A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Electronic TE compensation, will this work?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 12th 20, 06:15 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
soaringjac
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 126
Default Electronic TE compensation, will this work?

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 8:37:42 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
In my Stemme I have the ClearNav vario electronically compensated, I
think it's set around 90%, and it uses the fuselage static ports, aft of
the wing, and the pitot tube on the nose.Â* The mechanical variometer
uses the TE probe, also in the nose boom.Â* They both track nicely together.

On 2/12/2020 4:28 AM, wrote:
I have the same situation with a bad TE line. Not using the TE line, just the static and the pitot on the S-100. They are the standard static and pitot on a DG400, Not in a multi probe.

With the S-100 you can tune the compensation from 0 to 100. Usually 0 for perfect TE set up and 100 for perfect static/ pitot system. You have to adjust it and play with it some, but can get a great result. I am set at about 80.

Kevin
92


--
Dan, 5J


Interesting. In the S100 manual it is saying that for the electronic TE to be effective the pitot and static should be colocated (ideally in multiprobe). Interesting that you are getting good electronic TE with the sources that far apart. I guess its worth a try for me. I can try using the statics in the tail boom and see what happens.
  #12  
Old February 12th 20, 07:02 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dave Nadler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,610
Default Electronic TE compensation, will this work?

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 12:12:30 PM UTC-5, soaringjac wrote:
since my TE is leaking somewhere in the fin the TE line is no longer
working as it should and it is basically acting as a static now.


The open line is NOT necessarily acting as a static good enough for TE comp.
  #13  
Old February 12th 20, 07:21 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,601
Default Electronic TE compensation, will this work?

** Caution **Â* I'm not competing in world contests, just flying for
fun.Â* That said, it seems to work OK for me.Â* And it's certainly good
enough for Diamond flights.

And how do you know that your TE line is leaking?Â* Have you pressure
checked it?

On 2/12/2020 10:15 AM, soaringjac wrote:
On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 8:37:42 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
In my Stemme I have the ClearNav vario electronically compensated, I
think it's set around 90%, and it uses the fuselage static ports, aft of
the wing, and the pitot tube on the nose.Â* The mechanical variometer
uses the TE probe, also in the nose boom.Â* They both track nicely together.

On 2/12/2020 4:28 AM, wrote:
I have the same situation with a bad TE line. Not using the TE line, just the static and the pitot on the S-100. They are the standard static and pitot on a DG400, Not in a multi probe.

With the S-100 you can tune the compensation from 0 to 100. Usually 0 for perfect TE set up and 100 for perfect static/ pitot system. You have to adjust it and play with it some, but can get a great result. I am set at about 80.

Kevin
92

--
Dan, 5J

Interesting. In the S100 manual it is saying that for the electronic TE to be effective the pitot and static should be colocated (ideally in multiprobe). Interesting that you are getting good electronic TE with the sources that far apart. I guess its worth a try for me. I can try using the statics in the tail boom and see what happens.


--
Dan, 5J
  #14  
Old February 12th 20, 07:25 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
soaringjac
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 126
Default Electronic TE compensation, will this work?

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 10:21:23 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
** Caution **Â* I'm not competing in world contests, just flying for
fun.Â* That said, it seems to work OK for me.Â* And it's certainly good
enough for Diamond flights.

And how do you know that your TE line is leaking?Â* Have you pressure
checked it?

On 2/12/2020 10:15 AM, soaringjac wrote:
On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 8:37:42 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
In my Stemme I have the ClearNav vario electronically compensated, I
think it's set around 90%, and it uses the fuselage static ports, aft of
the wing, and the pitot tube on the nose.Â* The mechanical variometer
uses the TE probe, also in the nose boom.Â* They both track nicely together.

On 2/12/2020 4:28 AM, wrote:
I have the same situation with a bad TE line. Not using the TE line, just the static and the pitot on the S-100. They are the standard static and pitot on a DG400, Not in a multi probe.

With the S-100 you can tune the compensation from 0 to 100. Usually 0 for perfect TE set up and 100 for perfect static/ pitot system. You have to adjust it and play with it some, but can get a great result. I am set at about 80.

Kevin
92
--
Dan, 5J

Interesting. In the S100 manual it is saying that for the electronic TE to be effective the pitot and static should be colocated (ideally in multiprobe). Interesting that you are getting good electronic TE with the sources that far apart. I guess its worth a try for me. I can try using the statics in the tail boom and see what happens.


--
Dan, 5J


Me too. Im just flying for fun locally, have not even done any cross country yet. I am just looking for SOME TE compensation vs the NONE I have right now. Im going to just give it a try and see what happens. Its worth a try at least.
  #15  
Old February 12th 20, 09:57 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
JS[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 624
Default Electronic TE compensation, will this work?

Sometimes the probe itself can get plugged. If too much or too heavy lubricant has been applied, ports may gum up.
Multiprobes are easily damaged. Borrow someone else's probe and fly with it.
Or test with your own then with the borrowed one.

While fixing problems is more difficult than single probe, testing a multiprobe isn't difficult.
Essentially use a syringe and the ASI alone (as in Reichmann's book) to test each of the isolated lines for leaks, with probe attached and ports sealed.
Check for crosstalk between circuits. Pitot is the thin port at the end, static at the change in tube diameter, TE the hole in the side.

One day in the shop we found two bad multiprobes out of five tested. The other three probes worked on all three gliders. Glad it wasn't the mounting sockets!
It doesn't take much leakage to throw compensation off.

Electronic TE works very well. Personally used it with Cambridge, LX and ClearNav varios. Some varios require TE connection be connected to static. Some (ie: ClearNav) don't, so you can try both settings in the air.
Many of us have used electronic compensation in gliders that don't have a multi-probe. The 302 in my LS6a worked remarkably well with electronic compensation.
Jim
  #16  
Old February 12th 20, 10:07 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
soaringjac
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 126
Default Electronic TE compensation, will this work?

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 12:57:27 PM UTC-8, JS wrote:
Sometimes the probe itself can get plugged. If too much or too heavy lubricant has been applied, ports may gum up.
Multiprobes are easily damaged. Borrow someone else's probe and fly with it.
Or test with your own then with the borrowed one.

While fixing problems is more difficult than single probe, testing a multiprobe isn't difficult.
Essentially use a syringe and the ASI alone (as in Reichmann's book) to test each of the isolated lines for leaks, with probe attached and ports sealed.
Check for crosstalk between circuits. Pitot is the thin port at the end, static at the change in tube diameter, TE the hole in the side.

One day in the shop we found two bad multiprobes out of five tested. The other three probes worked on all three gliders. Glad it wasn't the mounting sockets!
It doesn't take much leakage to throw compensation off.

Electronic TE works very well. Personally used it with Cambridge, LX and ClearNav varios. Some varios require TE connection be connected to static. Some (ie: ClearNav) don't, so you can try both settings in the air.
Many of us have used electronic compensation in gliders that don't have a multi-probe. The 302 in my LS6a worked remarkably well with electronic compensation.
Jim


I did all the leak testing already, but I can't actually pinpoint the exact location of the leak. I stuck a small scope camera down the socket in the fin where the TE prob gets plugged into and this is the photo of it.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/wu5LUibL2KpF9eWZ6

I have no idea what im looking at, but it looks like the thing in the center has broke loose and i have a feeling that is where the leak is coming from. Kind of strange looking. Not sure what that is in the center of the tube.

  #17  
Old February 12th 20, 10:10 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
soaringjac
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 126
Default Electronic TE compensation, will this work?

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 10:02:55 AM UTC-8, Dave Nadler wrote:
On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 12:12:30 PM UTC-5, soaringjac wrote:
since my TE is leaking somewhere in the fin the TE line is no longer
working as it should and it is basically acting as a static now.


The open line is NOT necessarily acting as a static good enough for TE comp.


I know its not ideal at all but im running out of options. I may just do a test flight with all the plumbing as is and turn on electronic TE on the S100 and see what happens.
  #18  
Old February 12th 20, 11:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default Electronic TE compensation, will this work?

Why not take this glider to an A&P and get their help in solving whatever problem you have properly. Wether that is fixing it for you or helping you learn how to do that under supervision.
  #19  
Old February 12th 20, 11:49 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bob Kuykendall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,345
Default Electronic TE compensation, will this work?

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 2:34:56 PM UTC-8, Darryl Ramm wrote:
Why not take this glider to an A&P and get their help in solving whatever problem you have properly. Wether that is fixing it for you or helping you learn how to do that under supervision.


Too easy. Only the brave get out the sawzall.
  #20  
Old February 13th 20, 02:23 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dave Nadler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,610
Default Electronic TE compensation, will this work?

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 4:07:53 PM UTC-5, soaringjac wrote:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/wu5LUibL2KpF9eWZ6
I have no idea what im looking at...


Clearly a Dr. Who rerun.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lx9070 V80 and Butterfly electronic and pnuemantic compensation Jonathan St. Cloud Soaring 2 May 5th 16 06:47 PM
Electronic versus Pneumatic compensation (conclusions) [email protected] Soaring 0 September 26th 05 05:02 PM
Electronic versus Pneumatic compensation (follow-up) [email protected] Soaring 4 September 20th 05 06:21 PM
Electronic versus Pneumatic compensation (follow-up) [email protected] Soaring 2 September 20th 05 06:04 AM
Electronic versus Pneumatic compensation in LX7000 [email protected] Soaring 8 September 15th 05 02:49 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.