HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Nov 11, 2008, 06:27 PM
AMA 353531
rdeis's Avatar
United States, CO, Colorado Springs
Joined Aug 2003
6,543 Posts
Question
How to choose tail A/R ?

I'm futsing about with my Spirit-V (with a new wing and tail is it still a Spirit?) and wondered how to choose a correct aspect ratio for the tail?

I know the area and angle I want, but I'm not certain what to use for the root and tip chords.

Have been reading from here:
http://www.charlesriverrc.org/articles_modeldesign.htm
And from Don Stackhouse.

How do I balance the effectiveness of a higher aspect ratio against the better reynolds number of a lower one?
rdeis is offline Find More Posts by rdeis
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Nov 12, 2008, 07:26 AM
Registered User
Resurgam's Avatar
Vienna, VA, USA
Joined Dec 2005
739 Posts
I doubt it makes a huge difference to the flight performance. I would simply copy another design. 2m Chrysalis might be good.
Resurgam is offline Find More Posts by Resurgam
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2008, 10:39 AM
AMA 353531
rdeis's Avatar
United States, CO, Colorado Springs
Joined Aug 2003
6,543 Posts
If it makes no difference, then I'll more likely make my own based on asthetics.
rdeis is offline Find More Posts by rdeis
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2008, 05:32 PM
Registered User
United States, NM, Alamogordo
Joined Mar 2007
255 Posts
What I would do:

Once you have determined what area you need for your desired control responsiveness and margin of stability, and the root airfoil section, figure out how much load will be exerted at full deflection at the anticipated Vne.

Using this assumption, you can figure the bending moment at various aspect ratios.

At those aspect ratios, you can figure the root chord and the section thickness. Based upon the spar material you intend to use, you can then extrapolate how much material you must use in your spar caps to achieve the appropriate bending strength. If it's prohibitive, a larger chord is in order.

Otherwise, go with aesthetics.

Bryan
Bryan Quick is offline Find More Posts by Bryan Quick
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2008, 11:12 PM
Registered User
United States, MA, Waltham
Joined Dec 2001
6,855 Posts
I think if you make the airfoil correctly, then I think the structural issue will be your limit. When you make the tail's aspect ratio higher, it provides more stability for a given area.
lincoln is online now Find More Posts by lincoln
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: paper blast tube test
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2008, 12:19 AM
AMA 353531
rdeis's Avatar
United States, CO, Colorado Springs
Joined Aug 2003
6,543 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by lincoln
I think if you make the airfoil correctly, then I think the structural issue will be your limit.
No concern for Re number, then?

Quote:
When you make the tail's aspect ratio higher, it provides more stability for a given area.
Right- unless Re number falls far enough to be a problem.

With the short tail moment on this one, though, it needs an awful lot of area, so I could see structural limits coming in to play before the chord gets small enough to cause Re problems.

Thanks!
rdeis is offline Find More Posts by rdeis
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2008, 06:01 PM
Registered User
United States, MA, Waltham
Joined Dec 2001
6,855 Posts
I did say, with the right airfoil. Look how high the aspect ratio is on the tail on some of the Apogees. I actually asked Mark Drela the same question and he said that if the airfoil was right, then the structure became the limit. Will maybe check out on Profili when I get that running again.
lincoln is online now Find More Posts by lincoln
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: paper blast tube test
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2008, 08:42 PM
Registered User
Don Stackhouse's Avatar
United States, OH, Bradford
Joined Jun 2005
3,918 Posts
As the others have noted, there's a whole list of factors. One thing in particular is the lift curve slope, or "dCl/d-alpha" (dee-see-ell-dee-al-fah). This is how much the lift coefficient (of the entire flying surface in this case) changes for a given change in its angle of attack.

Higher aspect ratio surfaces generally have a higher lift curve slope, so they generate a stronger stabilizing force for a given sized disturbance. However, Reynolds number also can have an influence, particularly at the Re's where we operate. Also, at lower Re's there can be more problems with things like aerodynamic hysteresis.

The "optimum" answer (if there is one) will be different for each different design, and will depend on aerodynamic factors, structural factors, and the relative importance the designer attaches to each. In general, a longer tail moment arm will probably favor a lower tail aspect ratio, and a higher aspect ratio for shorter tail moments.

The good news is that for reasonably conventional layouts, if you can't or don't want to go through an elaborate optimization, just basing it on aesthetic considerations is probably not really that bad. What looks good to us is largely a matter of what we're used to seeing. The effects of "natural selection" in airplane designs has over the decades pushed designs towards what seems to work reasonably well most of the time. As a result, "TLAR" (That Looks About Right") might not get you an absolutely optimum world-beater, but as long as your plane's arrangement isn't too unconventional, it will probably work OK.
Don Stackhouse is offline Find More Posts by Don Stackhouse
Last edited by Don Stackhouse; Nov 13, 2008 at 08:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2008, 04:03 AM
Registered User
Tennessee
Joined Sep 2003
2,306 Posts
About 30 years ago, I used higher aspect ratio stabs but had some flutter problems. I have since gone back to aspect ratios less than 6 and have had no structural flutter problems. The high aspect ratio stabs had to be statically balanced about the pivot to control stab flutter during rotation after launch.
ChuckA is offline Find More Posts by ChuckA
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2008, 11:52 PM
Registered User
United States, MA, Waltham
Joined Dec 2001
6,855 Posts
I just ran Profili on the HT08. At Re=60k, Cd is around 0.012 to 0.013. At 30 k, .018 to .019 or so.
lincoln is online now Find More Posts by lincoln
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: paper blast tube test
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2008, 12:01 AM
Registered User
Don Stackhouse's Avatar
United States, OH, Bradford
Joined Jun 2005
3,918 Posts
However, what happens if you re-optimize the tail airfoil for the lower Re?

Also, is your tail area dictated by stability, or by control authority concerns? If stability is the issue, and not tail stalling, the the higher aspect ratio and the higher lift curve slope that goes with it may allow a smaller tail area that offsets the increase in Cd.

OTOH, if tail area is determined by control authority issues, such as having enough tail lift force to overcome the pitching moment from large wing flaps, then you're stuck, unless you can use a cambered tail airfoil to increase the tail's Clmax enough to deal with that.

Like I said before, a whole shopping list of issues, and no single or simple answer.
Don Stackhouse is offline Find More Posts by Don Stackhouse
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2008, 01:07 PM
Registered User
Cambridge, MA USA
Joined May 2001
1,737 Posts
Quote:
However, what happens if you re-optimize the tail airfoil for the lower Re?
Any airfoil with fully attached laminar flow, like the HT08, has very simple and predictable drag and lift behavior vs Reynolds number:
Clmax = constant
dCl/da = constant
Cd = constant/sqrt(Re)

The stabilizing power of a stab of some area S and aspect ratio AR is
dL/da = q S dCL/da = q S dCl/da / (1 + 2/AR)
and the drag is
D = q S Cd

We can now determine the AR,S combination which gives minimum drag at some fixed required stabilizing power. The dL/da equation gives the necessary S versus AR such that the stabilizing power is kept the same:
S = constant * (1 + 2/AR)
where the value of the "constant" is not important -- it will turn out that only the proportionalities matter.
The average chord is
c = sqrt(S/AR)
so that the drag is
D = constant * S / sqrt[ sqrt(S/AR) ] = constant * S^0.75 * AR^0.25
Again, the value of the "constant" doesn't matter.

Substituting for S from the stabilizing-power constraint we get a D vs AR relation:
D = constant * (1 + 2/AR)^0.75 * AR^0.25
It's a Calculus-101 exercise to find that the minimum D occurs at AR=4. So from a profile drag viewpoint, any strictly-laminar tail should have AR=4.

However, the optimum is extremely flat as the attached plot of D(AR) shows. If any of the following occurs:
* There is some turbulent flow (launch, large control inputs, imperfect airfoil)
* The stab carries some upload or download, so there's also induced drag
* Weight is also an issue
then the real optimum will shift towards the larger AR in each case. Any because of the flatness of the curve, the shift can easily be considerable. For these reasons I normally try to make the tail AR as big as is practical. The SG2 tail has a stab with AR=5.1, which theoretically is only a 0.5% stab drag penalty (the airplane drag penalty is perhaps 0.02% -- negligible). But it's surely better than a AR=4 stab when the other considerations are factored in.

Update: I added a second plot which also shows the chord and area of the "optimum stab", versus AR.
markdrela is offline Find More Posts by markdrela
Last edited by markdrela; Nov 15, 2008 at 01:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 2008, 04:02 AM
HyperFlight Support
Neil Stainton's Avatar
United Kingdom, England, Stratford-upon-Avon
Joined Feb 2001
3,867 Posts
Superb, you are a great teacher. Thank you.

Neil.
Neil Stainton is offline Find More Posts by Neil Stainton
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 2008, 06:55 AM
Registered User
Resurgam's Avatar
Vienna, VA, USA
Joined Dec 2005
739 Posts
Thank you for the analysis, Dr. Drela. It's always nice to have theoretical confirmation of an intuitive feeling
Resurgam is offline Find More Posts by Resurgam
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 2008, 09:27 AM
HyperFlight Support
Neil Stainton's Avatar
United Kingdom, England, Stratford-upon-Avon
Joined Feb 2001
3,867 Posts
BTW Mark, does this analysis hold for fins too?

TIA,

Neil.
Neil Stainton is offline Find More Posts by Neil Stainton
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hummingbird: How to remove tail boom? Xoltri Micro Helis 5 Dec 30, 2003 10:54 PM
How to choose between different motor winds? Tim Konuch Power Systems 1 Dec 03, 2003 04:35 PM
How to choose best number of winds / gear box ratio? Novy Power Systems 12 Oct 27, 2003 02:06 AM
How to choose correct gear box ratio? Novy Electric Sailplanes 27 Oct 19, 2003 02:42 PM
How To Choose A Prop mike98624 Power Systems 2 Oct 01, 2003 01:56 PM