Whether to balance wings of different weights:
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Sisyphus - 01 Apr 2004 15:07 GMT I have completed wing panels that differ significantly in weight. A 63" wing span when assembled. The wings are both balanced around the 4th rib, but one wing seems to weigh 2-3 oz more than the other. I am going to buy a grocery scale to measure with some degree of accuracy what that difference is and consider adding weight to the other wing.
The heavy wing was built with twice the CA that the other wing was, could glopping CA make that big a difference in weight once dry?
Dr1Driver - 01 Apr 2004 16:05 GMT >I am >going to buy a grocery scale to measure with some degree of accuracy I'd use a fish scale. Accurate to 1/2 ounce.
>The heavy wing was built with twice the CA that the other wing was, >could glopping CA make that big a difference in weight once dry? Yes. CA "cures", it doesn't "dry". If you use 2 ounces of CA while building, you'll have 2 ounces when it's done.
If the wings are out 2-3 ounces, I'd balance them, but balance the whole plane, not just the wing. You'll find when the wing is attached to the fuselage the lateral balance will be different. Dr.1 Driver "There's a Hun in the sun!"
Bill - 01 Apr 2004 19:24 GMT Oh my god, I just fell off my chair! That is the most stupid comment I have read this week.
Dr1, how do you come to such a ridiculous conclusion?
> CA "cures", it doesn't "dry". If you use 2 ounces of CA while building, > you'll have 2 ounces when it's done. Dr1Driver - 01 Apr 2004 20:54 GMT >Dr1, how do you come to such a ridiculous conclusion? OK smart a.s, what's your opinion? Some glues set by evaporation, some by curing. In the case of evaporation, a little weight is lost. In the case of curing, that you start with is what you end up with. Dr.1 Driver "There's a Hun in the sun!"
M Dennett - 01 Apr 2004 21:42 GMT Hey Bill, read Glue 101 before you type a whopper like your comment to Dr. 1. Why the heck would you write such a caustic response to him about something about which you obviously know next to nothing?
CA polymerizes and solidifes when catalyzed by the presence of various substances on the materials being glued, and/or when helped by a shot of "kicker" which is an aromatic amine catalyst in a solvent carrier. It does NOT "dry" which is a process whereby solvents evaporate leaving behind solids. Adhesives that "dry" undergo a loss of mass equal to the solvents lost. Adhesives that cure do not, except for perhaps negligible weight loss due to small amounts of volatiles escaping.
If CA "dried" then try explaining how it can do that in 1 second, and why thin CA "dries" the fastest.
Epoxies cure.
Epoxy paints flash off solvents first, then cure.
Polyester resins cure when catalyzed with (typically) MEKP.
White glue dries.
Plastic model cement dries.
Ambroid dries.
Nail polish dries.
Tremclad dries.
Mud dries.
CA cures.
Mike D.
> Oh my god, I just fell off my chair! > That is the most stupid comment I have read this week. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > CA "cures", it doesn't "dry". If you use 2 ounces of CA while building, > > you'll have 2 ounces when it's done. Bill - 01 Apr 2004 22:05 GMT DRY CA is considerably lighter than WET CA.
I would suggest you go and discover the meaning of the words WET and DRY!
> Hey Bill, read Glue 101 before you type a whopper like your comment to Dr. > 1. Why the heck would you write such a caustic response to him about [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > > CA "cures", it doesn't "dry". If you use 2 ounces of CA while building, > > > you'll have 2 ounces when it's done. Dr1Driver - 01 Apr 2004 22:10 GMT >DRY CA is considerably lighter than WET CA. Prove that with RELIABLE, FACTUAL statistics. Let me see some manufacturer's or research lab tables Dr.1 Driver "There's a Hun in the sun!"
Bill - 01 Apr 2004 22:17 GMT Oh my god, I just fell off my chair again! That is the second most stupid comment I have read this week.
> >DRY CA is considerably lighter than WET CA. > > Prove that with RELIABLE, FACTUAL statistics. Let me see some manufacturer's > or research lab tables > Dr.1 Driver > "There's a Hun in the sun!" Dr1Driver - 01 Apr 2004 22:39 GMT >Oh my god, I just fell off my chair again! Oh, I get it now. You're physically handicapped! I'm so sorry. Maybe you need a Health Care Aide to help you up when you fall. Dr.1 Driver "There's a Hun in the sun!"
Paul McIntosh - 01 Apr 2004 22:52 GMT Must be all that hitting your head when you fall off your chair that makes you so dumb, I guess.
CA cures through a chemical reaction. It has no water or solvents in it so it can't "dry".
-- Paul McIntosh http://www.rc-bearings.com
> Oh my god, I just fell off my chair again! > That is the second most stupid comment I have read this week. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Dr.1 Driver > > "There's a Hun in the sun!" M Dennett - 02 Apr 2004 17:06 GMT You need to protect your head when you fall off the chair.
Since I spend a good part of my time at work in a chemical laboratory, I decided yesterday afternoon to "dry" some samples of various CA adhesives and measure weight loss. I carefully weighed a few samples of thin and medium CA on an analytical balance accurate to 1/10 milligram. These samples were held in laboratory weighing dishes. To kick them off (as the surface chemistry of a sterile weigh dish will not catalyze CA for ages or ever), I treated several strips of paper with raw CA catalyst (no solvent, CA kicker is usually about 2% catalyst and 98% solvent) which I lay across the top of the weigh tin so that the catalyst (which is somewhat volatile) would do it's trick overnight.
This morning I checked the samples, and they were all fully cured, hard as nails. So I weighed them.
Gosh, surprise surprise! The weight loss varies between zero and one half a percent. As these are small samples some of that 1/2% can likely be attributed to weighing error. Some might be volatiles in the adhesive wandering off. At that level who cares.
NO significant weight loss. In fact numbers like that equate to NO weight loss.
So.. rather than continue to argue perhaps you should simply realize that you have your facts wrong. This information could actually be useful to you.
And btw, I do know the difference between wet and dry. Do you now understand the difference between drying and curing? Dr.1 does, Paul does, I do.
Mike D.
> Oh my god, I just fell off my chair again! > That is the second most stupid comment I have read this week. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Dr.1 Driver > > "There's a Hun in the sun!" M Dennett - 02 Apr 2004 21:57 GMT Wow, it got quiet here all of a sudden, didn't it?
<g>
Mike D.
> Gosh, surprise surprise! The weight loss varies between zero and one half a > percent. As these are small samples some of that 1/2% can likely be > attributed to weighing error. Some might be volatiles in the adhesive > wandering off. At that level who cares. Six_O'Clock_High - 02 Apr 2004 22:54 GMT ROFLOL! It never ceases to amaze me how many disdain hard factual data. You have spoiled their fun
> Wow, it got quiet here all of a sudden, didn't it? > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > attributed to weighing error. Some might be volatiles in the adhesive > > wandering off. At that level who cares. Dr1Driver - 02 Apr 2004 23:37 GMT >Wow, it got quiet here all of a sudden, didn't it? > ><g> <more grins>
Dr.1 Driver "There's a Hun in the sun!"
Robbie and Laura Reynolds - 03 Apr 2004 02:44 GMT > You need to protect your head when you fall off the chair. > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > So.. rather than continue to argue perhaps you should simply realize that > you have your facts wrong. This information could actually be useful to you. Wow, that's great to know. Back to the original question, go ahead and balance your airplane laterally by carving out the wingtip of the heavy side and/or adding pennies or lead to the light wingtip. Make sure that the engine and muffler are installed when you balance it. But if I were you I wouldn't be concerned about glue weight. You probably didn't use enough glue to make a measurable difference.
strathboy - 03 Apr 2004 18:48 GMT I hope you wern't doing this on company time!
> > You need to protect your head when you fall off the chair. > > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > you I wouldn't be concerned about glue weight. You probably didn't use > enough glue to make a measurable difference. M Dennett - 05 Apr 2004 15:02 GMT You bet I was! We use enough CA around this joint that a little diddling around here and there to learn something is no problem. Besides the owner is an airpane fan. Our company back forty is a registered MAAC flying field, so I also have no problem finding something to do at lunch.. snicker. Although winter seems to be keeping a grip on us as this morning there is ice on the cars and a -15C windchill reported. Grrr..
Mike D.
> I hope you wern't doing this on company time! Alex Brewer - 09 Apr 2004 05:57 GMT You lookin for any Industrial Engineers? <grin>
Alex.
> You bet I was! We use enough CA around this joint that a little diddling > around here and there to learn something is no problem. Besides the owner is [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > > I hope you wern't doing this on company time! Charles & Peggy Robinson - 03 Apr 2004 20:10 GMT Hello Mike,
Good post, especially that first line. (biiig grin)
My first reaction when I looked at this thread's first couple of messages was, "I know CAs outgas when they cure, so there must be some loss of mass. Probably not enough to measure without some extremely high resolution scales, though." Seem you've proved my conjecture to be right. Thanks,
CR
> You need to protect your head when you fall off the chair. > [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] >>>Dr.1 Driver >>>"There's a Hun in the sun!" M Dennett - 05 Apr 2004 15:10 GMT There may even be slightly higher losses than what I measured, but the point is it seems like it is basically next to nothing as I'd consider losses like 2-3% to be effectively "no loss" in the greater scheme of things.
Mike D.
p.s. personally I use aliphatic glues to build wings but not due to the above, rather because IMHO they end up tougher. But I do use CA to tack parts (and my fingers) in place.
> Hello Mike, > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > CR Don Hatten - 01 Apr 2004 22:20 GMT Take a fresh bottle of CA, weigh it, squirt some accelerator into it (and jump out of the way), and then weigh it again when it's set. The bottle of glue will weigh the same (if you take into account the amount that boiled over and/or flew somewhere else).
or easier on the pocketbook
get a gram scale and an epoxy mixing cup, squirt in a gram or 2 of CA, hit it with the accelerator and weigh it after it's set. It'll weigh the same
Don
> DRY CA is considerably lighter than WET CA. > > I would suggest you go and discover the meaning of the words WET and DRY! Doug McLaren - 01 Apr 2004 22:50 GMT | Take a fresh bottle of CA, weigh it, squirt some accelerator into it | (and jump out of the way), and then weigh it again when it's set. | The bottle of glue will weigh the same (if you take into account the | amount that boiled over and/or flew somewhere else). Hey now -- quit trying to confuse the issue with easily verified facts!
(:
 Signature Doug McLaren, dougmc@frenzy.com There is no distinctly American criminal class - except Congress. --Mark Twain
Oper8 On U - 01 Apr 2004 23:59 GMT Isn't it the water in the air that causes CA to cure ? If so the addition of water molecules to the mix may actually result in cured CA weighing more that liquid CA.
C.O.Jones - 02 Apr 2004 00:12 GMT > Isn't it the water in the air that causes CA to cure ? That's what I always understood. But then, I'm no chemist. Maybe the newer stuff uses something else.
> If so the addition of > water molecules to the mix may actually result in > cured CA weighing more that liquid CA. Would make sense to a point. Next question would be how much of that water evaporates as a result of the whole process? But I'll let Bill answer that one! :)
Sylvia Dulude - 02 Apr 2004 06:01 GMT i just depends on how dry it is in your area.
I will always buy or fly a basement built plane then a garage built plane.
Reason why does your basement jump in temperature or humidity as much as your garage. ???
Assemble 2 exact shaped pieces of balsa with any glue you want (literally i mean any glue) keep one in the basement and the other in your garage then compare after a week .
warp city here we come ....if you live in New Mexico don't even bother answering this
my 2 CDNcent's
> > Isn't it the water in the air that causes CA to cure ? > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > evaporates as a result of the whole process? But I'll let Bill answer that > one! :) MJC - 02 Apr 2004 14:41 GMT I doubt if your use of CA would make any measurable difference. What is MUCH more likely is that there is a difference in wood density between the wood used on either side of the wing. This is not, however, a bid deal. Wings, for the reason mentioned above, frequently need to be laterally balanced. The easiest and most accurate way to do that is to put assemble the two wing halves together and then balance the entire assemble. You do NOT have to weight anything; what you're going to see is that one side of the wing will droop. All you have to do is start adding pennies (my favorite) or a washers or whatever just inside the tip of the high wing until the assembly balances. Then epoxy those weights inside the wing tip where you won't see them once it's covered. KEEP IN MIND that epoxy has weight too, so just glue in MOST of whatever weights you use and then check it again for balance once the epoxy kicks. You might have it so close that just dabbing in more epoxy will finish the balancing act.
MJC
> I have completed wing panels that differ significantly in weight. A > 63" wing span when assembled. The wings are both balanced around the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The heavy wing was built with twice the CA that the other wing was, > could glopping CA make that big a difference in weight once dry? jjvb - 02 Apr 2004 15:23 GMT Wait until you have the plane finished and all together, then do a lateral balance. The lateral balance will change depending on other issues such as engine and muffler location, etc.
John VB
> I have completed wing panels that differ significantly in weight. A > 63" wing span when assembled. The wings are both balanced around the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The heavy wing was built with twice the CA that the other wing was, > could glopping CA make that big a difference in weight once dry? strathboy - 03 Apr 2004 02:10 GMT The drivel from some posters never ceases to amaze me. Who really gives a damn about the miniscule weight of CA or how much is applied in the process of building two wing halves. I defy anyone to buiild two wing halves of identical weight. Always balance your wings laterally and then the entire plane. Maybe we can generate some posts on the differing weight of graphics applied to the wing after its built and covered. Some just can't resist flaunting their knowledge regardless of its relevance. Give us a break and keep it simple and pertinent like MJC.
> Wait until you have the plane finished and all together, then do a lateral > balance. The lateral balance will change depending on other issues such as [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > The heavy wing was built with twice the CA that the other wing was, > > could glopping CA make that big a difference in weight once dry? Robbie and Laura Reynolds - 03 Apr 2004 02:45 GMT > The drivel from some posters never ceases to amaze me. Who really gives a > damn about the miniscule weight of CA or how much is applied in the process [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > flaunting their knowledge regardless of its relevance. Give us a break and > keep it simple and pertinent like MJC. Don't forget also that oil tends to collect more on one side than the other, which could cause the plane to go out of balance. And then it really gets bad when bugs and grass seeds start to collect in the oil.
strathboy - 03 Apr 2004 19:03 GMT ......he/she said with tongue in cheek!!
> > The drivel from some posters never ceases to amaze me. Who really gives a > > damn about the miniscule weight of CA or how much is applied in the process [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > other, which could cause the plane to go out of balance. And then it > really gets bad when bugs and grass seeds start to collect in the oil. David AMA40795 / KC5UH - 03 Apr 2004 05:00 GMT When I built the wing panels for my Dynaflite Super Cub, I weighed the piles of wood for each panel, shuffled parts ( it is easy to feel the heavier wood ) between the piles to even the weight. When the panels were finished, they were within 1 oz of each other, and these panels weigh about 30 oz each!
It is like building a straight wing - build it straight, do not try to remove warps that get built in !!!
David
>The drivel from some posters never ceases to amaze me. Who really gives a >damn about the miniscule weight of CA or how much is applied in the process [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >> > The heavy wing was built with twice the CA that the other wing was, >> > could glopping CA make that big a difference in weight once dry? strathboy - 03 Apr 2004 18:46 GMT David, you are one meticulous builder.. What was the weight differential BEFORE you sorted the wing halves. Isn't it simpler to just plug in a tiny bit of tip lead to balance the wing? Unless you're flying a pattern ship in competition, sorting balsa is hard to justify,
> When I built the wing panels for my Dynaflite Super Cub, I weighed the > piles of wood for each panel, shuffled parts ( it is easy to feel the [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > >> > The heavy wing was built with twice the CA that the other wing was, > >> > could glopping CA make that big a difference in weight once dry? Charles & Peggy Robinson - 03 Apr 2004 20:41 GMT He's not alone. Those of us who started in this hobby before ARFs were available picked up this trick early on. Dead weight is your model's enemy! Why add it when a little forethought can eliminate the need? Part of this hobby is the knowledge of a job done well.
I have a Lanier Extreme Stick ARF that flew well but was noseheavy as hell with a light .46 2-stroke. I'm just finishing up the mod of moving the servos back to under the h-stab in order to eliminate the 4 -5 ounces of weight I had to add back there to balance the thing. I already have the battery behind the wing, may have to move it further back. Won't know until I recheck the CG.
Cheers,
CR
> David, you are one meticulous builder.. What was the weight differential > BEFORE you sorted the wing halves. Isn't it simpler to just plug in a tiny [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] >>>>>The heavy wing was built with twice the CA that the other wing was, >>>>>could glopping CA make that big a difference in weight once dry? strathboy - 04 Apr 2004 16:06 GMT Charles, the knowlegeable builder ALWAYS does a pre-balance check BEFORE permanently installing servos and drilling the engine mounts. Takes a bit more time and effort but if ARFs are your idea of RC modelling, you should have lots of the former.
> He's not alone. Those of us who started in this hobby before ARFs > were available picked up this trick early on. Dead weight is your [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > >>>>>The heavy wing was built with twice the CA that the other wing was, > >>>>>could glopping CA make that big a difference in weight once dry? Charles & Peggy Robinson - 06 Apr 2004 17:26 GMT Strathboy,
This your second post to me, telling me to locate my servos to achieve the correct balance point. The first was in regard to the Kadet Senior ARF, now this one. In both cases you've shown your ignorance of the models in question. Both of them come out of the box with the servo trays permanently installed and with pushrod materials supplied to reach those trays. Seems logical to try these servo locations before electing to modify the model. In the case of the Extreme Stick, the servo tray is located about as far back as it can be, under the wing, even so, the stock model is noseheavy with any engine.
As for drilling the engine mount; in the case of the KSA, the engine is located on the mount so as to place the prop drive washer just clear of the cowl and still allow cowl removal for maintenance. In the ESA, I used a light DB mount with the engine as far back on it as it would go and still allow the fuel lines to clear it. The ESA required major surgery to balance it without ballast.
Your sarcastic remark about ARF building comes as a surprise to me, coming from someone who thought that preselecting wing wood in order to have the finished wing panels come out equal in weight was unusually meticulous. Aren't you the guy who suggested that adding weight to the finished wing was a lot easier?
You really ought to educate yourself a bit more before about the subject(s) before you expose your backside for all to see.
CR
> Charles, the knowlegeable builder ALWAYS does a pre-balance check BEFORE > permanently installing servos and drilling the engine mounts. Takes a bit [quoted text clipped - 88 lines] >>>>>>>The heavy wing was built with twice the CA that the other wing was, >>>>>>>could glopping CA make that big a difference in weight once dry? strathboy - 09 Apr 2004 13:56 GMT Charles, wouldn't you expect the producers of ARF's to take balancing into consideration when they're designing them? Just imagine, "major surgery" required. As for adding weight to balance wings, I've never had to add anything more than an ounce to compensate for whatever created the imbalance be it glue, wood composition or whatever. Its really inconsequential. I must admit however, that the constraints you describe (fixed servo trays and prop clearance ) would preclude implementing my suggestions. I do indeed have limited experience with ARF's (only 2) and both have been very annoying including the reasons you mention. Both were low wing, had numerous design flaws and high wing loadings. They also had short lives. Charles, don't take take the sarcasm (bait) in newsgroup comments too seriously. Remember, hypertension can seriously shorten your flying years.
> Stramounts and thboy, > [quoted text clipped - 118 lines] > >>>>>>>The heavy wing was built with twice the CA that the other wing was, > >>>>>>>could glopping CA make that big a difference in weight once dry? David AMA40795 / KC5UH - 05 Apr 2004 04:43 GMT The first piles comparison started at 5oz difference! To be even pickier, I moved the heavier ribs toward the center of the panels. I could do this since all but the outer 2 ribs and root ribs were identical !
And like Charles said, I do not like to fix the radio gear location UNTIL I know about where the plane will balance. Sometimes this still does not help - I just finished assembling a Sig 4*60 with a Magnum 91 4-stroke in the nose. Even with the battery against the firewall, I still have to add ~1oz of lead to the nose. I'd hate to see the chunk of lead required to balance this plane with a 60 2-stroke!
David
>David, you are one meticulous builder.. What was the weight differential >BEFORE you sorted the wing halves. Isn't it simpler to just plug in a tiny >bit of tip lead to balance the wing? Unless you're flying a pattern ship in >competition, sorting balsa is hard to justify, Dan Thomas - 09 Apr 2004 20:29 GMT > The first piles comparison started at 5oz difference! To be even > pickier, I moved the heavier ribs toward the center of the panels. I [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > still have to add ~1oz of lead to the nose. I'd hate to see the chunk > of lead required to balance this plane with a 60 2-stroke! Some folks seem to be worrying way too much about lateral balance. In full-scale aircraft maintenance we pay no attention to lateral balance, and close attention to longitudinal balance. In an FS airplane, the 30-pound battery is off to one side, sometimes the same side the solo pilot sits on, along with most of the instruments, and flap motors and autopilot stuff and so on might be in one wing or the other. When we weigh the airplane we might find a 30 pound difference between the mains of a 1400 pound airplane, and notice little or nothing in flight. It's the fore/aft imbalance that's the killer.
Dan
John Alt - 09 Apr 2004 21:09 GMT > > The first piles comparison started at 5oz difference! To be even > > pickier, I moved the heavier ribs toward the center of the panels. I [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > nothing in flight. > It's the fore/aft imbalance that's the killer. And these are aircraft your concerned with tracking in both inside and outside loops, right?
Dan Thomas - 12 Apr 2004 16:28 GMT > > > The first piles comparison started at 5oz difference! To be even > > > pickier, I moved the heavier ribs toward the center of the panels. I [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > And these are aircraft your concerned with tracking in both inside and > outside loops, right? Good point. Four of our FS airplanes are Cessnas, non-aerobatic, and two are aerobatic Citabrias. None are laterally balanced, but in flight the Citabrias can be kept in line with normal control inputs, since the pilot is on board and can see any deviation. For an RCer, watching from the ground, it's more difficult and if lateral balance will help, then it should be done, as you say.
Thanks Dan
Six_O'Clock_High - 13 Apr 2004 06:35 GMT Most of the rider scale pilots I run around with use fuel tank selectors to burn of the heavy wing.
> > > > The first piles comparison started at 5oz difference! To be even > > > > pickier, I moved the heavier ribs toward the center of the panels. I [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > Thanks > Dan strathboy - 10 Apr 2004 01:31 GMT Pitch is where its at!!!
> > The first piles comparison started at 5oz difference! To be even > > pickier, I moved the heavier ribs toward the center of the panels. I [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Dan strathboy - 10 Apr 2004 01:29 GMT That's interesting. I just completed my 4 star 60 and it balanced perfectly with an OS 61 2 stroke. NLR (no lead required)
> The first piles comparison started at 5oz difference! To be even > pickier, I moved the heavier ribs toward the center of the panels. I [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >bit of tip lead to balance the wing? Unless you're flying a pattern ship in > >competition, sorting balsa is hard to justify,
|
|
|