EDF, Thrustvectoring, and Thrusters

[L Edge]

I like to design things that don't exist.

This video opened a new window for me. First came learning to use and fly EDF's in the 64mm range. Then came 2d thrust vectoring nozzles that were popular and then I got into trying to improve a higher alpha for the plane. I did alot of testing using a F-22 as a test bed. My F-22 usually start rocking its wings about 15 to 20 degrees and when I experimented with the 2D nozzle (pitch and yaw) it increased the high alpha angle to 30 to 35 degrees before rocking. As you know, not advisable to let those wings rock.

Looking at the video, how can I come up with a higher value? Can I stop the rocking by anything, then it dawned on me, why not apply pressure to the end of the wing. Voila!!!! TAP THE FLOW OF THE EDF AND DIRECT IT TO THE END OF THE WING. Concept is with the higher pressure times the exit area, it develops a force on each side to counteract the rocking motion. So, I decided to call it a THRUSTER.

Secondly, in order to hover an EDF, there must be forces to counteract yaw,pitch and roll from the power source, since their is no motion of the plane.. The thrust vectoring unit provides yaw and pitch, so can the Thruster overcome roll?

Design:
Used carbon fiber tubing that was hollow and since the static pressure inside the duct was low, decided to place the tubing facing right behind the fan blade and pick up the flow and diverted to each wing.

Fan is removed to show pickups where flow is diverted to tubes. As the RPM's increased, pressure is increased and so is the flow.

Designers are always worried obstructions in the ducting. Mine has 3-- 2 pickups for flow, and one carbon fiber for the wing(runs full across) that is located 6 inches from exit.

Tube is turned 90 degrees to extend to the end of the wing.

Results:
1) All that tubing internally did not hurt the performance of the EDF.
2) Watch the way I launch the F-22. That has to be close to 45 degrees on the throw, notice no rocking?
3) Flying around in an 80 x 160 ft area, it shows the improvement of the high alpha angle(now it can stay near 45 with no trouble) and also being able to recover from rocking at the high angles.
4) It sharpens the turns(going around the camera man) and I felt comfortable flying it.
5) Trying to hover is hard enough, with an EDF it has slow responses and is very difficult. Look around 1:40, I actually got it to hold a few secounds(never could before the thrusters) before it took off tipped and started spinning.

Conclusion:
It works. Limiting factor is the flow. My EDF was only 5 blades and 3 s. To go to 12 blades, 4s requires a complete overhaul of size etc., Happy to get a higher angle of attack and a help in hovering.

Here is the video. Also have video on outside flying, amounts to the same.

 

[GrizWiz]

so basically a tail heavy jet?

 

[L Edge]

so basically a tail heavy jet?

No, the CG was never moved.

 

[GrizWiz]

No, the CG was never moved.

Ok!

 

[L Edge]

No, the CG was never moved.

Another example of increasing the high alpha in a plane is to mount a set of movable canards(leave fixed and parallel) to find CG. Then activate a gyro on pitch for the canards and fly slowly and you can get unbelievable high angles of attack. Plenty of videos showing that.

 

[Scotto]

I like to design things that don't exist.

This video opened a new window for me. First came learning to use and fly EDF's in the 64mm range. Then came 2d thrust vectoring nozzles that were popular and then I got into trying to improve a higher alpha for the plane. I did alot of testing using a F-22 as a test bed. My F-22 usually start rocking its wings about 15 to 20 degrees and when I experimented with the 2D nozzle (pitch and yaw) it increased the high alpha angle to 30 to 35 degrees before rocking. As you know, not advisable to let those wings rock.

Looking at the video, how can I come up with a higher value? Can I stop the rocking by anything, then it dawned on me, why not apply pressure to the end of the wing. Voila!!!! TAP THE FLOW OF THE EDF AND DIRECT IT TO THE END OF THE WING. Concept is with the higher pressure times the exit area, it develops a force on each side to counteract the rocking motion. So, I decided to call it a THRUSTER.

Secondly, in order to hover an EDF, there must be forces to counteract yaw,pitch and roll from the power source, since their is no motion of the plane.. The thrust vectoring unit provides yaw and pitch, so can the Thruster overcome roll?

Design:
Used carbon fiber tubing that was hollow and since the static pressure inside the duct was low, decided to place the tubing facing right behind the fan blade and pick up the flow and diverted to each wing.
View attachment 187492

Fan is removed to show pickups where flow is diverted to tubes. As the RPM's increased, pressure is increased and so is the flow.

View attachment 187494

Designers are always worried obstructions in the ducting. Mine has 3-- 2 pickups for flow, and one carbon fiber for the wing(runs full across) that is located 6 inches from exit.

View attachment 187499

Tube is turned 90 degrees to extend to the end of the wing.

View attachment 187500


Results:
1) All that tubing internally did not hurt the performance of the EDF.
2) Watch the way I launch the F-22. That has to be close to 45 degrees on the throw, notice no rocking?
3) Flying around in an 80 x 160 ft area, it shows the improvement of the high alpha angle(now it can stay near 45 with no trouble) and also being able to recover from rocking at the high angles.
4) It sharpens the turns(going around the camera man) and I felt comfortable flying it.
5) Trying to hover is hard enough, with an EDF it has slow responses and is very difficult. Look around 1:40, I actually got it to hold a few secounds(never could before the thrusters) before it took off tipped and started spinning.

Conclusion:
It works. Limiting factor is the flow. My EDF was only 5 blades and 3 s. To go to 12 blades, 4s requires a complete overhaul of size etc., Happy to get a higher angle of attack and a help in hovering.

Here is the video. Also have video on outside flying, amounts to the same.

So do the thruster tubes move with the ailerons or are they stationary? Did you have a gyro stabilizer board in it? That looks like more than 45 to me! Nice flying. It would have to be a control line for me to not hit a wall.

 

[L Edge]

Thrusters were glued to wing.
I never fly using a gyro to fly. I use gyros to maintain levelness of experimental airplanes.(I will explain how I use it and how you could to get your experimental planes).
Probably is better than 45 degrees.
Years ago, vectoring thrust (VT) was the thing. It offered me different way of flying. Once mastered, offered absolute control to fly tight areas. Use these TV for many projects.
Got better at flying. Besides, would be shot if I poke a hole or rip in dome. By the way, got any domes in the area? Joined membership and got to fly weekdays during the day all year long. . Realy nice during cold or rainy days.

 

[Scotto]

Thrusters were glued to wing.
I never fly using a gyro to fly. I use gyros to maintain levelness of experimental airplanes.(I will explain how I use it and how you could to get your experimental planes).
Probably is better than 45 degrees.
Years ago, vectoring thrust (VT) was the thing. It offered me different way of flying. Once mastered, offered absolute control to fly tight areas. Use these TV for many projects.
Got better at flying. Besides, would be shot if I poke a hole or rip in dome. By the way, got any domes in the area? Joined membership and got to fly weekdays during the day all year long. . Realy nice during cold or rainy days.

I still dont understand. Was the left thrust tube always the same airflow as the right or was there a way of controlling the difference? I guess I also dont understand why it made such a big difference from without having the thruster tubes.

 

[L Edge]

I still dont understand. Was the left thrust tube always the same airflow as the right or was there a way of controlling the difference? I guess I also dont understand why it made such a big difference from without having the thruster tubes.

When hovering, you need to control all three axis. With TV, yaw and pitch are covered with the airflow. Since the plane is stationary and vertical, there is no flow over the wing. So you need something to prevent it from spinning around. So I used the thrusters to counteract the spinning around. Since the EDF did not provide enough of a pressure flow, it reduced the torque some and slowed down the rotational speed.
If it was enough flow to stop it rotating, I was going to use a landing gear valve and servo to control(tx slider) the flow.

So basically, the flow produced an external force to counteract the torque of the EDF. In my case, not enough, just slowing down the speed of rotation. Both exits were needed or there would be wobble to the equation.

 

[Scotto]

I get it now. Thanks. Have you played around with using the little tiny whoop size edfs for thrusters?

 

[L Edge]

I get it now. Thanks. Have you played around with using the little tiny whoop size edfs for thrusters?

Excellent thought. My problem was weight, by the time I add an ESC, flight controller, 2 units, wiring, the F-22 lost most of its fast movement. I used dead weight to test idea out.
It is a shame that gyros only are set up to move a servo.