Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
April 26, 2019, 08:17:28 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with email, password and session length
News: Help Support Hip Pocket Aeronautics Builders' Forum and Plan Gallery

You can help support our forum and gallery
by having plans printed by Ratz.

Details and Feedback here: Help Support the Forum & Gallery - Plan Printing
 
Home Help Search Login Register
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Blizzard E36  (Read 14372 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
danberry
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 17
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 946



Ignore
« Reply #75 on: October 04, 2015, 10:28:52 AM »

What if we just worked from a position of trust in this very simple event?  How many events have been destroyed by trying to imagineer boiler plate rules to frustrate potential cheaters?  Simple seems to be working in E36 so far.

e36 has decent rules. When a glut of planes that will do 3 minutes on five seconds is found, the rules will be tweaked.
We aren't there yet. And when we get there....the 3 guys alive who fly Free Flight will get together over a beer and figure a solution. Which will be reduced motor run and increased minimum weight.
Logged
DerekMc
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 52
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 1,383



Ignore
« Reply #76 on: October 04, 2015, 10:34:26 AM »

What if we just worked from a position of trust in this very simple event?  How many events have been destroyed by trying to imagineer boiler plate rules to frustrate potential cheaters?  Simple seems to be working in E36 so far.

e36 has decent rules. When a glut of planes that will do 3 minutes on five seconds is found, the rules will be tweaked.
We aren't there yet. And when we get there....the 3 guys alive who fly Free Flight will get together over a beer and figure a solution. Which will be reduced motor run and increased minimum weight.

LOL and too true.
Logged

They fly better when you smile!
Derek
JohnOSullivan
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 191


Topic starter
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #77 on: October 04, 2015, 11:45:18 AM »

What if we just worked from a position of trust in this very simple event?  How many events have been destroyed by trying to imagineer boiler plate rules to frustrate potential cheaters?  Simple seems to be working in E36 so far.

e36 has decent rules. When a glut of planes that will do 3 minutes on five seconds is found, the rules will be tweaked.
We aren't there yet. And when we get there....the 3 guys alive who fly Free Flight will get together over a beer and figure a solution. Which will be reduced motor run and increased minimum weight.

Totally agree.

The E36 rules as currently appear to be satisfying the needs of all those currently flying the class. There is no need to meddle with what is working effectively.
There will inevitably be improvements in performance with more familiarity with the class and tweaking of electronics, but this can be dealt with when the time comes. First step would be to reduce the preliminary round motor runs to 10 seconds. Simplicity is what makes this class work.
Logged

John O'Sullivan
MAAC 5401
MACI 26
airplay
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Denmark Denmark

Posts: 91



Ignore
« Reply #78 on: October 04, 2015, 12:08:07 PM »

F1S allready starts with 10 sec ordinary rounds... Very convinient as lokal airspace ruling hereabout for modelaircraft suggest or rather demands: The flight level must not exceed 100
m above terrain.

But one nice class E-36/F1S! Simple, cheap but still with many new roads for development...

Jens
Logged
airplay
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Denmark Denmark

Posts: 91



Ignore
« Reply #79 on: February 28, 2016, 05:34:06 PM »

Went flying today with my old Blizzard. Very drifting conditions with temps around 0 C. My testing was Cobra 2204/ APC 6/5.5 .
Power on and go... Best readings on 5 s 81m and on 10 s 162m. Awsome.
I had 2 goes on 10 s but stopped as the model disappeared i low clouds . Quite frightening until the model dropped down from big grey on DT.
Conclusions: Blizzard performs very well on high power.

One comment more: The tailplane broke on last launch on very short DT. Stronger build for 16m/s plus next!

Jens     
Logged
rivers
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 1
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 38



Ignore
« Reply #80 on: March 03, 2016, 11:31:14 AM »

Hi airplay, Awesome altitude numbers indeed. What is the kv of your Cobra motor? An online search showed a Cobra 2204 -2300kv to be the highest multirotor motor available.
Logged
airplay
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Denmark Denmark

Posts: 91



Ignore
« Reply #81 on: March 06, 2016, 03:26:33 PM »

@ Rivers: 2300Kv.
Further conditions: Batteries HK Nano 300mAh, - 70C and -90C testet. Last ones clearly superior but still fading a bit on 10 sek runs. So next I'l try some TP cells.
AUW around 130g.

Jens
Logged
rivers
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 1
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 38



Ignore
« Reply #82 on: March 07, 2016, 02:11:02 PM »

Hi airplay
OK on the Cobra kv .. thanks

Hi John.
Re. post #25 carbon wing: Did you finish the wing and how did it work? Weight?
Logged
airplay
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Denmark Denmark

Posts: 91



Ignore
« Reply #83 on: April 14, 2016, 03:07:18 PM »

Some updates on new Emax 2600Kv drone motor / ACP 6x5.5E  :

Consistent readings on 5s : 90-93 m with nice roll over.
10s is a bit out of control.  150m plus but sometimes on the back and huge problems with recovery. I suspect the SoLite covering is too soft for topspeed.

In general I have some problems with stable trim on high power. So now for next model I'll try Cuben fibre. Or Icarex for central plane.

Hope to attend some contests this year in Sweden and Jutland.

Jens

(any tips on Cuben? Glueing ect?)

Logged
JohnOSullivan
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 191


Topic starter
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #84 on: April 14, 2016, 06:09:48 PM »

Jens:
Looks like you are getting some great height out of your new motor.
I've been derelict lately and have much to catch up on. I still have my Blizzard carbon AG 03 section wing half built and the Blizzard 3 wing not started.
I have two dvs high kv motors to test (www.dys.hk) which are a bit heavier than my usual motors, but promise quite a bit  more power.

The way things are going, I feel that the next step with the Blizzard is to increase the wing chord and get a bit more area into the wing to reduce the wing loading.
The current motor power increase will handle the increased area well and will pay off in the improved glide from the larger wing. no other changes planned in fuselage or tail.
The wing structure with the geodetic rear section should take care of wing flex on the climb. I am currently using Ultracote Light covering and this seems to work well. I would prefer Micafilm ( the original pre-1996  stuff which has randomly oriented fibres). I have a limited amount of the "translucent white" which is 0.75 oz/sq. yd which I will use on the Blizzard 3 and the carbon AG03 wings.

As for Icarex, it is a nice covering, but I'm not convinced it can add any torsional benefit unless you have a very rigid carbon structure. I used it on my Electric Executioner balsa geodetic tail and found it to be floppy. I recovered the tail with transparent Micafilm and it solved the problem.

Logged

John O'Sullivan
MAAC 5401
MACI 26
PeeTee
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 48
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,227



Ignore
« Reply #85 on: April 15, 2016, 03:30:08 AM »

Interesting work chaps

Jens

We have found that often, when using a higher power motor it's necessary to trim for a specific motor run, otherwise the model exhibits the  unpredictability you mention - perhaps my power guru John T would care to explain more.

John O'S

Which particular DYS motor have you selected? They appear to have better quality than many of the similar type, and I'm pretty sure that John T & Ray E  have bought and used them.

Peter

Logged
john thompson
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 66



Ignore
« Reply #86 on: April 15, 2016, 04:28:25 AM »

A couple of years ago I used high power - courtesy of Peter T who does my motor selection - I was getting about the same height 300 feet or so in 5 seconds . !0 second runs were impossible, out of control .
I also increased wing area using a 7 inch chord (with and without undercamber ), total weight I think was in the order of 185 g . I built very rigidly , no carbon booms they flex,( I even tried putting ant the four corners so to speak 3mmx 2 mm longerons on the outside to try to stiffen ) and if they do not, they are too heavy , so regular balsa box . wings Mylar plus tissue .
In fact from memory I built about 3 or 4 of them with various configurations , high , low pylons , lots of downthrust  etc but all were erratic . My final conclusion was that it was the power train that caused the problem .
With a IC engine I would never launch a model without ensuring that the revs (acoustic Tach ) are in the right ball park , models are too touchy when flown to the limits to permit otherwise .
This as of now is not possible ,without a lot of complications ( and what does it do in the air ?) I think with electric motors . I tried same battery , freshly charged , after one run when it is warmed up . Heating battery whilst charging and heavens knows what combinations with other batteries, all to no avail . I also tried different props , the most reliable , but not the ones that got the highest, used small props at high revs , any variation in power I surmise was evened out .
I have not pursued this at all , finding it a bit tame , I am more used to wanting 500 feet at least , in 5 seconds . But every one to their own . I still like to think that I am the quickest ( when checking club mates runs on the ground) one on the watch to ensure a max  4.99 second prop stop , anticipation some call  it, just glad at my age I can still operate a watch . But such small differences can mean the differences between winning and  loosing . This controlling the length of the run needs a bit more sorting out , I think. Such as utilising an electronic timer which is set at 4.9 or what ever , some one should be able to come up with some test device which ensures the same for all ? I know that E36 is popular for it's simplicity but people will always look for advantages to keep interest up, no doubt .  All in all there surely must be a way of ensuring a consistent battery output , but here again maybe not ? Could one have a Controller that ensured the same revs ?  With the marvels of electronics something might exist or be made ?
Do not ask me though about F1Q ,which I foresaw would morph into a powered glider class. Not my style I think ?
John 

 
Logged
RayE
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 2
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 58



Ignore
« Reply #87 on: April 15, 2016, 01:54:07 PM »

I have 3 E36's with high power motors. All 3 are Satellites or variations thereof. The first one is powered by a Suppo 2208/8 2600kv whilst the other 2 are fitted with the DYS D2822 2282 2600KV. These latter two have been built only recently  and are still to be trimmed. The original has been in use for about 9 months in a high power configuration and, contrary to the experiences of others, retains it's pattern for the full 10 seconds. Maybe the Satellite is an inherently stable design.

Re JT's comment about this all being a bit tame, as a rubber flyer I find it quite exciting! And F1Q is right up my street.

Ray               
Logged
airplay
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Denmark Denmark

Posts: 91



Ignore
« Reply #88 on: April 15, 2016, 03:05:02 PM »

Thanks for all your useful comments!

One question for John O'S: Did you apply your Icarex 45 degrees or 90?
Concerning the Blizzard design I have to say that until latest motors it has behaved like a kitten...

Jens.   
Logged
PeeTee
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 48
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,227



Ignore
« Reply #89 on: April 15, 2016, 03:42:37 PM »

Jens

In case you've not seen it there's a topic on Icarex here: http://www.hippocketaeronautics.com/hpa_forum/index.php?topic=4974.0  with a lot of useful information from those who have used it.

I've found that once you start increasing the power to weight ratio of E36 models, they become more tricky to trim. I forgot to mention that in my view, the launch becomes much more critical. Ray E's Satellites fly very nicely, and all I would add is that the climbs are much more of a corkscrew spiral rather than just straight up. The latter will give you a greater height gain but with the possibility of a poor transition, or being knocked off pattern if it's windy and/or turbulent. Experimenting is great fun though Cheesy

I too would like to go to Jutland, but I think it clashes with a competition in England.

Peter
Logged
airplay
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Denmark Denmark

Posts: 91



Ignore
« Reply #90 on: April 15, 2016, 05:23:21 PM »

Thanks Pee Tee for the link. Many fine tips!
E 36's on the edge has many thrilling experiences. I had one bad  launch on 10s on ending in an high speed race 1 km downwind ...At home I found out that both inner planes had same wash-in after the ride...
So my plan is building very stiff wings(read covering) for the class next!
Jens
Logged
rivers
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 1
Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 38



Ignore
« Reply #91 on: April 15, 2016, 06:24:23 PM »

Regarding Icarex  on an E-36 wing. I just finished a wing covered with the material. I used the light stuff from FAI Supply. Here is my take:
1. It is a woven fabric and has a kind of soft feel. With modest heat shrinking very little torsional stiffness is added when put on 0 - 90 as I did.
2. It definitely should go on 45 deg, which I would do next time for sure.
3. The more you shrink it the tighter it gets and torsional stiffness goes up. It can take a lot more heat than expected. I used test patches to test the heat resistance . I ended up using the highest setting on my shrink iron and stiffness improved. Don't do this without pre-testing samples. Hot air may work better but I didn't try it
4. It sure looks pretty ... picture coming.
Logged
JohnOSullivan
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 191


Topic starter
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #92 on: April 15, 2016, 07:54:53 PM »

TeePee;
I use the DYS 22822 2600 kV motor. I have fitted in my Blizzard Mk3 model, but have not flown it yet as I have not completed the wing. I may build a new wing with a wider chord (6") to get more area and reduce the wing loading with the heavier motor.
I've done very little Free Flight over the winter and we are still getting snow here. It's good to see some action on the Power and Electric Power threads as this gives a bit of impetus to get things done. I have started a New Executioner wing and tail, but a sanding error on the tip made me shelve it for several months. I'll have to get back to it as Don DeLoche is begging me for an article on it.
Jens:
I got a bunch of Icarex a few years ago and the only thing I used it for was my Executioner tail. I used it at 90 deg and it seemed floppy. I recovered the tail with Micafilm and it was much stiffer.
I am sure that is a great covering for rigid carbon structures. It is about the same weight as coloured Micafilm or Oracover (Ultracote) Lite.
Logged

John O'Sullivan
MAAC 5401
MACI 26
John
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 59



Ignore
« Reply #93 on: April 20, 2016, 08:50:20 AM »

Hi John,

Like you I have been derelict as well, but have managed to get my Dynamo E and Mutt ready for this years flying. Also I am hopeful that I can get the Wee Devil E36 finished, Have that fuselage finished covered with motor and electrics installed and the tail and fin ready for sanding and covering. Just the wings to finish building and covering so hopefully, if work does not get in the way, will have it ready for flying soon.

Have not checked but what is the weight and power of the DYS 22822 and is it much more different than the usual E36 motors. Good to see this post being used again.   

John
Logged
PeeTee
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 48
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,227



Ignore
« Reply #94 on: April 20, 2016, 09:35:33 AM »

John O'S - the 2208 2600kV appears to be a generic spec. The first ones I acquired for your erstwhile team-mate came from Giant Shark (no longer with us) and were better that some later gold anodised ones. Finally, the DYS made version came along and the quality & performance seemed better. DYS have now bought out a slightly different 'high torque' motor for multicopters, which I have, but haven't tested yet.

John (the other Canadian one  Wink). The 2208 2600 motors are approx 10-15 grams heavier than an EMax 2805 and typically need an 18-20 amp ESC (which will add another 10g). Ray E and John T will attest that the weight is more than offset by the increased power.

Are you visiting England this year?

Peter
Logged
John
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 59



Ignore
« Reply #95 on: April 20, 2016, 09:50:27 AM »

Hi Peter,

Unfortunately no as we are still paying for the Daughters wedding from last year, but we may be able to get over next year. I hope if we do that there may be flying at Middle Wallop by then, but who knows, keep my fingers crossed. If not maybe the FF Nationals, you guys are getting short on flying sites these days, could I fly E36 in the local park or is that no longer possible like it used to be in the sixties, FF and CL every Sunday morning, them were the days.

All the best, have a pint for me next time you are in the pub.

John
Logged
airplay
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Denmark Denmark

Posts: 91



Ignore
« Reply #96 on: May 06, 2016, 02:04:36 PM »

Breaking News!            My Blizzard did place second in its first competition. 14 Swedes and Danes gathered at Rinkaby for for the new yearly Nordic Cup (still informal though)
I missed 3 sec on last ordinary round due to lost trim....  So no fly off as only Chr Schwartzbach had 5 max and won. Grats!
But the Blizzard climb like no other model present...The glide need a bit nursing.

Jens
Logged
Wout Moerman
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 22
Offline Offline

Netherlands Netherlands

Posts: 620


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #97 on: May 07, 2016, 04:50:23 AM »

Congratulations! Well done!
Logged

Rubber FF scale:
www.zininmodelvliegen.nl
cvasecuk
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 198



Ignore
« Reply #98 on: May 07, 2016, 06:13:43 AM »

During its development you have used a variety of motor/prop/battery combinations. What were you using for the comp?
Ron
Logged
JohnOSullivan
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 191


Topic starter
WWW

Ignore
« Reply #99 on: May 07, 2016, 07:24:55 AM »

Well Done Jens
Nice to see it climbs well. I've rarely had any trim differences between 5 and 15 sec climbs. This may change with larger motors.

I'm still in Free Flight hibernation this season (although I've been flying electric rc sailplanes on a weekly basis)
I have some new motors to try out including the DYS 2208 but with having to use a 25 amp ESC and larger battery will add quite a bit of weight.
 I've also pulled out a half built carbon wing with AG03 section which I must finish.
Logged

John O'Sullivan
MAAC 5401
MACI 26
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!