Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
ModelsRailroadsRockets
Radio Controlled
Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater Models
ModelGeeks.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Model Forum / Radio Controlled / Air Models / July 2010



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Fuel Level Sensor

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
SoarScale2 - 18 Nov 2004 19:58 GMT
Does anyone know of a vendor that sells a fuel level sensor for R
applications?
Thanks,
Tony Elliot

--
SoarScale
Paul McIntosh - 18 Nov 2004 23:16 GMT
Unless you had a neucleonic type, I doubt it would be very accurate.  The
planes bounce around too much while flying.  One thing I have seen is a
clear window on one side of the tank compartment.  With highly colored fuel
you could see the level on a slow fly-by.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com

> Does anyone know of a vendor that sells a fuel level sensor for RC
> applications?
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> SoarScale2's Profile: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=46724
> View this thread: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=300323
ALG1947 - 19 Nov 2004 00:31 GMT
GET A AIRMADILLO THE TANK IS IN FULL VIEW FOR A FLY BY
James Beck - 19 Nov 2004 13:59 GMT
> GET A AIRMADILLO THE TANK IS IN FULL VIEW FOR A FLY BY

That's fuuny.
I had one for about 2 years and that is EXACTLY what I did.
Do a low pass and take a look.

BTW, we can hear you no need to SHOUT. ;-)

                  Jim
SoarScale2 - 19 Nov 2004 19:58 GMT
This is a very large scale twin engined scale aircraft where "bouncin
around" is not too much of an issue and aerobatics are rare. Sid
windows won't work nor will colored fuel. I need a general way, othe
than time, to detect the  fuel level when in level flight - woul
attach a strobe on the aircraft that would flash when in level fligh
during a tank check run. Any ideas

--
SoarScale
Syntax - 04 Jul 2010 05:33 GMT
Telemetry is now reporting receiver battery voltage, some way o
reporting fuel level via telemetry would be good.  Pressure transducers
Because the fuel is sloshing around during flight, an innovative way o
measuring this is called for

--
Synta
Martin X. Moleski, SJ - 04 Jul 2010 06:10 GMT
>Telemetry is now reporting receiver battery voltage, some way of
>reporting fuel level via telemetry would be good.  Pressure transducers?
>Because the fuel is sloshing around during flight, an innovative way of
>measuring this is called for!

Even the full-scale general aviation planes haven't got great
fuel-level sensing.

I doubt we're going to get it down at our level any time
soon.

You should be able to measure what's in the tank on a few
test flights, extrapolate to an ounces-per-minute number,
figure your max endurance, and run a timer.

That seems a whole lot simpler to me than getting sensors
inside of a tiny little tank!

                Marty

Signature

Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See <http://www.big-8.org> for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

Chuck - 04 Jul 2010 09:28 GMT
>> Telemetry is now reporting receiver battery voltage, some way of
>> reporting fuel level via telemetry would be good.  Pressure transducers?
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
>                 Marty

Back in the days of bladder tanks, we used a spring loaded flap that
pressed on the tank. When it moved far enough, it caused a microswitch
to operate.
Six_O'Clock_High - 04 Jul 2010 16:27 GMT
>>Telemetry is now reporting receiver battery voltage, some way of
>>reporting fuel level via telemetry would be good.  Pressure transducers?
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
> Marty

Marty's way puts less load on the airframe which means better performance
for a given engine.

(so says the guy who puts .32's on .19 sized airframes)

YMMV
Tim Wescott - 04 Jul 2010 22:19 GMT
>> Telemetry is now reporting receiver battery voltage, some way of
>> reporting fuel level via telemetry would be good.  Pressure transducers?
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> I doubt we're going to get it down at our level any time
> soon.

I think a lot of the reason that general aviation planes don't have it
is the shape dictated by wing tanks -- sensing the up/down level of fuel
in a wide, low tank ain't easy.

Our tanks are more square -- but our acceleration vector tends to vary a
lot more unless the flight is very boring.

> You should be able to measure what's in the tank on a few
> test flights, extrapolate to an ounces-per-minute number,
> figure your max endurance, and run a timer.

That only works with a predictable throttle profile (like our club
president, whose throttle positions are "full on", "land" and "shut off").

> That seems a whole lot simpler to me than getting sensors
> inside of a tiny little tank!

If you could think up a small accurate flow meter you could integrate
flow -- but the meter wouldn't be trivial.

Signature

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

Martin X. Moleski, SJ - 05 Jul 2010 05:06 GMT
>> You should be able to measure what's in the tank on a few
>> test flights, extrapolate to an ounces-per-minute number,
>> figure your max endurance, and run a timer.

>That only works with a predictable throttle profile (like our club
>president, whose throttle positions are "full on", "land" and "shut off").

Well, if you calculate the "full on" endurance, every time
you throttle down, you add to your margin of error.  

Landing with too much fuel is not usually as troublesome as
landing deadstick (I know that's not true of full-size
airliners, but at our fuel loads, I think it is a reasonably
accurate statement).

>> That seems a whole lot simpler to me than getting sensors
>> inside of a tiny little tank!

>If you could think up a small accurate flow meter you could integrate
>flow -- but the meter wouldn't be trivial.

I thought about a flow-meter, too.  I think the mechanism and wiring
would be vastly simpler and more reliable than gauges in the tank.
If you remember to fill your tank every time and reset the fuel
flow meter, it should be fairly accurate.  If you know you have
10 oz of accessible fuel in the tank, when the flow meter says
that you've provided 10 oz to the engine, it's time to land.

Our tank designs are so simple that most installations should
provide the full amount of fuel that the tank is rated for.

But that still seems like too much work for too little gain.

                    Marty
Signature

Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See <http://www.big-8.org> for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

Tim Wescott - 05 Jul 2010 07:42 GMT
>>> You should be able to measure what's in the tank on a few
>>> test flights, extrapolate to an ounces-per-minute number,
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
>
> But that still seems like too much work for too little gain.

It might make sense if you were doing some serious airplane tuning and
wanted to know if you needed to put in a bigger tank or could put in a
smaller one -- but then, you can do that just by going out and flying,
then measuring how much fuel you had left.

Signature

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

Six_O'Clock_High - 05 Jul 2010 22:46 GMT
>>>> You should be able to measure what's in the tank on a few
>>>> test flights, extrapolate to an ounces-per-minute number,
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
> smaller one -- but then, you can do that just by going out and flying,
> then measuring how much fuel you had left.

This entire discussion is one of the types of things that keep me active in
my flying community, but more importantly reading here.  Where else can you
get into a discussion about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin
and not have hurt feelings running rampant?
Martin X. Moleski, SJ - 08 Jul 2010 13:10 GMT
>> ... that still seems like too much work for too little gain.

>It might make sense if you were doing some serious airplane tuning and
>wanted to know if you needed to put in a bigger tank or could put in a
>smaller one -- but then, you can do that just by going out and flying,
>then measuring how much fuel you had left.

I think that's how Maynard Hill did things.

Over and over and over ...

Amazing man!

                Marty
Signature

Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See <http://www.big-8.org> for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2012 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.