![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 10:41:12 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote: "Ramapriya" wrote in message . com... Unlike the elevators and rudder that change an aircraft's pitch and yaw with no other secondary effect, why does the banking of wings by the use of ailerons not just roll an aircraft but also produces a turn (yaw)? The simple answer is that, theoretically, the ailerons act exactly as you would think. That is, a turn is not caused by a change in bank. In level flight, the wings are generating 1g of lift, equivalent to the weight of the aircraft and all occupants inside. If this lift vector is rotated by the ailerons then it will point in the direction of the rotation, and therefore force the aircraft to change its direction of flight, and therefore to turn. And there will a corresponding loss of lift against gravity; all simply calculated by geometric functions of sine and cosine. So the aircraft will begin to descend, as it turns. A more complicated answer is that since the "center of lift" is ahead of the "center of gravity", having the lift vector tilted to one side or the other by bank does pull the nose of the airplane around a bit, inducing a turn. If the center of lift actually was ahead of the center of gravity then the aircraft would loop nose-up, so it isn't. They are aligned. But it is the acceleration in the direction of the rotated lift vector which changes the direction of the airflow around the aircraft. So the airfoils at the tail force the airplanes nose to point into the direction of the changing wind. This also changes the direction of the lift vector to the new location, which is actually the same location, and it is known as the center point of the circle the airplane is drawing out in 3-d space. The circle is actually the bottom of a cone, with the cone drawn by the lift vector of the aircraft. The tighter the turn then the flatter the cone. If there is no turn then the cone is not a cone but a flat plane instead. In other words, the aircraft in a turn is flying in a circle, instead of just accelerating sideways and retaining its former forward velocity, which it does not do. The changing wind over the airfoils rotate the aircraft into flying into a circle. An even more complicated answer points out that the ailerons themselves create increased drag on the raised wing and reduced drag on the lowered wing, which creates a yaw opposite in direction to the intended turn. More or less. A lowered aileron has the increased drag, while a raised aileron has less drag. This will pull the nose around opposite from the direction of expected bank. Adverse yaw is the ailerons acting in place of the rudder, and it prevents the aircraft from lining perfectly into the wind. But once the aircraft is banked then the aircraft will turn. The aircraft turns because it is banked. A banked aircraft will not turn if, and only if, the wing is not generating lift. A wing will not generate lift if its angle of attack is so controlled by the horizontal stabilizer. One other note, the aircraft will lose lift and so descend as it banks into a turn. But as it descends, the wings will regain upward airflow and restore the lift lossed. This stops the downward acceleration, with the airplane having reached its terminal velocity. But the lift, and the loads on the wing, have increased just from the aircraft going into a bank; even if adjustments have not been made for level flight. (I think this is ~correct. Pretty sure.) --Mike |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mike Rhodes" wrote in message
... [...signed...] (I think this is ~correct. Pretty sure.) You ought to *know* before you post, I guess. With respect to your specific comments: The simple answer is that, theoretically, the ailerons act exactly as you would think. That is, a turn is not caused by a change in bank. In level flight, the wings are generating 1g of lift, equivalent to the weight of the aircraft and all occupants inside. If this lift vector is rotated by the ailerons then it will point in the direction of the rotation, and therefore force the aircraft to change its direction of flight, and therefore to turn. Wrong. In the theoretical case I describe (which isn't the reality case anyway), banking would simply cause the airplane to sideslip sideways, without any turn occurring. The "1g of lift" stuff is irrelevant, except inasmuch as there IS lift (a force) that is redirected sideways. A more complicated answer is that since the "center of lift" is ahead of the "center of gravity", having the lift vector tilted to one side or the other by bank does pull the nose of the airplane around a bit, inducing a turn. If the center of lift actually was ahead of the center of gravity then the aircraft would loop nose-up, so it isn't. They are aligned. Wrong, again. The center of lift is actually behind the center of gravity (I screwed up in my original post). The horizontal stabilizer balances out the difference in force to prevent the nose from dropping as a result of the difference. To revist my original post, the correct statement would have been "since the 'center of lift' is behind the 'center of gravity', having the lift vector tilted to one side or the other by bank does pull the nose of the airplane around a bit, inducing a turn *opposite to that intended*." I apologize for resulting confusion, but the fact remains that your statement is entirely incorrect. [...] An even more complicated answer points out that the ailerons themselves create increased drag on the raised wing and reduced drag on the lowered wing, which creates a yaw opposite in direction to the intended turn. More or less. A lowered aileron has the increased drag, while a raised aileron has less drag. This will pull the nose around opposite from the direction of expected bank. Heh...one of the few things you get right, and it's exactly what I wrote. Adverse yaw is the ailerons acting in place of the rudder, and it prevents the aircraft from lining perfectly into the wind. "In place of"? Uh, okay...I guess you could say it that way. But once the aircraft is banked then the aircraft will turn. The aircraft turns because it is banked. No, it does not. Any turn as a result of bank is actually due to other design features of the airplane, such as dihedral and a vertical stabilizer. Pete |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 22:22:22 GMT, Mike Rhodes
wrote: A banked aircraft will not turn if, and only if, the wing is not generating lift. A wing will not generate lift if its angle of attack is so controlled by the horizontal stabilizer. I was not quite right with the "if and only if". Of course the rudder can also stop the turn, as in a side-slip. And the side-slip Peter mentioned is what pushes the nose around in the turn by its push on vertical stabilizer. I did not point directly at the vert stabilizer as Peter did in his reply. Because the banked aircraft is aligned less with gravity, it would then want to accelerate 'up', as 'up' is relative to the aircraft. But this would immediately change the angle-of-attack of the both the wing and the horizontal stab. So the wing loses some lift, while the horizontal stab increases its already downward push. This would tend to push the nose 'up', and restore the angle of attack of the wing. The turn is a relatively slow process (the pilot has time to make adjustments), and maybe the mechanics are not so simple as I think my post implied. --Mike |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 19:30:24 GMT, Mike Rhodes
wrote: On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 22:22:22 GMT, Mike Rhodes wrote: Because the banked aircraft is aligned less with gravity, it would then want to accelerate 'up', as 'up' is relative to the aircraft. But this would immediately change the angle-of-attack of the both the wing and the horizontal stab. So the wing loses some lift, while the horizontal stab increases its already downward push. This would tend to push the nose 'up', and restore the angle of attack of the wing. Oops. I got this wrong. If both wing and horizontal stab are pushed down then the net effect is no change in angle of attack. --Mike |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...
There are many. The one already provided by Stan's reply is one of my favorites. There are also several good books on the topic, including the FAA's own flight training manuals (available for download from their web site somewhere, but I don't have a link handy) and a book called "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators". Pete I love jsd's site too, and have condensed all those chapters into two Word files (in case someone is interested!). But I wish Denker had also written the stuff for a non-aviator like me in mind. For example, he's written loads on trim but till this day, I don't know what exactly trimming is and how it physically works ![]() Ramapriya |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Ramapriya" wrote in message
om... I love jsd's site too, and have condensed all those chapters into two Word files (in case someone is interested!). But I wish Denker had also written the stuff for a non-aviator like me in mind. For example, he's written loads on trim but till this day, I don't know what exactly trimming is and how it physically works ![]() Well, trimming isn't complicated. But there are numerous methods for actually *accomplishing* it, so perhaps that's why Denker sort of just assumes you're familiar with the concept and doesn't get into how it "physically works". That is, the basic concept is simple: "trimming" simply means to set a particular control (the "trim"...generally you may have elevator, rudder, or aileron trim or any combination of the three, though I don't doubt there's at least one unusual aircraft out there that has yet another possibility I'm not aware of) so that instead of the pilot having to hold a particular control input, the "trim" holds it for him. So, for elevator trim (the most common type), once the pilot has selected a pitch attitude for a climb (for example), along with the desired power setting (often full power), he can then set the elevator trim to hold the elevator control input at that particular pitch attitude. It gets complicated when you start talking about each specific trim mechanism, since they all have subtle differences in exactly how they accomplish that "hold the control input" action, as well as effects of power or airspeed changes on the effect of the trim. As an example, look at elevator trim: Generally speaking, elevator trim can be thought of as "setting" an airspeed, since for a given power setting, airspeed varies precisely with pitch attitude. A further generalization is that changes in power do NOT actually change the "trimmed airspeed". That is, for a given trim setting, increasing power will result in the nose pitching up and decreasing power will result in the nose pitching down, with the airspeed remaining constant in both cases. For some aircraft, the airspeed literally remains constant. For others, you will actually see slight variations in airspeed. But regardless, any variations are almost always so small that you can still think of setting airspeed rather than a specific trim setting. Since trim doesn't really set a pitch attitude either (except for a given power setting), it's not like there's really a more useful paradigm to use. Just as an example of one elevator trim mechanism: in most of the single-engine Cessnas (and maybe their piston twins, but I don't know those airplanes well enough to say), elevator trim is accomplished through the use of a moveable "trim tab" mounted on the trailing edge of the elevator. There's a wheel in the cockpit that moves this trim tab up and down. When the trim tab moves up, it exerts a downward force on the elevator and when the trim tab moves down, it exerts an upward force on the elevator (aerodynamically, in the exact same way that the elevator itself changes the horizontal stabilizer's up or down force). The trim tab is relatively small, so that by pushing down on the elevator, the net effect is to cause the horizontal stabilizer to create an upward force (nose down pitch), just as if the pilot had pushed forward on the yoke to deflect the elevator downward. Anyway, other aviation references will provide much more detailed information on that sort of thing. "Stick and Rudder" will give you a good pilot's view of things, while the "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators" delves more deeply into the actual mechanics of flight (naturally). Pete |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ramapriya" wrote in message om... Where does the turning effect come from? The most basic (maybe too basic) answer is generally this: When you bank, the lift is at an angle, not straight vertical. That angle pushes it the plane to the side as well as up. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
(Ramapriya) wrote in message . com...
Hi guys, Unlike the elevators and rudder that change an aircraft's pitch and yaw with no other secondary effect, why does the banking of wings by the use of ailerons not just roll an aircraft but also produces a turn (yaw)? Logically, one would expect an aircraft to keep going straight ahead even if the pilot banked the aircraft left or right. Where does the turning effect come from? Is there a website you know of that can teach me such basics, without having to bug you? ![]() Cheers, Ramapriya Alas, Ramapriya, it is far more complex than that! First of all, the rudder causes not only yaw, but by virtue of the yaw accelerating the outside wing and effectively increasing lift, causes bank toward the inside of the turn. The ailerons cause both roll AND yaw...but counterintuitively, the yaw is to the outside of the turn. That is because the creation of lift also creates drag. And when you use the ailerons to bank, you are increasing the lift on the outside wing...and therefore yawing toward the "outside" of the turn. The rudder largely is used to counter that force. And none of that is why an airplane turns. The true cause of the turn is...well, we need to look at an airplane in our mind's eye...picture it in level flight. The force of gravity is offset by the force of lift...generated by the wings. We can say that there is a downward vector...gravity...and an upward vector...lift, which is perpendicular to the airplane's wing. Now, let us bank the airplane. The lift vector is still perpendicular to the airplane's wing, but now it is directed somewhat toward the inside of the bank. And the airplane therefore turns that way...is pulled that way, if you will. Oh, and yes, since the lift vector is directed toward the inside of the turn, the amount of lift to counteract gravity is decreased...and the airplane will descend unless something is done...usually the addition of power or an increase in the angle of attack...increases the antigravity portion of the lift vector. That will either help or totally confuse you. Feel free to email me for a dialog. Jim |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I strongly suggest that you visit
www.whittsflying.com It will answer pretty much any flying question that you have. I also suggest that you go for a discovery flight - sounds like you are moree than ready ![]() Of course, you are also still welcome to ask here. Tony -- Tony Roberts PP-ASEL VFR OTT Night Cessna 172H C-GICE In article , (Ramapriya) wrote: Hi guys, Unlike the elevators and rudder that change an aircraft's pitch and yaw with no other secondary effect, why does the banking of wings by the use of ailerons not just roll an aircraft but also produces a turn (yaw)? Logically, one would expect an aircraft to keep going straight ahead even if the pilot banked the aircraft left or right. Where does the turning effect come from? Is there a website you know of that can teach me such basics, without having to bug you? ![]() Cheers, Ramapriya |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 05:03 AM |
Phoenix AIM-54A (QUESTION) | Krztalizer | Naval Aviation | 10 | February 23rd 04 07:22 AM |
Legal question - Pilot liability and possible involvement with a crime | John | Piloting | 5 | November 20th 03 09:40 PM |
Question about Question 4488 | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | October 27th 03 01:26 AM |
Basic Stupid Newbie Questions... | John Penta | Military Aviation | 5 | September 19th 03 05:23 PM |