Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Which aircraft have pos/neg elevator lift?

Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Which aircraft have pos/neg elevator lift?

Old 29th Mar 2009, 15:06
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 50
Posts: 1,609
I would submit that a canard does not have to always produce lift. The same argument that a tail "could" produce lift applies to a canard producing down force.

Use a stick pusher to prevent any nastiness.

The point is that theory is one thing. Practical observation shows that so far in the entire history of aviation no commercial airliner has or has had a lift producing tail.

Many of the free flight endurance models I designed and built as a kid had multiple lifting surfaces. They were all trimmed to fly at only one speed. The most successful ones only had 1 lifting surface.
FE Hoppy is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2009, 15:41
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Thanks for the spelling correction Beer Hunter... I guess I was absent from school that day. Probably taking flying lessons.
captjns is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2009, 16:09
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,319
Originally Posted by Mad (Flt) Scientist
The key is that stability is concerned with the CHANGE in forces and moments in response to a disturbance - the absolute values matter for trim and control, not for stability. Which is why the branch of aerospace engineering concerned with these matters is called "stability and control" - both need to be considered, and they are not the same thing.
Thanks, MFL !
Exactly what I would have said if I had been able to get my tongue (errr... keyboard) around it in a clear and concise manner.
I graduated with "stability and control" as my main subject, but it IS forty years ago.

CJ
ChristiaanJ is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2009, 16:34
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Right here
Age: 45
Posts: 419
I would submit that a canard does not have to always produce lift. The same argument that a tail "could" produce lift applies to a canard producing down force.
I don't see that, at least not by the same argument. For a positive stability contribution from decalage, the rear surface must have a lower angle of attack than the front surface, as explained in Denker´s book referenced earlier. (Not suggesting his is the only good description, but it is one readily available online).

The wing always has to have positive angle of attack in steady flight, obviously. This means that in a conventional aircraft, the tailplane can therefore have a negative or zero angle of attack, or a slight positive angle of attack (but never more positive than the wing). But in a canard aircraft, the canard must always have a more positive angle of attack than the wing does; otherwise the surface at the front would have a lower angle of attack than the one at the rear, and the decalage would give a negative contribution to stability.

To emphasize: A tailplane can provide positive decalage if lift is negative, zero or slightly positive, but a canard can only provide positive decalage by producing positive lift.

The only way an aircraft could be stable with a canard having zero lift, is if there are other positive contributions to stability, resulting in a net positive stability despite the negative decalage contribution. That might be the case if you take an already stable delta wing aircraft and add a canard for maneuverability. I wonder if there are such aircraft? Some Kfir, perhaps?

So yes, you could in principle have a stable aircraft with a canard producing no lift. But we can tell from the very high angle of incidence displayed by most canards that they are designed to always provide positive lift.
bjornhall is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2009, 17:17
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,319
Originally Posted by bjornhall
That might be the case if you take an already stable delta wing aircraft and add a canard for maneuverability. I wonder if there are such aircraft? Some Kfir, perhaps?
Why something as extreme as a Kfir?
What about the Long-EZ?
I would submit it already manages to "look" like a dynamically stable wing in pitch, so that the contribution from the canards may be mostly better trim and manoeuvrablity rather than primarily added decalage.
If so, even an EZ might well end up with very small loads on the foreplane.

CJ

PS never had the occasion to study an EZ closely enough, hence my "look" between quotation marks
ChristiaanJ is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2009, 18:55
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Middle East
Posts: 98
Hmmm, I was under the impression that decolage, if you want to use it in this context, was primarily to ensure that the appropriate flying surface stalled first rather than for stability. Also, the only evidence the 172 article produces is a fairly dubious experiment where the author loads one at its rear c of g limit and finds it is still stable. Well it would be because Cessna wisely anticipated someone would try this and ensured the allowable c of g range would be far enough forward to remain stable.
I'd love to be proven wrong - are any of you guys aircraft designers with wind tunnel or computer modelling experience?
NO LAND 3 is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2009, 19:18
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Right here
Age: 45
Posts: 419
What about the Long-EZ?
I would submit it already manages to "look" like a dynamically stable wing in pitch, so that the contribution from the canards may be mostly better trim and manoeuvrablity rather than primarily added decalage
I'd be surprised ... But who knows, might learn something!

Also, the only evidence the 172 article produces is a fairly dubious experiment where the author loads one at its rear c of g limit and finds it is still stable.
Far as I remember, what he did was to tie strings to the outer end of the stabiliser, and observe the direction of the vortices generated. From that one could readily observe the direction of the lift being generated. Have to admit I'm only 75% convinced though, would love to see it myself...

Negative on the aircraft designer question.... Anyone else?
bjornhall is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2009, 20:45
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,319
NO LAND 3,
Re "decalage" as we are using it here at the moment, it's not an issue of what stalls first. That's determined by the separate profiles, etc.
We're talking about the "normal" behaviour around the steady state and small deviations around that steady state.

I agree about the 172 article.

bjornhall,
I wouldn't be surpised at all.... It would be typically Rutan.
I'll dive into it if I find a moment.

CJ
ChristiaanJ is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2009, 22:09
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 97
I have some limited wind tunnel exposure and I have yet to come across an aircraft that does not exhibit a small amount of positive lift on the horizontal tail with the CG near the aft certified range, at normal cruise speeds.
So when I read that none of them do, I know for a fact that the statement is incorrect. Actually I wouldn't be surprised that most if not all modern general aviation aircraft behave that way. I don't know about airliners.
Machdiamond is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2009, 10:16
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Glorious West Sussex
Age: 72
Posts: 1,012
What's the French for duck, Rodney?
It's canard.
You can say that again, bruv...
TyroPicard is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2009, 01:02
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Windsor CA 95492
Age: 93
Posts: 49
Mach diamond

Please see my entry no33.You can achieve positive lift on complete tailplaneand still have positive static stability of the complete aircraft, but it won't be very positive in most cases.
Keith
keith smith is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2009, 03:54
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,123
I have yet to come across an aircraft that does not exhibit a small amount of positive lift on the horizontal tail with the CG near the aft certified range, at normal cruise speeds.
Which airplanes were those, specifically? Got any relevant data?
Intruder is online now  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.