Mass balance vs Moment of Inertia

Mass balance vs Moment of Inertia - Neverending battle.

If you want to use my graphic outside Wikipedia, and its resolution or license doesn't satisfy you, write to me: 100px (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The radian glider took a real beating at the last crash. Although it had a 'soft' landing eventually, going through the trees was not pleasant the foamy airframe. since it wasn't covered, indentations can be seen all over the aircraft.

I made a big mistake. Once I had put the autopilot inside the canopy bay. I thought I was clever that by restoring the center of gravity line through using 2x7g lead weights at the tail of the weight. The reasoning was to minimise the amount of extra ballast by increasing the moment by the c.g. (crazy right!). But unfortunately, I didn't think of considering the inertia effect it will have on the make-up of the airframe.

For you newbies, this is what wikipedia says about inertia: Inertia is the resistance of any physical object to any change in its state of motion, including changes to its speed and direction. In other words, it is the tendency of objects to keep moving in a straight line at constant linear velocity.

In other words, Inertia favourite cliche line could be: "the more things want to change, the more they should stay the same".

So with every elevator/rudder deflection, a control moment will be produced but now a resisting inertial moment (albeit transitional) will oppose such moment causing the airplane to become less responsive to control inputs. So any effort to avoid a crash, for example, by applying sudden control surface deflection (be it rudder or elevator) will be resisted by this lump of mass at the same point at which you're trying to create the restoring moment. And the rest is history.

It is at this point that when you wish you could say: "Ignorance is bliss".

Comments

Setting up the Tarot T4-3D gimbal on the Pixhawk 2.4.8 with Specktrum dx6 Gen2 toggle switch

So i took the challenge of setting up the Tarot gimbal not just for inherent stable video footage but also the flexibility of controlling it from the radio control. However, I encountered quite a few challenges which made me aware that I'm not the one only in this battle . It's quite clear that the setup of the Tarot gimbal using its own software is completely different from how it's been described in the Ardupilot/Arducopter webpage and in mission Planner. In Mission Planner and it's associated site makes one believe that it should be done through software, only to realize that in actual fact the setup is more complex than that. After two evenings of trying various combinations, I realized the getting the pixhawk Aux channels to communicate with the T4 gimbal requires the following steps: - The Pixhawk Pin9 (Aux1) needed to be activated to pass through user-chosen channel from the transmitter. For the Dx6 Gen2 it was the channel 6, which can assigned the ...

The hard climb of innovation

For the last couple of months, our design team has been hard at work at detail development of our drone concept which we hope to make public early 2021. These have been unprecedented times with so many changes within our company: people moving countries, stuck at airports, universities closing and transitioning to online classes and exams; all in the space of one year! Nevertheless, one of the fundamental challenges facing the drone industry in developing countries next year, is how to operate within an environment where shipping of critical parts (amongst other things) has been disrupted due to the covid-19 pandemic. If the most critical items (propellers, batteries, sensors, etc. ) of the system are also associated with the longest lead time, this has a significant impact on the operating cost and service coverage that can be achieved. Unfortunately, there's no easy way of solving this issue except if it was envisioned as part of the development process. But this is seldom the ca...

Integration for a nonlinear quadcopter with flapping dynamics model into Mission Planner and Flightgear for 3D visualization

The objective for this milestone was to integrate the same model functionality developed and analyzed within the Matlab/Simulink environment into a mature environment that will be able to test most functionalities of the Flight controller software that will be flashed for real-flight testing. The decision was to either migrate the Ardupilot (in this case ArduCopter ) software into the Matlab environment or integrate the highly nonlinear quadcopter model with flapping dynamics into the Ardupilot environment. The former option would mean no easy integration with Mission Planner and the real-time sofware-in-the-loop ( SITL ) testing tool (which also includes the infrastructure to communicate with the Flightgear 3D visualization environemt, while the later with make use of singular environment although the software development effort would quite tedious and error-prone. It was chosen to go with the first option as this was thought to be lead to more mature verification method prior...

Search This Blog