Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Hinge less ailerons
Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

John.Hines(at)craftontull
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 7:39 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

I had an interesting conversation with Jim Younkin over the weekend

about the Zenith 601.  For those that don't know, Jim Younkin is

credited with inventing the autopilot and he is the president of

Trutrak.  When I told him I was building a 601XL, he rather gruffly

asked what kind of aileron hinge I was using.  We then launched into the

normal conversation about how Zenith claims they last longer than a

piano hinge...  He then said that questions of reliability weren't then

only reason he didn't like them.  He said that flexing metal is not a

hinge, it is a spring.  A spring requires more force to move than a

hinge.  He talked about the CT2K having spring balanced ailerons and how

even though it was an LSA it required a bigger autopilot servo than a

Bonanza.



After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the demo plane.  The

elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion was stiff.  But

you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it didn't bother me.

Does the piano hinge give it better motion?  How much weight does it

add?



All I know is that I'm a guy with no pilot's license and a completed

tail kit.  Jim Younkin is a hell of a lot smarter than I am.  It's hard

to argue with a guy with his credentials.  What do you guys think?



John

www.johnsplane.com 

 

John R. Hines

IT Manager

Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.

901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200

Rogers, AR 72756

Office: 479-878-2449

Mobile: 479-366-4783

Fax: 479-631-6224

John.Hines(at)craftontull.com

www.craftontull.com



Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. exists to anticipate and understand the needs of our clients and provide them with successful solutions.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

craig(at)craigandjean.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:05 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

If you look in the file archive for this list you can see examples of AP

servos installed in 601's:



www.matronics.com/photoshare/craig(at)craigandjean.com.02.11.2006/



These include servos from Navaid and Treo. I assume at least one of these

planes uses the "skin" hinges. Any of the owners should be able to comment

on their servo performance: Jeff Small, Tony Graziano or Pat Safford.



 	  Quote: 	
		  From my point of view I would bet that the force of the wind on the ailerons

generates much more counterforce than the "skin" hinge.
	




-- Craig

admin(at)arachnidrobotics
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:12 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

I'm definitely going with the hinged aileron, for all of the reasons you mention.  Bottom line is, it adds less than two pounds, it's smoother, and there are no negative side effects to the conversion.  It was kind of a no-brainer.  

     It helped my decision having moved the stick on both hinged and 'spring' ailerons.  The hinged were what you would expect, smooth.  The extended skin 'spring' was noticeably stiffer.

    



John Hines <John.Hines(at)craftontull.com> wrote:[quote] --> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Hines" 



I had an interesting conversation with Jim Younkin over the weekend

about the Zenith 601.  For those that don't know, Jim Younkin is

credited with inventing the autopilot and he  is the president of

Trutrak.  When I told him I was building a 601XL, he rather gruffly

asked what kind of aileron hinge I was using.  We then launched into the

normal conversation about how Zenith claims they last longer than a

piano hinge...  He then said that questions of reliability weren't then

only reason he didn't like them.  He said that flexing metal is not a

hinge, it is a spring.  A spring requires more force to move than a

hinge.  He talked about the CT2K having spring balanced ailerons and how

even though it was an LSA it required a bigger autopilot servo than a

Bonanza.



After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the demo plane.  The

elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion was stiff.  But

you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it didn't bother me.

Does the piano hinge give it better motion?  How much weight does it

add?



All I know is that I'm a guy with no pilot's license  and a completed

tail kit.  Jim Younkin is a hell of a lot smarter than I am.  It's hard

to argue with a guy with his credentials.  What do you guys think?



John

www.johnsplane.com 

 

John R. Hines

IT Manager

Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.

901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200

Rogers, AR 72756

Office: 479-878-2449

Mobile: 479-366-4783

Fax: 479-631-6224

John.Hines(at)craftontull.com

www.craftontull.com



Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. exists to anticipate and understand the needs of our clients and provide them with successful solutions.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should

daveaustin2(at)can.rogers
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:28 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

I've had both the bending aileron and the hinged on my 601.  The only diff.

is slightly less effort on the stick for normal turns.  If you want to roll

the a/c the ailerons are to my mind quite heavy in either format - not much

difference.

Dave Austin  601HDS - 912, Spitfire Mk VIII

d.goddard(at)ns.sympatico
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:32 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

---

p.mulwitz(at)worldnet.att
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:36 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

Hi John,



I think the choice between hingeless and piano hinge on the ailerons 

is one that can go either way with little impact.



I agree with you that the actual design of the Zodiac XL works 

without much movement of the ailerons.  This is probably because the 

actual aileron size is large enough that it doesn't need to move much 

to create the roll moment we need for flight.  I think of it as the 

aileron translating force from the control stick to the airplane 

without actually moving a great deal.  It is the force rather than 

the control surface movement that counts.



This may be different for an autopilot than a human pilot.  There 

isn't a force feedback system that tells the autopilot how hard it is 

pushing on the flight control surface.  That leaves actual motion as 

the medium it uses to control the plane unlike the human pilot who uses force.



One impact of the hingeless design is it forms a perfect "Gap Seal" 

between the aileron and wing.  This is highly desirable and shows up 

greatly in the low speed control that works so well on the 

Zodiac.  Again, this has nothing to do with autopilot function which 

is primarily used at cruise speeds.



For me the decision is easy.  I don't want to give up the fun of 

flying to a computer.  I am not installing an autopilot in my 

plane.  That means the hingeless design works best for me.



Best regards,



Paul

XL fuselage

At 08:38 AM 8/11/2006, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



I had an interesting conversation with Jim Younkin over the weekend

about the Zenith 601.  For those that don't know, Jim Younkin is

credited with inventing the autopilot and he is the president of

Trutrak.  When I told him I was building a 601XL, he rather gruffly

asked what kind of aileron hinge I was using.  We then launched into the

normal conversation about how Zenith claims they last longer than a

piano hinge...  He then said that questions of reliability weren't then

only reason he didn't like them.  He said that flexing metal is not a

hinge, it is a spring.  A spring requires more force to move than a

hinge.  He talked about the CT2K having spring balanced ailerons and how

even though it was an LSA it required a bigger autopilot servo than a

Bonanza.



After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the demo plane.  The

elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion was stiff.  But

you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it didn't bother me.

Does the piano hinge give it better motion?  How much weight does it

add?



All I know is that I'm a guy with no pilot's license and a completed

tail kit.  Jim Younkin is a hell of a lot smarter than I am.  It's hard

to argue with a guy with his credentials.  What do you guys think?



John

www.johnsplane.com


	


--

gk(at)601hd.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:39 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

Regarding the bendy metal hinge design, does anyone know if there a

significant difference in aileron force between the XL and HD/HDS?  The

HD/HDS design has full length ailerons, the XL does not.  Do you need more

aileron deflection on the XL?



Graham Kirby

601HD

randy(at)n344rb.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:56 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

I had all the same thoughts when I built my ailerons...  My final 

determination on the hingeless ailerons came down to drag.  This set up is 

more streamline and essentially have gap seals built in...



Seems everyone is concerned about weight, but no one is concerned about 

drag...??



Randy

XL Wings - Plans Only

http://www.n344rb.com

Do Not Archive



---

Daniel Vandenberg

Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 22

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 9:27 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

William Wynne,et al commented on this some time ago, as they had removed the hinge-less ailerons on their 601XL taildragger in favor of hinges. 



As I recall, their conclusion after this was that the roll forces were slightly lower (slightly improved) in slow flight...but the same at cruise speeds.  In the end they concluded that the benefit was minimal.



You can read about this here...about 1/3rd of the way down the page:



http://www.flycorvair.com/hangar1105.html



Dan



John Hines <John.Hines(at)craftontull.com> wrote:[quote] --> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Hines" 



I had an interesting conversation with Jim Younkin over the weekend

about the Zenith 601.  For those that don't know, Jim Younkin is

credited with inventing the autopilot and he is the president  of

Trutrak.  When I told him I was building a 601XL, he rather gruffly

asked what kind of aileron hinge I was using.  We then launched into the

normal conversation about how Zenith claims they last longer than a

piano hinge...  He then said that questions of reliability weren't then

only reason he didn't like them.  He said that flexing metal is not a

hinge, it is a spring.  A spring requires more force to move than a

hinge.  He talked about the CT2K having spring balanced ailerons and how

even though it was an LSA it required a bigger autopilot servo than a

Bonanza.



After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the demo plane.  The

elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion was stiff.  But

you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it didn't bother me.

Does the piano hinge give it better motion?  How much weight does it

add?



All I know is that I'm a guy with no pilot's license and a  completed

tail kit.  Jim Younkin is a hell of a lot smarter than I am.  It's hard

to argue with a guy with his credentials.  What do you guys think?



John

www.johnsplane.com 

 

John R. Hines

IT Manager

Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.

901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200

Rogers, AR 72756

Office: 479-878-2449

Mobile: 479-366-4783

Fax: 479-631-6224

John.Hines(at)craftontull.com

www.craftontull.com



Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. exists to anticipate and understand the needs of our clients and provide them with successful solutions.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not

dougsnash(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:18 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

As a CH-701 builder I'm asking this question out of

complete ignorance.



Would there not be a tendancy for the aluminum of a

hingless aileron to work harden at the flex point? 

Admittedly I have not looked closely at the aileron

attachment on a CH-601 so I can't picture how it

works.  I'm just basing my question on the

descriptions you guys have given.



Doug MacDonald

NW Ontario, Canada

CH-701 Scratch Builder





__________________________________________________

ggower_99(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:39 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

All I can comment is that the 601 XL , even with the flexing metal "spring" is lighter in control than most of the airplanes I have flown (from the right seat),  so I dont thing it will need a bigger servo.  I have Navaid autopilot not installed yet...  Maybe Navaid is better 



The other way I will be scared to move a lighter stick to any side  and make an inadverted roll like flying a Pitts   



Saludos

Gary Gower.

Do not archive.



John Hines <John.Hines(at)craftontull.com> wrote:[quote] --> Zenith-List message posted by: "John Hines" 



I had an interesting conversation with Jim Younkin over the weekend

about the Zenith 601.  For those that don't know, Jim Younkin is

credited with inventing the autopilot and he is the president of

Trutrak.  When I  told him I was building a 601XL, he rather gruffly

asked what kind of aileron hinge I was using.  We then launched into the

normal conversation about how Zenith claims they last longer than a

piano hinge...  He then said that questions of reliability weren't then

only reason he didn't like them.  He said that flexing metal is not a

hinge, it is a spring.  A spring requires more force to move than a

hinge.  He talked about the CT2K having spring balanced ailerons and how

even though it was an LSA it required a bigger autopilot servo than a

Bonanza.



After talking to him I thought back to my flight in the demo plane.  The

elevator motion was very smooth, but the aileron motion was stiff.  But

you need so little aileron motion to maneuver that it didn't bother me.

Does the piano hinge give it better motion?  How much weight does it

add?



All I know is that I'm a guy with no pilot's license and a completed

tail kit.  Jim  Younkin is a hell of a lot smarter than I am.  It's hard

to argue with a guy with his credentials.  What do you guys think?



John

www.johnsplane.com 

 

John R. Hines

IT Manager

Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc.

901 N. 47th Street, Suite 200

Rogers, AR 72756

Office: 479-878-2449

Mobile: 479-366-4783

Fax: 479-631-6224

John.Hines(at)craftontull.com

www.craftontull.com



Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. exists to anticipate and understand the needs of our clients and provide them with successful solutions.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or 		Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. [url=http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=42974/*http://www.yahoo.com/preview] Check it out.[/url]

dredmoody(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:43 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

I've only flown the 601XL so my opinion is pure conjecture, but I've found with my UL that aileron surface close to the fuselage is as useless as a screen door on a submarine. The air flow is not as smooth there and the result is more drag than roll reaction. Flaps work well there but the ailerons return more roll for effort out near the wingtips.



Ed Moody II



---- Graham Kirby <gk(at)601hd.com> wrote: 

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Regarding the bendy metal hinge design, does anyone know if there a

 significant difference in aileron force between the XL and HD/HDS?  The

 HD/HDS design has full length ailerons, the XL does not.  Do you need more

 aileron deflection on the XL?

 

 Graham Kirby

 601HD

Gig Giacona

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1416
Location: El Dorado Arkansas USA

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:44 am Post subject: Re: Hinge less ailerons

My feeling on this is we all trusted CH with the design of the aircraft we are flying and I, for one, am going to trust him with the design of the way the aileron is hinged.



That said. I've flown in the factory plane and if the force required to roll the plane is too much for you to do all day on a long cross country you are going to have a lot of trouble picking up individual rivets to build the thing.

_________________
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR

Last edited by Gig Giacona on Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:45 am; edited 1 time in total

Kevin Bonds

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 171
Location: Nashville, Tn

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:48 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

I doubt you will ever deflect the ailerons far enough to work-harden them.

The "hinge" does not actually bend (ie stretch). I think it is more akin to

the kind of flex you might get when rolling up your aluminum for storage. 



Kevin Bonds



Nashville TN

601XL Plans building.

http://home.comcast.net/~kevinbonds



 



do not archive DO NOT ARCHIVE 



 

--

_________________
KevinBonds
Nashville, TN
Plans-building Zenith CH601XL w/Corvair Power
http://home.comcast.net/~kevinbonds

admin(at)arachnidrobotics
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:59 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

The hinged aileron is his design as well...

Gig Giacona <wr.giacona(at)cox.net> wrote:[quote] --> Zenith-List message posted by: "Gig Giacona" 



I feeling on this is we all trusted CH with the design of the aircraft we are flying and I, for one, am going to trust him with the design of the way the aileron is hinged.



That said. I've flown in the factory plane and if the force required to roll the plane is too much for you to do all day on a long cross country you are going to have a lot of trouble picking up individual rivets to build the thing.



--------

W.R. "Gig" Giacona

601XL Under Construction

See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR





Read this topic online

dredmoody(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 10:59 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

Good point..... one lister is expressing hesitance to contradict an experienced flyer who doesn't like the design but seems totally okee dokee with not trusting Chris Heintz's design and testing experience. Go figure,



Ed



---- Gig Giacona <wr.giacona(at)cox.net> wrote: 

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 I feeling on this is we all trusted CH with the design of the aircraft we are flying and I, for one, am going to trust him with the design of the way the aileron is hinged.

 

 That said. I've flown in the factory plane and if the force required to roll the plane is too much for you to do all day on a long cross country you are going to have a lot of trouble picking up individual rivets to build the thing.

 

 --------

 W.R. &quot;Gig&quot; Giacona

 601XL Under Construction

 See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=54183#54183

craig(at)craigandjean.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:07 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

Zenith actually did a life test with a motor flexing a sample. It went tens

of thousands of cycles before short cracks appeared at the ends. I think

they then drilled two stop holes and continued the test. You will die of old

age before this is a real problem.



-- Craig

randy(at)n344rb.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:16 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

I agree...  I'm not sure what the radius of the bend would be from stop to 

stop, but I'd bet it's several feet...



Randy

XL Wings - Plans Only

Do Not Archive

---

randy(at)n344rb.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:25 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

Here's what Chris Heinz says about the hingeless ailerons:



Whereas a hinge has rotating parts (friction, wear and the need to be 

lubricated), the "hingeless hinge" has no parts with relative motion because 

the deflection is provided by flexing part 'a' (which is an extension of the 

aileron skin). If the length 'a' is of the order of 3/4" to 1", the 

thickness of the flexing metal being .016", the metal being 6061-T6, and the 

deflection of the aileron a maximum of +/- 15 degrees, we can, using 

available deflection statistics for recreational airplanes, calculate the 

fatigue life of the metal.



It is some 120,000 hours, which, reduced by the safety factor of 8 (usual 

when analysis is performed), amounts to 15,000 hours flying time.



Now to be absolutely sure, we also performed fatigue tests. It was easy to 

replace the aileron bellcrank with an electric motor and an eccentric moving 

the rod and aileron. We had 3 eccentrics for 3 stages of deflection to 

reproduce the above mentioned statistics and, knowing that the motor's RPM 

is 1700, we get 100,000 cycles per hour (CPM).

In a relatively short period, the cycles from the statistics could be 

applied to the deflection of the aileron for an aircraft utilization of 

10,000 flying hours. No crack (not even chipped paint) was noticed.



After that, and just to know if by any bad luck it did crack, do I have to 

repair it in the field, or can I fly safely home and fix it in the shop? I 

cut a 1/8" notch at both inboard and outboard ends of the flex area with 

snips and restarted running the tests.



After the equivalent of another 3 hours, the notch had developed into a 

crack reaching on one end the first rivet, and on the other end the second 

rivet through the wing skin and rear channel. The test was then continued 

for the equivalent of another 10,000 flying hours with no further 

deterioration.



The conclusions are: The "flex hinge" is adequate for the intended use 

(10,000 flying hours, which is an awful lot of time considering that most of 

us fly about 50 hours per year; it's 200 years!). Also, if a (very unlikely) 

crack would be discovered at the preflight check, you can safely fly home 

and then repair it!  I know of at least two Zodiacs having logged over 1600 

and 2100 hrs. respectively without any problem, so it definitely works!



A conventional hinged aileron adds weight and does not "look as good" as the 

maintenance-free hingeless aileron - with its smooth surface and completely 

sealed gap.



You can also read this article online at: 

http://www.zenithair.com/kit-data/ht-aileron.html

Thanks,



Randy

XL Wings - Plans Only

http://www.n344rb.com



Do Not Archive

---

gboothe(at)calply.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:41 am Post subject: Hinge less ailerons

I'm making a note in my Palm, "Year 2206 - check ailerons." Thanks Randy!



Gary Boothe 

Cool, CA 

601 HDSTD, WW Conversion 

Tail done, wings almost done....(with hingeless ailerons)

Do Not Archive

Here's what Chris Heinz says about the hingeless ailerons:



..The conclusions are: The "flex hinge" is adequate for ... 200 years!.



Randy

XL Wings - Plans Only

http://www.n344rb.com



Do Not Archive

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 1 of 3

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum