It's lookign great Will.

Originally Posted by wdeighton

Last night was one of those downer days.

2) After spending hours trying to analyse another model, I saved and restarted my machine, only to the the file not work when I re loaded..

Sadly I've had that happen on files I've spent weeks on! To stop it from happening, or at least reduce the pain if it does happen, it's a good idea to save versions of a file if you're spending a long time on it. By that I mean after an hour save the files as "Groove_Armada_2.xxx" (for example). Then after another hour save it as "Groove_Armada_3.xxx" etc etc. That way if any file gets corrupted you only have to back track a little, not start from scratch.

PS what program are you doing the CFD in?

Sean.

Originally Posted by Sean Moloney

It's lookign great Will.



Sadly I've had that happen on files I've spent weeks on! To stop it from happening, or at least reduce the pain if it does happen, it's a good idea to save versions of a file if you're spending a long time on it. By that I mean after an hour save the files as "Groove_Armada_2.xxx" (for example). Then after another hour save it as "Groove_Armada_3.xxx" etc etc. That way if any file gets corrupted you only have to back track a little, not start from scratch.

PS what program are you doing the CFD in?

Sean.

Hello Shaun.
I am using star ccm+. There some tutorials on you tube, but none do exactly what we want. once you get the hand of it you can load up some .stp files, create a wind tunnel, mesh, volume mesh, and analyse.
The mesh, volume mesh take a while, as does the analysis, but that is just the computer churning away. I can do this quite confidently now, it just understanding what I want to post process (What results I want) and how I want to display them the make sense. The pictures above show some information, but it doesn't give may any information do start driving changes.

With catia and file naming it is not as easy to save thing with incremental names, as in messes up assemblies and drawing relations
At the end of a good working day I like to zip the folder up as a backup.

Will

Still not there
I can make pretty pictures, but at the moment nonsense

This is a model doing 500mph, but apparently not.

Hey will, does the red spot on the lower tail mean its draggy?
Ive always wondered what a tall slab sided tail boom would do for yaw stability and if it would cost more drag. maybe its a way you could get your desired stability without the law tail.
Looking great by the way.

Originally Posted by josh18

Hey will, does the red spot on the lower tail mean its draggy?
Ive always wondered what a tall slab sided tail boom would do for yaw stability and if it would cost more drag. maybe its a way you could get your desired stability without the law tail.
Looking great by the way.

I think in that picture the analysis had nor run enough times. once I have left it for a while to all smoothes out.

How do I change the Title of the Thread?

I have received the Section, and as requested by dirk the model should now be called Groove armada DP which I will do with pride.

I hope to put this sections on the cad between now and the end of the weekend and start to do some more simulations, packaging and finalising the design.

William

Any Idea how to get of Alan the inventor of the onboard telemetry system?
I would like to ensure it can be packaged in my model.

Originally Posted by wdeighton

How do I change the Title of the Thread?

I think if you go to "go advanced" in the edit of your first post you can do it there.

So I have now put the DP Sections onto the Groove Armada_DP.
Also think I can package the Alan Cocconi Stability Augmentation System under the wing seat (planning all the balast in the wing).

Still some more work, but Things seem very doable.

Got a fright the other day when the lad who will be doing my machining said, What you doing next week, Are you ready for it.
Well it never happened for the better as I wasn't, but I am trying to catch up now and be ready next time he has a machine avalable.

So looking at wing joiners.
Trying to decided how to blend the wing into the fuz, fuz fillets, and I have somthing to thing about, but still not quite there.

As always constructive comments welcome.

Will

After owning a Kinetic 2M DP, I have decided I need to make some adjustments.

Looking at the proportions wing span, to elevator size to moment.
The K2M has a very short moment for a 2M model, And this in average uk conditions makes the model yaw allot on take off. Not a lot of fun.
The 2.5m Ga would have had a shorter relative moment, so I have increased the boom by an extra 100mm, the stab span by an extra 50mm and the stab cord by an extra 10mm. I need to do some work on the fin to see if than is ok or if it needs to get a bit bigger.

Parametrics is my friend. Means I can change some values and my CAD models updates.

When I look at some of the other DS models, I feel like this model needs more effort with its blends, and some will come, but I am trying to make this model easy and efficient to lay up, minimum scrap carbon. and easy to cut out. Hope I am not going to loose too much on aerodynamics.

Nice Will! If I had the option though I would ditch the canopy opening and try to get the gear in via the wing seat. My scorchers have a canopy and it is a weak point. I cant really do anything about it because the fuse is so skinny but you look to have enough room there to do it. I also think it would have to be much more slippery without the canopy seams right up the front too.
Cheers mate,
Josh

Originally Posted by josh18

Nice Will! If I had the option though I would ditch the canopy opening and try to get the gear in via the wing seat. My scorchers have a canopy and it is a weak point. I cant really do anything about it because the fuse is so skinny but you look to have enough room there to do it. I also think it would have to be much more slippery without the canopy seams right up the front too.
Cheers mate,
Josh

Hello Josh
Thanks your your imput.
I have been considering this for a while. Open the wing seat and weaken the fuz there, or canopy and have somthing that breaks on nose landing.
So my plan is to stick with the canopy, and have a sub canopy below. The sub canopy I would like to fix in a semi permanent way so it gives strength. scews is the best option but the hardest to package. When you open the canopy the Idea is to only have access to your switch or battery plugs.

But that is 2 extra mouldings!

I was trying to get away with the wing not having and poky bits, poking forward to go into the fuz, or rear where the bolt is. This is to simplify the lay up as much as possible.

Hi Will, any reason not to have the nose a bit longer?

It would look a bit more balanced ("if it looks right, it is right....") & provide better leverage for CGing plus additional space for gear, etc.

Oh, & then you could move the canopy forward & have a tape-on wing