Do you want this big green box to go away? Well here's how...

Click here for full update

Wildcat! photo archives restored.

Click here for full update

Donors can now disable ads.

Click here for instructions

Add yourself to the user map.

Click here for instructions

[rebel-builders] New issue FUS-30 thickness and FUS-30 doubl

Converted from Wildcat! database. (read only)
Locked
Garry Wright

[rebel-builders] New issue FUS-30 thickness and FUS-30 doubler

Post by Garry Wright » Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:24 pm

The concept seems rather simple actually. Looking at the tailwheel from
the rear in ascii form below we see various points of reference


|
|
A |______ B
|
| | One armed tail wheel assembly.
|_____ | C
|
|

The wheel is just a line - sorry my ascii art leaves a lot to be
desired. : )

The wheel creates a cw moment at C of weight x distanceAB in inch lbs or
whatever units you like. This must be countered by a moment provided in
an anti-cw direction at C by the member BC. This in turn is countered by
a moment at B, then at A, then at the mount point above A. If anyone can
adjust my understanding of the statics involved here I would appreciate
being un-misconceived. The fact that the weight vector does indeed pass
vertically thru the mountpoint is not relevant to the resolution of moments.

Garry

Ken wrote:
Hi Garry
I respect Wayne's and your experiences and I appreciate it when anybody
shares their experiences. I wish more people would do so. It is a good
learning environment when more than one side of an issue is on record.
Then the student can choose to investigate more if he wishes and
hopefully apply the scientific method instead of just polling for
opinions which seems too common nowadays. Things are often not what they
first appear as we all well know. Tailwheels are subject to more multi
dimensional and multi mode oscillations than I first suspected. The
static and low speed load analysis is fairly simple for anyone
interested though.
Ken


Garry Wright wrote:
For the record Ken, I agree with Wayne. A significant torque is
developed and two years of not agreeing on this has not changed my
opinion or yours. I have suffered damage from it like Wayne and believe
that one sided tailwheels are suitable only for aircraft with tubular
framework - not for Rebels and the like. Pot re-stirred : )

Garry

Ken wrote:
FWIW and to stir the pot ;)
I happily run the Matco one sided tailwheel and assert that neither the
tailspring or fuselage can tell the difference between a one sided or
two sided tail wheel fork. My spring has no twist whatsoever when the
wheel is forward and aft. Exactly the same as my former two sided fork was.

Of course this is with the side to side center of the wheel centered on
the spring. It is hard to imagine that the Maule isn't also centered
left to right?

Ken

Wayne G. O'Shea wrote:

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------




-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------





-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Locked