Hi all. ATC here curious about Helo design.
Why do some helicopters have a non symmetrical anti torque rotor? As in the Apache or S92 where the tail rotor blades pairs are set at 60-30 degrees rather than a standard 90?
It's my understanding that every rotor should have another rotor spinning the other way to counter torque.
If I'm building a boat with 2 rotor propellers and have one rotating clockwise and one counter clockwise. Will that suffice? And will it also still produce thrust?
Or alternatively is it better to have them spinning the same direction but with a counter rotor on each?
On this helicopter I'm making the starting torque always seems to be 50 on one engine and 0 on the other. As a result when I start the engines it spins like crazy. How can I ensure that they both either start at zero or at the same level?
I noticed that the first helicopter I designed with the new rotors was spinning clockwise after the tail rotor lost it's power. Which then prompted me to check the direction the rotor was spinning.
Sure enough, rotors also turn clockwise. This is wrong and I think the issue comes from the developer's lack of understanding of the physics behind why rotors induce a torque on whatever airframe they're mounted to.
Rotors do not induce a torque on the airframe because of drag. Instead they do it because of torque reaction. What is torque reaction? Well, it's nothing more than newton's third law, which tells us that "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction". This means that, if the engine applies force to the rotor, then we should expect an equal force to be applied to the engine in the opposite direction. In other words, if the motor applies force such that the rotor spins clockwise, then a force will be applied to the motor such that it spins counterclockwise.
The way it is currently implemented in game is backwards, and instead of applying said force in the opposite direction, it's applied in the same direction!
I urge the devs to fix this, and honestly, to listen to the community. A lot of people explained why the "air drag" explanation for the airframe spinning was BS, yet it looks like the devs didn't listen at all.
Has anyone successfully used PIDs to correct the spin of a helicopter? I tried to use one with input from an angular speed sensor that outputted to the tail rotor, but the helicopter spun even worse than when I used stabilised yaw from the gyro and showed no sign of correcting. I'd really rather use PIDs instead of having to resort to adding another rotor. Any help/guidance would be amazing!
I have almost a full setup here. Shipping is included and I accept PayPal.
J4 Torque: SOLD, comes with original box, wrenches, grease and spare rings. The trigger is the upgraded mag trigger. The Torque comes with a lifetime warranty on the gun so as long as you have the Torque, they will repair it. I've only had 2 or 3 cases of paint through it and it's just not for me. I'll even throw in the gun stand for free.
V Force Mask: SOLD, it's really clean and barely seen any use.
Rotor Hopper: SOLD it works well, just don't need it.
V Tac Pants: SOLD, honestly, if you buy these with something else, I'll reduce them $10. Size Large, 32-38 waist
The tank was just for show, it's out of hydro and not for sale unless someone just really wants it.
Hello Hoggiters,
Im new to the Hind but well versed with the Huey and Hip. Can someone tell me in regards to the Hind special menu (rudder trimmer option) and how to control it in flight how the torque pedals work with the trim button?
I've diagnosed it as a trim issue because when i hit the reset trimmer switch i get my range of movement again. The torque appears to lock itselfs to full right or full left and I watch the pedals go full left or right when I centre my own saitek pedals. This is usually after a series of trim use when approaching a landing area or during advanced break manoeuvres from combat.
What am I missing in the equation - I can use the Hip no problem in combination with the SPUU25 limiter, trim and the rudder all together. I did check my axis commands and theres no clashes there
Hello enginerds! I'm a long-time enthusiast, may join the dark side of engineering some day, but for now, I'm a prior aircraft mechanic and current career pilot. I have a question that's been bugging me for a bit. It has to do with the "Jesus-Nut" on aircraft.
(For those who don't know, it's quite common to use a single, very large, nut to torque large propellers or rotor-heads on. It's colloquially called a "Jesus nut" in this application because it's such a critical point of failure that if it falls off, you're going to meet Jesus). Simple concept. I'm just geeking out on it.
In a C-130 airplane I used to work on, the propeller is centered on the shaft via a rear split-cone (sitting on a flange machined on the shaft) and a front split-cone, with some drive splines in the middle. A big 'Jesus-nut' squishes the whole thing together with somewhere around 2,000 ft/lbs of final torque. My understanding is that this doesn't cause any bearing preload, so it's just stretching the prop shaft. The propeller itself goes through positive and negative torque situations in flight. After personally removing the prop, you can see that there is ZERO fretting of either front or rear drive cone, leading me to believe that at least a portion of the torque load is taken up by friction between the drive-cones and the shaft.
The S-61 helicopter I now fly has about the same method of attachment (the whole rotor head sits on some drive splines between an integrated cone on bottom and split-cone on top) 'Jesus nut' is applied and torqued...by hand...until it stops. Yes. 0-torque. My understanding is that the head in this situation is also NOT pre-loading any bearings.
My question is this: Why would one scenario require a torqued Jesus-nut while the other scenario doesn't? Wouldn't an un-torqued fastener allow for the possibility of slop (if even a few thousandths axially/radially), causing unnecessary wear on the cones, an off-balance condition of a 2000+lb rotor head, etc etc?
EDIT: I think I found my answer in the maintenance manual. Hours of digging at this. For some ungodly reason the S-61 Jesus nut has not only a locking spline, but circumferential bolts on top (and it looks like bottom of the rotor head) to effectively apply a pretension to the main rotor shaft. Main Rotor Shaft **in the maintenance manual. Mechs kept telling me how there's no torque on the Jesus nut and only a retainer holding it together which is technic
... keep reading on reddit ➡Hi, I recently bought the new Breaking Ground DLC and naturally the first thing I planned on building is a plane. However, I have difficulty in making the plane stable in flight since it always rolls to the right due to the torque from the rotors. I've tried making contra-rotating propellers but when one spins clockwise and the other counter-clockwise, the forces counter each other and the propellers do not spin at all. Adding a third rotor is too unstable and makes the plane shake. The KSP wiki has a tutorial on propellers but I found it hard to understand/does not work. The only success I've had is with twin-prop planes. How can I make a stable inline rotor plane?
It’s actually cheaper to buy in the UK over the normal torque drive head and is newer / performs better?
I've had my car for a couple of years now and it's time to refresh its rear end. Brakes, bearing, bushings, etc.
First step was to remove everything ! I knew that the screws holding the rotors were stuck, but I was not expecting that !
I posted previously on here for advice on a FEA model of a rotor (https://www.reddit.com/r/FSAE/comments/ge8xtg/applying_brake_torque_on_fea_rotor_model/ )
i took the advice given and i created the model in the comments. i appreciate any (constructive) criticism as im trying to learn. Thanks.
