| Author | Message | ||
     Michael Farley New member Username: Mikefarley Post Number: 1 Registered: 11-2006 |
Greetings, We are currently completing control surface rigging on our CT Express, and are running into a potential problem.... With the current version (plans version) of the aileron counterweight arm and lead weights, the instructions are calling for 20 degrees up and 10 degrees down. We are able to get the full 10 degrees down, but only approx. 16-16.5 degrees in the up travel until the opposite counterweight prohibits further movement. My dad went out and looked at Terry Sack's beautiful CT, and his travels are almost the exact same as ours. So the question is...what is everyone else getting in terms of aileron travel? We're trying to avoid cutting holes in the bottom of the wing for further movement, so that leaves two options: 1. Settle for what we have, or 2. A redesign of the counterweights with slightly shorter arms for (hopefully) some more movement. I think we're in favor of option 1, but I wanted to see what everyone else has first. Also, does anyone have problems with lack of aileron authority? Thank you for the help!! Mike Farley | ||
| Kevin Dennes New member Username: Kdennes Post Number: 102 Registered: 01-2001 |
Mike, those numbers are fairly similar that I found with the 2000 and we settled to leave it as it was. Larry Olson said that he did not think it warranted any structural change to the wing to accommodate the slight extra throw of the counterweight. The aircraft performs very well with those numbers on our aircraft. I am pleased that I didn't cut into the wing to achieve the 20 degrees. Of course, I acknowledge that others may have a different opinion and you should weigh up what others say before making your decision. Regards. Kevin (from Downunder) | ||
| James Butler New member Username: Jim_butler Post Number: 6 Registered: 09-2005 |
Mike, I will try to measure mine in the next couple of days and get back to you. In the meantime, be very careful about shortening the arm for the counterweights. If you reduce the total moment, you could end-up with the center of gravity of the aileron/weight assembly being behind, or too close to the center of pressure, leading to aileron flutter. Aileron flutter can seem like more of an explosion of the wing in flight. Jim | ||
| Gary H. Wolfelt New member Username: Wolfelt Post Number: 50 Registered: 11-2003 |
Mike: This isn't my design. I just got to take a look at what someone else has done. I don't know if this is the "fix" for you. But I thought that it might be worth a look. GHW   | ||
| Steve Christensen New member Username: Stevec Post Number: 10 Registered: 12-2002 |
Mike, I have a CT Express. I do not have the lead attached to the arm yet. At the outboard aft tip of the aileron I have a deflection of 3 3/16" up and 1.5" down. That is 21.62 degrees up and 10.13 degrees down. Steve Christensen | ||
| Michael Farley New member Username: Mikefarley Post Number: 2 Registered: 11-2006 |
Gary- Thank you for the picture. That seems like a good design idea for adding mass to the weight without a lot of additional arm. I'm not sure if that will help us, however. Our weights are essentially the same thickness as the arm itself (3/8"), and by the looks of that picture the lead at the forward end of the arm is quite a bit thicker, and the end of the arm is where the lead contacts the wing skin. The shape itself holds merit, though, if we decide to re-shape ours. Our primay problem is that we need to make the arms long enough to clear the rear shear web, but then short enough not to impose a limitation on the weights. I think what we have now is pretty optimal, which leads us to probably settle for what we have in terms of travel. Kevin-Thanks for the post. Those numbers look to be close to what the desgin will allow without wing alteration. It's nice to hear of someone else who is having no problems with what we have in terms of travel. Thanks guys! | ||
| Reinhard Metz New member Username: Reinhard_metz Post Number: 75 Registered: 03-2003 |
Mine don't go the full 20 degrees, and the plane fies fine. I'm pretty sure the solution here is to just leave it alone. | ||
| Michael Farley New member Username: Mikefarley Post Number: 3 Registered: 11-2006 |
Steve- One thing that we ran into when we first started balancing the ailerons was that, using the original Wheeler counterweight arms, the distance from the aileron to the bolt hole locations for the lead was not long enough to permit full travel when the weights were bolted down. Basically, the lead would hit the aft shear web, limiting the movement of the aileron. Our solution was to fabricate new counterweight arms that were approx. 1-1.5" longer than the originals to fix this. I doubt/hope that you won't have this problem, but if you're using the old, original Wheeler arms you may want to check this. Otherwise, count your blessings!!  | ||
| Gary Markwardt New member Username: Gmark Post Number: 41 Registered: 12-1999 |
Mike: your numbers are similar to my Express 2000 and it flys great. I think you are okay. | ||
| James Butler New member Username: Jim_butler Post Number: 7 Registered: 09-2005 |
Mike, I get 17 degrees up and 13 degrees down. The airplane has plenty of aileron authority throughout the flight envelope. Jim | ||
| Michael Farley New member Username: Mikefarley Post Number: 4 Registered: 11-2006 |
I think our final numbers will be right around 17 degrees up and 10 degrees down. From what everyone has said, I think we're going to live with what we have, tighten everything up and move on to rigging the tail surfaces. Thanks for everyone's help on this!! | ||
| Glen Farley New member Username: Glen_farley Post Number: 3 Registered: 08-2006 |
We are getting ready to send our registration package to the FAA and wondered what recent builders have used for their Bill of Sale (Form 8050-2) since the company is out of business (three times) and cannot provide the documentation. | ||
| Sven-Ake Eriksson New member Username: Sven Post Number: 28 Registered: 11-1999 |
Hi everybody I am in the phase of aileron/flap construction and have been aware of the potential problem with aileron travel. If you follow the original CT manual instructions you will likely end up with marginal aileron travel, at least when considering 20 degrees up movement. I have used the "aileron rigging" template to find out how to position the counterweight arms and found that it will be minor changes to that instruction procedure to get the neeeded aileron travel. I also have the lead weights with the same thickness as the counterweight arm (0.5 inches). | ||
| Chaz King New member Username: Chazking Post Number: 22 Registered: 01-2005 |
Does anyone know the size (L & W) of the flaps? And, the wings? I'm comparing the impact of 10ºflaps (IOW, what percentage of the wing is flaps) and use as an estimate for the impact of the "flap" on the bottom of the cowling (how much "flap affect" is the bottom of the cowling contributing to drag in level flight?) From that I expect to estimate the impact from adding cowl flaps as a means of reducing parasitic drag! (or peripatetic drag!) Chäz |