birdy
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2004
- Messages
- 7,066
- Location
- Alice Springs-central Oz.
- Aircraft
- open frame single seat & a 'wasa' RAF, among other types.
- Total Flight Time
- 7000 odd, bout 5000 gyro
Ok, the 'happy season' is over, and we can forget bout be'n warm n fuzzy and get back to sum serious learning.
The ' affects of ......... on rotorblades' thread has gon to sh1t, lost in a boghole of egos, BS n facts, but like most lost causes, it surfaced a few other points, like inertia.
Now, DF [ Dennis Fetters] started one tangent by listing the benifites of lighter glass blades over heavier extruded alloy ones.
I replied with a counter list of benifits of the heavier ones over lighter, and it started go'n down hill from there.
But, we did agree on one point, that be'n, a heavier blade will possess higher resistance to cyclic pitching [ stick shake] than the lighter blade, simply coz of the mass of the baldes providing the resistance, twice per rev, to the longditudional torque involved in the cyclic pitching.
Thats logical and even a SCG can savvy. :bored:
But then i kinda agreed to dissagree with DF on the point of the rate at which a tip weighted blade of equal inertia to a uniforely weighted blade would respond in RRPM AFTER the disc started pitching and gaining load.
He said, basicaly, coz.
I didnt argue coz i didnt know, but i couldnt understand how 2 blades of equal inertia and identical profile could have different rates of rpm responce.
Then CB [ Chuck Beaty] jumped in and explained in great detail that they do actualy have the same respose rate, with facts n figures backed by laws of phisics.
Even a SCG knows who to take seriously.
But this thread is not bout taken sides, its bout FACTS.
Fact one;
Heavier blades will provide greater resistance to cyclic inputs.
Fact 2;
blades of identical inertia and profile will have identical rrpm response rates to load changes, and identical flight parths, regardless of total balde weight.
How am i go'n so far?:help:
The ' affects of ......... on rotorblades' thread has gon to sh1t, lost in a boghole of egos, BS n facts, but like most lost causes, it surfaced a few other points, like inertia.
Now, DF [ Dennis Fetters] started one tangent by listing the benifites of lighter glass blades over heavier extruded alloy ones.
I replied with a counter list of benifits of the heavier ones over lighter, and it started go'n down hill from there.
But, we did agree on one point, that be'n, a heavier blade will possess higher resistance to cyclic pitching [ stick shake] than the lighter blade, simply coz of the mass of the baldes providing the resistance, twice per rev, to the longditudional torque involved in the cyclic pitching.
Thats logical and even a SCG can savvy. :bored:
But then i kinda agreed to dissagree with DF on the point of the rate at which a tip weighted blade of equal inertia to a uniforely weighted blade would respond in RRPM AFTER the disc started pitching and gaining load.
He said, basicaly, coz.
I didnt argue coz i didnt know, but i couldnt understand how 2 blades of equal inertia and identical profile could have different rates of rpm responce.
Then CB [ Chuck Beaty] jumped in and explained in great detail that they do actualy have the same respose rate, with facts n figures backed by laws of phisics.
Even a SCG knows who to take seriously.
But this thread is not bout taken sides, its bout FACTS.
Fact one;
Heavier blades will provide greater resistance to cyclic inputs.
Fact 2;
blades of identical inertia and profile will have identical rrpm response rates to load changes, and identical flight parths, regardless of total balde weight.
How am i go'n so far?:help: