made). As far as wing flex goes, again without knowing the actual design of the airplane, it's not possible to comment specifically. But I would think that on an airplane of that scale, it should be possible to construct wings that have effectively no flex at all, eliminating that source of error for all practical purposes. The Reynolds number issue sounds like a red herring to me, but I suppose a drastic enough difference in the wings could affect the trial. Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
EU Heavy Bomber ideas? | David E. Powell | Military Aviation | 79 | June 29th 04 06:24 AM |
Announcing THE book on airshow flying | Dudley Henriques | Piloting | 11 | January 9th 04 07:33 PM |
Props and Wing Warping... was soaring vs. flaping | Wright1902Glider | Home Built | 0 | September 29th 03 03:40 PM |
Can someone explain wing loading? | Frederick Wilson | Home Built | 4 | September 10th 03 02:33 AM |
Wing Extensions | Jay | Home Built | 22 | July 27th 03 12:23 PM |