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
|
|||
|
|||
Blow holes vs turbulaator tape.
Just curious if there is research that compares blow holes versus tabulator tape as to effectiveness and drag? i.e., are the bow holes worth the maintenance or is tape effectively just as good? Does the new Ventus have tape or blow holes?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Blow holes vs turbulaator tape.
On Sunday, October 23, 2016 at 4:54:27 PM UTC-7, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
Just curious if there is research that compares blow holes versus tabulator tape as to effectiveness and drag? i.e., are the bow holes worth the maintenance or is tape effectively just as good? Does the new Ventus have tape or blow holes? Blow holes don't involve much extra maintenance. When I was polishing the wings on my DG-303, I'd just put a piece of wing tape over them. I only checked whether any holes were clogged once, as I decided it was unnecessary. Hook a low pressure air source to the intake (I used a vacuum cleaner exhaust port). Hold a lit stick of incense over each one, if it failed to brighten up, run an appropriate size needle through the hole (carefully, so as not to push out the brass tube insert). It took longer to replace old turbulator tape on my other gliders. DG offered a DG-300/303 Club with (among other things) dimple tape replacing the blow holes, I guess they decided the blow holes were worth a premium for that particular airfoil. Marc |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Blow holes vs turbulaator tape.
At 23:54 23 October 2016, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
Just curious if there is research that compares blow holes versus tabulator tape as to effectiveness and drag? i.e., are the bow holes worth the maintenance or is tape effectively just as good? Does the new Ventus have tape or blow holes? That subject goes back over 30 years. As I recall, the blowholes would be better performance-wise if they could be regulated to blow really strongly at low speeds, and then blow only a little at higher speeds. To do this, one needs a large inlet to supply enough air to the ducts at thermalling speeds. Then, you have to shut that supply down to a trickle when cruising at higher speeds. This goes backwards to just having a fixed size inlet that is not adjustable in flight. One would have to have an extendable scoop on each wing that the pilot could extend and retract depending on airspeed to achieve this. Anyway, the Z-tape works pretty well, is cheap to install, and is easy to maintain. The blowholes are labor intensive both in construction ($) and in maintenance. I had DG-300 serial number 2, which was one of the first gliders with this technology. Back in 1983-1985, I did side by side comparison tests with the blowhole system working on the regular fixed size inlets. Then, I repeated the (side by side) tests with the inlets removed (to nullify the blowholes), and used Z-tape for the turbulation instead. I could not see any measurable performance difference between blowholes (with fixed size inlet) and Z-tape. There were arguments about the Standard Class rules to the point that there would have been protests filed if I had come up with and used a variable inlet scoop, so I left it alone. So, long story short. The Z-tape is a lot cheaper and easier, and yields good results. If you are in a class which would allow inlet size adjustment in flight, and you have lots of money to pay for the installation, and lots of time to spend maintaining all of of those tiny holes, then you might see a marginal improvement over Z-tape. That's how I remember it, although it was a long time ago, and the blowhole technology may have gotten better.....FWIW RO |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Blow holes vs turbulaator tape.
Thanks for the reply. I seem to remember that Dick Butler had throttled the blow holes on his ETA biter, not sure how he did that. seems like tape would have more drag but the manufacturing must be very time consuming (expensive).
On Sunday, October 23, 2016 at 5:45:04 PM UTC-7, Michael Opitz wrote: At 23:54 23 October 2016, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote: Just curious if there is research that compares blow holes versus tabulator tape as to effectiveness and drag? i.e., are the bow holes worth the maintenance or is tape effectively just as good? Does the new Ventus have tape or blow holes? That subject goes back over 30 years. As I recall, the blowholes would be better performance-wise if they could be regulated to blow really strongly at low speeds, and then blow only a little at higher speeds. To do this, one needs a large inlet to supply enough air to the ducts at thermalling speeds. Then, you have to shut that supply down to a trickle when cruising at higher speeds. This goes backwards to just having a fixed size inlet that is not adjustable in flight. One would have to have an extendable scoop on each wing that the pilot could extend and retract depending on airspeed to achieve this. Anyway, the Z-tape works pretty well, is cheap to install, and is easy to maintain. The blowholes are labor intensive both in construction ($) and in maintenance. I had DG-300 serial number 2, which was one of the first gliders with this technology. Back in 1983-1985, I did side by side comparison tests with the blowhole system working on the regular fixed size inlets. Then, I repeated the (side by side) tests with the inlets removed (to nullify the blowholes), and used Z-tape for the turbulation instead. I could not see any measurable performance difference between blowholes (with fixed size inlet) and Z-tape. There were arguments about the Standard Class rules to the point that there would have been protests filed if I had come up with and used a variable inlet scoop, so I left it alone. So, long story short. The Z-tape is a lot cheaper and easier, and yields good results. If you are in a class which would allow inlet size adjustment in flight, and you have lots of money to pay for the installation, and lots of time to spend maintaining all of of those tiny holes, then you might see a marginal improvement over Z-tape. That's how I remember it, although it was a long time ago, and the blowhole technology may have gotten better.....FWIW RO |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Blow holes vs turbulaator tape.
On Monday, October 24, 2016 at 3:26:10 PM UTC+1, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
Thanks for the reply. I seem to remember that Dick Butler had throttled the blow holes on his ETA biter, not sure how he did that. seems like tape would have more drag but the manufacturing must be very time consuming (expensive). On Sunday, October 23, 2016 at 5:45:04 PM UTC-7, Michael Opitz wrote: At 23:54 23 October 2016, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote: Just curious if there is research that compares blow holes versus tabulator tape as to effectiveness and drag? i.e., are the bow holes worth the maintenance or is tape effectively just as good? Does the new Ventus have tape or blow holes? That subject goes back over 30 years. As I recall, the blowholes would be better performance-wise if they could be regulated to blow really strongly at low speeds, and then blow only a little at higher speeds. To do this, one needs a large inlet to supply enough air to the ducts at thermalling speeds. Then, you have to shut that supply down to a trickle when cruising at higher speeds. This goes backwards to just having a fixed size inlet that is not adjustable in flight. One would have to have an extendable scoop on each wing that the pilot could extend and retract depending on airspeed to achieve this. Anyway, the Z-tape works pretty well, is cheap to install, and is easy to maintain. The blowholes are labor intensive both in construction ($) and in maintenance. I had DG-300 serial number 2, which was one of the first gliders with this technology. Back in 1983-1985, I did side by side comparison tests with the blowhole system working on the regular fixed size inlets. Then, I repeated the (side by side) tests with the inlets removed (to nullify the blowholes), and used Z-tape for the turbulation instead. I could not see any measurable performance difference between blowholes (with fixed size inlet) and Z-tape. There were arguments about the Standard Class rules to the point that there would have been protests filed if I had come up with and used a variable inlet scoop, so I left it alone. So, long story short. The Z-tape is a lot cheaper and easier, and yields good results. If you are in a class which would allow inlet size adjustment in flight, and you have lots of money to pay for the installation, and lots of time to spend maintaining all of of those tiny holes, then you might see a marginal improvement over Z-tape. That's how I remember it, although it was a long time ago, and the blowhole technology may have gotten better.....FWIW RO Other than a little care during polishing blowholes don't need much attention but zig-zag tape keeps catching on grass, clothing, under finger-nails and on rigging trestle tops resulting in little sharp and draggy lifted corners that won't stick back down easily. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Blow holes vs turbulaator tape.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Blow holes vs turbulaator tape.
Herr Waibel has been quoted as saying of the ASW27 that "there is a 50/50
chance that the blow holes improve performance by 1/2 point". Possibly apocryphal. Easy to clean with a piece of copper wire and a vacuum cleaner but tedious beyond belief. jim |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Blow holes vs turbulaator tape.
On Monday, October 24, 2016 at 9:26:10 AM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
Thanks for the reply. I seem to remember that Dick Butler had throttled the blow holes on his ETA biter, not sure how he did that. Model airplane servos to open or close the supply. I think there were two sets of holes. One set further forward for lower speed, and another further back for higher speed. I think the aft set was always open, but the forward set could be closed off to not trip the flow before it needed to be tripped. Tape is only set for one C/L. With multiple sets of holes, you can transition based on C/L with different hole locations. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Blow holes vs turbulaator tape.
I think the JS-1 has two sets of blow holes, as per their web site.
On Monday, October 24, 2016 at 8:23:15 AM UTC-7, Steve Leonard wrote: On Monday, October 24, 2016 at 9:26:10 AM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote: Thanks for the reply. I seem to remember that Dick Butler had throttled the blow holes on his ETA biter, not sure how he did that. Model airplane servos to open or close the supply. I think there were two sets of holes. One set further forward for lower speed, and another further back for higher speed. I think the aft set was always open, but the forward set could be closed off to not trip the flow before it needed to be tripped. Tape is only set for one C/L. With multiple sets of holes, you can transition based on C/L with different hole locations. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Blow holes vs turbulaator tape.
i'll tell you everything i know based on my time with eta-biter, concordia, and talking to butler.
The blow holes on eta biter are driven by a naca duct. the naca duct has been modified to be closed via a switch in the cockpit that drives a servo. at a certain airspeed, the blowing is swithced of and the boundry layer is turbulated further back by....zig sag tape. there is a presentation by butler about this "blowing articulation" out there on the web. Due to manufacturing and maintainance complexity, concordia doesn't have blowholes. neither does the V3. that's kinda a schleicher thing. When we refinished my 20C two years ago, the question was this: can we fill in the blowholes, and just put zig zag over the blow-hole location? the idea was to reduce the maintainance/not worry about filling them with wax/ no cracking of the paint over the longer term. we wanted to make sure that the turbulator tape would provide the same benefits though, and not actually harm the performance. butler and waibel both said zig zig in the same location would offer the same performance benefits.. I personally wanted to keep the blowholes, and fantazised about installing blowhole articulation for a club class ringer. I was outvoted though, so we did zig zag tape. the glider flies really well. Ask erik nelson and his V2XA... On Sunday, October 23, 2016 at 7:54:27 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote: Just curious if there is research that compares blow holes versus tabulator tape as to effectiveness and drag? i.e., are the bow holes worth the maintenance or is tape effectively just as good? Does the new Ventus have tape or blow holes? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Another Blow to Airbus | a[_3_] | Piloting | 52 | August 19th 10 10:49 AM |
To blow or not to blow... | Dallas | Piloting | 50 | February 15th 08 12:57 PM |
oil blow out IO-360 | Robert M. Gary | Piloting | 18 | July 17th 06 04:44 PM |
oil blow out IO-360 | Robert M. Gary | Owning | 18 | July 17th 06 04:44 PM |
When Poorboys drill holes ...was: Drilling holes in steel tubing | wright1902glider | Home Built | 4 | November 4th 05 01:19 AM |