Simple Soarer love

[Webdragon]

How about an update to the FT Simple soarer? maybe a bigger wing or maybe add flaps or go hog wild an redesign the whole airframe like i did.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...soarer-build&usg=AOvVaw0qemuJuma7LMYqL6GvApJT

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...soarer-build&usg=AOvVaw0qemuJuma7LMYqL6GvApJT

 

[Matthewdupreez]

cooolll...
i've got a 1.7m hotwired wing that i want to put on a motor glider.... PPC, with a 2200mah battery.. hopefully i can get it to fly really slowly.. at a really low throttle %.. for nice long flights

 

[Webdragon]

i extended my wing to a full 60 inches and just kept the glider nose, i am going to set it up with a pusher prop. The booms are arrow shafts and i used a 3rd one inside the wing to give the spar some more strength.

 

[junyper]

yeah yeah! good idea! + 1

 

[TEAJR66]

Try a 60" Armin Wing, experimental airlines style.

Put that on a regular Simple Soarer with a power pod. You will really enjoy that experience.

 

[Tench745]

Try a 60" Armin Wing, experimental airlines style.

Put that on a regular Simple Soarer with a power pod. You will really enjoy that experience.

I put an Armin wing on my soarer a while ago now. It is a lot slipperier than the FT wing: it flew faster and farther than the FT wing in the same conditions. The FT wing is draggier, but also produced more lift than an Armin wing of the same size and thickness. I stay aloft longer in lift with the FT wing than I could with the Armin wing and the FT wing behaved more predictably in turns. I kept my Simple Soarer as a 3ch, so it took a good amount of experimentation with dihedral and wingtip camber of the Armin wing to stop it from stalling out of tight turns. If I'd added ailerons, it may have been okay.

 

[TEAJR66]

I put an Armin wing on my soarer a while ago now. It is a lot slipperier than the FT wing: it flew faster and farther than the FT wing in the same conditions. The FT wing is draggier, but also produced more lift than an Armin wing of the same size and thickness. I stay aloft longer in lift with the FT wing than I could with the Armin wing and the FT wing behaved more predictably in turns. I kept my Simple Soarer as a 3ch, so it took a good amount of experimentation with dihedral and wingtip camber of the Armin wing to stop it from stalling out of tight turns. If I'd added ailerons, it may have been okay.

Totally agree.

 

[Foamforce]

I put an Armin wing on my soarer a while ago now. It is a lot slipperier than the FT wing: it flew faster and farther than the FT wing in the same conditions. The FT wing is draggier, but also produced more lift than an Armin wing of the same size and thickness. I stay aloft longer in lift with the FT wing than I could with the Armin wing and the FT wing behaved more predictably in turns. I kept my Simple Soarer as a 3ch, so it took a good amount of experimentation with dihedral and wingtip camber of the Armin wing to stop it from stalling out of tight turns. If I'd added ailerons, it may have been okay.

Do you have any theories as to why this was the case? Was your wing profile and thickness the same? Is it possible that the facets on the FT wing produce vortexes to produce more lift?

My goal of replicating a Night Radian means that flight duration is more important to me than speed. I had been considering an Armin wing for it until I read this. I don’t understand why it behaves the way you described though.

Thanks!

 

[TEAJR66]

Make both wings. Play around and figure out what wing works best for you in various conditions.

 

[Piotrsko]

Annnd: which one flies better depends on how you build and finish each one.

Remember that soaring is about needing to reduce rate of sink to less than whatever air around you has as a lift component, not a higher lift quotient. Less drag might be meaningful, but only if it allows you to stay in the up going air.

 

[Foamforce]

But why would a smooth Armin wing get less lift than a faceted FT wing, if all other factors are equal? The FT wing is a little lighter, and maybe that could be confused for having more lift. Could the facets themselves improve lift somehow? I would think that they would just cause it to stall a little earlier. There’s also the strong possibility that @Tench745’s Armin wing wasn’t identical, so that other factors such as a different thickness may have caused the difference in lift.

 

[TEAJR66]

Make a few versions of each wing. Play around. Have fun. You'll find your comfort zone.

 

[Piotrsko]

Differences in lift can usually be traced back to camber changes and leading edge. The lumps may or may not have an effect, reasonably sure we're not super critical, probably just barely transitional. What @TEAJR66 said is very appropriate. Go look at the Gottengen airfoils from the 30's.

 

[Tench745]

Do you have any theories as to why this was the case? Was your wing profile and thickness the same? Is it possible that the facets on the FT wing produce vortexes to produce more lift?

My goal of replicating a Night Radian means that flight duration is more important to me than speed. I had been considering an Armin wing for it until I read this. I don’t understand why it behaves the way you described though.

Thanks!

The FT wing is a thicker airfoil and the undercambered wingtips are also good for high lift at low speeds. The tradeoff is drag. Slow flight can often be your friend when in lift. If you can slow down and stay in the lift longer, you can ride it up longer. The Armin wing was slippery, but didn't slow down as well.
When I finally added undercambered tips to the Armin wing it behaved a lot more like the FT wing.

 

[Foamforce]

The FT wing is a thicker airfoil and the undercambered wingtips are also good for high lift at low speeds. The tradeoff is drag. Slow flight can often be your friend when in lift. If you can slow down and stay in the lift longer, you can ride it up longer. The Armin wing was slippery, but didn't slow down as well.
When I finally added undercambered tips to the Armin wing it behaved a lot more like the FT wing.

Ah, that explains it. I was thinking that you had done an identical wing to the original, just using the Armin technique instead of the bevels. Thanks!

 

[Tench745]

Ah, that explains it. I was thinking that you had done an identical wing to the original, just using the Armin technique instead of the bevels. Thanks!

Actually, I'm looking at it again, and reality is slightly different from my memory. The wings appear to have the same thickness of spar. But my Armin wing has a little camber to the lower surface, making it more of a semi-symetrical airfoil, so a smoother airfoil, but less overall camber.