dc ! this thread is about coning angle
it's not about how a ball works !! you could look it up on google, or if it saves you the time it measures the direction element of the acceleration vector in the plane defined by the arc of the little glass tube, thereby indicating what proportion of the g experienced is lateral
re the velocity of the Apache this thead isn't about that either !! and i have answered it 4 times
and given that you don't understand what a balance ball does, can't work out how to measure distance in units of aircraft leangth, can't see that the measurment requiring 10 repetitions to be averaged is the timing (since 2seconds is a very sensitive number in the denominator), have generally been disingenous in not recognising the central point about the ratio of 'lift' to Cf. Your arguement against it is to do with lift not being proportional to Nr^2, whereas to a first degree approximation it is universally considered to be sufficiently relevent (in all published and respected works). It is not surprising that you don't understand, infact I think you maybe do (or should) understand but you just perversly enjoy leading the 'easily led' and rather simple Crab down the garden path. You dismiss my assumptions yet make your own (uniform downwash assumption). How about this (agree if you have any honour) if you take the premis that Lift is proportional to Nr^2 then you agree with what I have said about the limiting coning angle observation ? and better than that the Ultimate CA wrt a/c speed would resemble the graph of Ct/sigma that NL posted it's a novel way to look at coning angle, it brings something constructive to the party. and all you can do is try unsuccessfully to pick little holes in irrelevant aspects in a way that calls into question your undersatnding of those things. play straight and acknowledge the insight into the crude concept of Ultimate Coning Angle.
Furthermore YOU have refused to give YOUR idea of what the dependancy of Lift on Nr is. you didn't answer THAT. and you want to press me on all sorts of stupid (and fairly obvious points which i am mostly patiently responding to). YOU don't answer my points and i have answered most of yours.
CAN YOU? I don't think so. Nr^2 is a pretty reasonable approximation for these purposes.
How about you give the coefficients of the polynomial expansion on Nr? K(a0Nr + a1Nr^2 +a2Nr^3 +a3Nr^4 ...) (or minus power terms if you wish...) etc
I don't beleive that you can't work out how to measure the distance flown from the video LOOP. Please confirm that you can see that loop?
You can't be a helicopter designer, and if you are then I hope the "people on your team" can help you with some of these ideas. Are you a helicopter designer?