RE: Wanted: picture of Benol not mixing with glow fuel for R/C cars.
[quote]ORIGINAL: supertib [quote]ORIGINAL: Nitrovein I have noticed that BeNOL can vary in color from batch to batch, sometimes orange-red sometime bright red. The orange color runs crisper. [:)] Most people I have talked to have recommended not to mix more gas/castor then what you use in a week. Gas supposedly breaks down the castor oil, but I don´t know if that has been tested in a controlled
Posted on: 5/24/2013 4:43 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Car Nitro & Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11521168

RE: Wanted: picture of Benol not mixing with glow fuel for R/C cars.
I have noticed that BeNOL can vary in color from batch to batch, sometimes orange-red sometime bright red. The orange color runs crisper. [:)] Most people I have talked to have recommended not to mix more gas/castor then what you use in a week. Gas supposedly breaks down the castor oil, but I don´t know if that has been tested in a controlled environment... [:)]
Posted on: 5/22/2013 2:51 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Car Nitro & Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11519574

RE: Wanted: picture of Benol not mixing with glow fuel for R/C cars.
Airplane and sport engines are less picky with the fuel so if you don´t have any problems with to much color additive and like it, use it. [:)] Not sure if it´s a bad thing to use castor in that fuel, but some kind of reaction does occur. As it´s more of a sport fuel anyway, most people might not notice any bad behavior from adding castor... [:)]
Posted on: 5/20/2013 4:14 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Car Nitro & Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11516855

RE: Wanted: picture of Benol not mixing with glow fuel for R/C cars.
[quote]ORIGINAL: 1QwkSport2.5r [quote]ORIGINAL: Anthoop I can remember that thread...but maybe it has been removed? Picture was a bowl of orange/red tinged fuel and some globules of some dark substance floating in it? [/quote] That's the one. I don't think it was removed; if anything it got out of hand and got locked. The fuel was said to be [color=#FF0000]Odonnells[/color] and the oil added was Benol. [/quote] I have tried to add straight/pure castor to this fuel also and I got dark brown sludge and stains. We all have different expectations on the fuel, but this fuel is one that I don´t touch with a 10ft pole. I have mixed BeNOL with a variety of oil without any problems, but I might have been lucky... [:)] To much color additive on the other hand can give a rough and unstable engine, at least that is what I have found.
Posted on: 5/19/2013 11:53 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Car Nitro & Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11516759

RE: Two Stroke Oils
Castrol Greentec XTS; http://www.midlandtool.com/MSDS/Stihl%20-%202%20Cycle%20Enigne%20Oil%20Mix.pdf [:)]
Posted on: 5/17/2013 3:51 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Gas Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11513987

RE: Valve overlap on 4 strokes
Easy explanation of cam LSA: http://www.compcams.com/Pages/413/cam-timing-lobe-separation-angle.aspx [:)]
Posted on: 9/15/2012 3:11 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11229077

RE: Rc nitro turbo
[quote]ORIGINAL: phmaximus lets say a iphone, sure they can make them, but they cant make one 1:250 the scale of a real one... or think about some mechanical devices, there is limits to how small things can be made.... whats a good example... ahhh can opener? say if we make a tiny can opener the metal is going to be way to thin and the chanced are that the can it self sould be stronger. Ball bearings are the same the smaller they get the less load they can handle... [/quote] I think you have a point in this, but the point is more that the technology isn't there yet. I remember the first mobile phones and how everyone always said; "Now they cant get any smaller" Well they did and then they started to get more and more futures as the development has pushed it that way. [:)] There are several problems to solve, as lubrication, materials to use etc etc. But as pressure is applied on the area present, the force "seen" will be less than on a larger turbo, but sure it might still be to much... [:)] As always when it comes to superchargers and turbos everyone is interested in knowing how much pressure it can make, but never stops to think about the fact that to make pressure you have to restrict the flow somewhere... [;)] [quote]ORIGINAL: phmaximus Have the last 111 post taught u guys something? in theroy its possible but in practice its not...on engines around 2.11cc [/quote] I don´t think of it as to what we have learned now, but on what it might bring in the future. Remember, Impossible only means that no one has successfully done it yet! [;)]
Posted on: 9/9/2012 8:29 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "RC Car General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11222722

RE: Rc nitro turbo
[quote]ORIGINAL: savagecommander NOS just bridges the gap until the turbo spools up. It doesn't actually spool the turbo [/quote] As the turbo is depending on it self to produce what it needs (as in more boost will give it more gases to spool it self with) then NOS will give it more exhaust gases from "another source". I think the first ALS systems supplied raw fuel in the exhaust manifold, but as of now they supply that fuel through the normal injectors in the EFI.
Posted on: 9/9/2012 7:46 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "RC Car General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11222680

RE: Rc nitro turbo
[quote]ORIGINAL: phmaximus dude I have aspergers everyone gives me the..... [/quote] So do I, but then my brain is programmed to see engines and likes to create pictures of it, give it art and it freaks out. [;)] Some things I wrote can be taken condescending, but I have learned to take a step back and try to understand by my self what I say and what people are meaning. But no, I´m no more perfect than anyone else and do make mistakes as everyone else. [:)] [quote]ORIGINAL: phmaximus So what's the CFM rating on a 2.11cc motor, how much would this turbo supply? Can it pump in more air than what is lost through the exhaust, what are u going to use to spool the turbo? On those snowmobiles they burn nitrous to help spool the turbo. [/quote] First one has to know the stoichiometric condition needed for the fuel that´s used, when that is established you then look at how much fuel your actually burning and then you do the math to see how much air that´s needed. [:)] It´s not only on 2-strokes that they use help by burning excessive fuel to help the turbo to spool. ALS is used on many 4-strokes in competition. It´s main advantage is to help the turbo spooling so the boost is there over a broader rpm range as the turbos main disadvantaged is that it relays on exhaust gases to work. So most of the time it´s not needed to get it to work, but it helps it to work better. [;)]
Posted on: 9/9/2012 4:48 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "RC Car General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11222549

RE: Rc nitro turbo
[quote]ORIGINAL: savagecommander For this to advance people need to think outside of the box.... Do the work themselves. Too many people are the ''If it works post a pic'' and refuse to fathom the concept. Small two strokes haven't been introduced to forced induction due to complexity and manufacturing restrictions. It's easier to increase displacement than add induction. Snowmobiles can be limited by engine size, so induction options are feasable. Stop looking for answers on the Internet- use your heads. [/quote] +1 If you need a picture in front of you, then this subject is most likely to much for you. Apart from the OP I think most of us has agreed that the manufacturing part is the first problem to address as without any turbo in the right size it´s still just a theory. But in theory 2-strokes with the design that we use can be turbocharged, as they have proved by practice with larger 2-strokes. Here is a notice about a company that also develop turbo installations for 2-strokes (third notice in writing and first notice is a clip of the engine running): http://www.hojfolket.se/hsr/?page_id=113 That 50cc engine has of now an increase of about 140%. You can order his book here; http://www.boostbusters.com/boostbusters-engine-book-061211.pdf What I cant grasp or visualize is how "someone" thinks comparison of a 2-stroke snowmobile is terrible, yet talks about 4-strokes and valves... As for the 8k.rpm maximum of a 4-stroke or the 4k.rpm maximum of a supercharger should take look at this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBKUQPjQ16I&list=PLC42A864EC443C562&index=28&feature=plpp_video 12k.rpm with supercharger on a 4-stroke in the 40`s and the best part is that you can look at the pictures without having to read. [:D]
Posted on: 9/8/2012 3:39 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "RC Car General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11221549

RE: Rc nitro turbo
[quote]ORIGINAL: supertib up until I posted proof, most here were adamant that boosting a 2 stroke was impossible....... any 2 stroke was the argument...unless of course it was something like a Detroit diesel as it has valves....everyone here said because the intake and exhaust were open at the same time it was impossible to build boost pressure..some people were even quite rude and abrasive in how they stated their view............ now that I have posted irrefutable proof certain parties no longer want to even discuss the topic.....typical !!! [:D] [/quote] I have started to type many times to support you, but most of the time it feels like a lost battle to debate with some on this forum. [8|] Thank you for the article, always fun to read about engine tuning and especially when it´s backed-up by dyno runs! [;)]
Posted on: 9/7/2012 3:20 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "RC Car General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11221086

RE: Rc nitro turbo
[quote]ORIGINAL: Foxy Snowmobiles/motorcycle two-strokes and model nitro engines TOTALLY different kettles of fish. Turboing a snowmobile has absolutely no relationship with turboing what is basically a mini top-fuel engine. The notion is fairly ridiculous and that's why these threads come up against so much resistance every time. Superchargers have an infinitely better chance of working, yet people still bang on about turbos. Strange. [/quote] The things that these 2-stroke glow engines have in common with a Top Fuel engine in it´s basics is; part of the fuel, they both use a reciprocating crank assembly and they both make noise. [;)] If you go any deeper then that and try to evaluate the theory, then they share quite a lot with 2-strokes in bikes and snowmobiles. But then some of the calculations is the same when I tune 2-stroke glow engines and full size 4-strokes, they have both similarities and differences. The more you read the more you learn. [;)] A supercharger would be easier in some points, but in others not so... The problem with turbo is to get the right amount of back pressure. [:)] (Edited due to misprint, also shortened it slightly to simplify)
Posted on: 9/7/2012 3:08 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "RC Car General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11220908

RE: Rc nitro turbo
[quote]ORIGINAL: phmaximus LOCK IT... sick of debaiting crap about snowmobiles... if we were still talkin about r/c motors it would be fine [/quote] Can´t see anyone force you to debate. You do however force people to educate yourself instead of doing so yourself and when they try to help you with that it´s to much and you don´t want to read it... [8|] As no one has made a successful turbo yet to RC it´s not so strange that people question the whole idea and that´s where snowmobiles and bikes with 2-strokes comes in. Just to prove that it´s not the theory that´s wrong, but instead prove that it´s the mechanical part that´s not there yet. Turbo´s on 2-strokes is nothing new and those that have done it successfully (that I have seen) has gained more than 100% in power.
Posted on: 9/7/2012 11:00 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "RC Car General Discussions"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11220827

RE: Vertical tails
Thank you "HighPlains"! A airplane of this size is not the end of the world if it´s not everything I hoped for. It´s just to get more builds "under my wings" and to try. [:)] But I do know that there is a lot of combined experience on this forum and that is something I´m open for.
Posted on: 9/6/2012 4:54 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11219290

RE: Vertical tails
I hear you! [:)] I´m not the best to express what I mean and sometimes I get words "lost" in the translation. I´m well aware of that this plane is not any stable trainer and for that I´m thankful as those types of planes are the ones that I struggle the most with. Let me put it like this, if this design is a 2 out of 10 in stability, then I´m aiming at 2,2 rather then 1,8. [;)] I´m what they call an aggressive pilot, but I will take it easy anyway until it´s trimmed in okay. [:)] I have trained so much in the sim that the first time ever I took a plane to the sky I tried everything from inverted, loops, rolls etc. Second time, I was hovering. I have never been to an airfield, but have fields of tall grass where I live so that part is covered. [:)] I tossed everything on a scale and was as objective as possible and I´m in the 8-900g span, not to exact yet but a receipt that I´m on the right track. For an engine that´s still in the upper range of the weight scale compared to others of the same size and for adding dual aileron servos and fiberglass etc, I have done all right so far. Time to start finishing the tail section! [:)]
Posted on: 9/5/2012 3:51 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11218042

RE: Vertical tails
It is rather stoutly built, I admit that. [:)] I´m aiming at 1000g and is well bellow that at this point, but I think I can shave some more of it. I downloaded the manual for the Wonder and did some reverse engineering to get the measurements in the ballpark. I have added weight by using dual servos for the ailerons and by adding vertical webbing to the wing (to support the added weight of the servos). I also made the decision to lay a layer of fiberglass to reinforce the fuselage for the upcoming belly landings, but by doing so I have also made the wood fiber more tolerant for some holes to lighten it. By using a integrated engine mount I have shaved some weight there to. The bottom line, I have tried to keep it as close to the original spec as possible, but with a slight twist of my own. [:)] I will start to cover the wings today and take it from there as I will then be able to better see if the balance is in the ball park to. The engine is a project of it´s own... [8|] It kind of started with that and a pile of balsa scrap. I will be using an old OS CZ-2 that I used in a car when I was young(er). It´s been lightened quite a lot and been given a few tweaks, so it´s more up to date compared to newer (airplane) engines. [:)] My main concern is the tail, as in the fins and how long the chord should be of the horizontal tail. I do want to keep it on the sluggish side when it comes to pitch stability, but without taking all of the fun out of it. So yes, I do want to eat my cookie and keep it at the same time! [:D]
Posted on: 9/3/2012 11:00 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11216535

RE: Vertical tails
Thank you for taking the time to draw that and I have saved it for future plans. [;)] (My measurements is metric, but I have done a crude converting to inches) This wing has a chord of 195mm(=7,68" ) + ailerons that I have cut up to 20mm (=0,79" ), I´m not quite sure 9.3% ailerons will do the trick..? But, I will be the first to know! [:D] Wing span is 950mm (=37,4" ) but with reinforced wingtips so that I can screw on different types of plates/winglets to try out. The wing is made up almost like in your drawing, but I have used 5x2mm pine spars (upper and under) and 1,5mm vertical webbing out to the aileron servos. The horizontal tail is made up of two layers of 3mm balsa wood glued with crossing grain for a total thickness of 6mm (=1/4" ). It´s 300mm (=11,81" ) in span and 270mm (=10,63" ) in chord with the elevator (being 35mm (=1,38" ). BUT, I might cut down the size slightly and also drill some holes in it. [:)] Any good pointers for me so far? [:)] [image][/image]
Posted on: 9/3/2012 3:20 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11216083

RE: Vertical tails
I thank you for taking the time, but no need for any drawings as I´m near complete. [:)] The thing that I haven't made yet is the vertical fins and the horizontal tail is just near finished. Otherwise it´s starting to get it´s clothes on. [:)] This will be my fourth plane and my second scratch build of "own" design, so I have no unrealistic hopes of having invented a "new wheel". [:)] I wanted to use some leftovers from my first build and try some ideas for the next(?) plane. I used a NACA four digit modified airfoil, maybe not the best choice, but the choice I made... [:D] It´s 14.2% @ 32% and camber is 1.2 @ 41%. Roughly I might ad, as I cut the trailing edge where it had the right width and then the ailerons will be made separately. Don´t worry, I have no intention of flying it straight for long, just some low fast passes after a dive!.. Adrenaline sure is nice sometimes! [:D]
Posted on: 9/1/2012 5:32 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11213879

RE: Vertical tails
I couldn't agree more with you "BMatthews", I think it was the wonder of simplicity that got me interested. Although I have added some futures that I wanted (but maybe not needed) such as dual servos for the ailerons. I have nothing planed for the tail and no drawing of anything as this has been a freehand build with nothing more then some measurements on a piece of paper. But the idea is to keep it close to the original, I´m not trying to reinvent the wheel here, just build and fly. [:)] The two main things that will set it apart from the original is that I intend to use a longer chord on the horizontal tail plate for good pitch stability. I have also used a semi-symmetrical airfoil. If I return the question, is there any shape or form to avoid? Maybe I should concentrate to get the drag as low as possible... Speed was after all one of the futures that got me in to this project. [:)] (Just too clarify, I don´t own a Wonder and have never seen one in person either, so I might be of on several measurements compared to the original)
Posted on: 8/27/2012 2:50 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11208121

RE: Vertical tails
Thank you "da Rock" for your reply. As I don´t have the plans for that plane I´m not sure if my tail is larger or smaller, I will need to look in to that (before I make it). I don´t have any goals with this plane other than flying it, so my main concern was flight characteristics more than speed. But speed is nice too! [:D]
Posted on: 8/27/2012 7:50 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11207541

Vertical tails
I´m building a plane that´s 90% like the SIG Wonder, meaning it will look like it and be about the same size but I have not used the plans etc from that. (If this question has been asked 100 times before I apologize, I haven´t looked that hard in all honesty) Just like the Wonder I´m using two vertical tails without any rudder, but I started to think that maybe a different angle (like a V-tail) would be worth trying. Or is this asking for trouble when not using any rudder? Any insight is most welcomed! [:)]
Posted on: 8/27/2012 3:50 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11207313

RE: Webra & OPS Aircraft Engines Availablity
OPS engines: http://www.mantuamodelshop.com/-c-23_83.html [:)]
Posted on: 7/12/2012 4:32 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Glow Engines"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11152320

RE: Beginner question regarding CG
Hi there again, I thought I should make an update for you. [:)] First flight attempt was about two weeks ago, that didn’t go so well. Hit something with my landing gear on takeoff and the plane turned in to some bushes. That went rather well under the circumstances, only the prop broke and I striped out the screws holding the landing gear. So, I fixed the landing gear and changed out the prop and waited for some better weather. This evening I thought I had waited enough, so out I went again. This time the takeoff went well and I got to enjoy the plane in its natural habitat, but that didn’t last very long… I was flying in a slight angle towards me when I realized that I was going to get the evening sun right in my eyes. So I started to make a left turn banking hard, that’s when I realized I had a barn coming up quickly. So I hit down elevator as the plane was then in a knife edge left turn, which gave me a clear path by the other side of that barn. But then the next obstacle came up so I kept rolling over to get the plane inverted and then I just had to give it some more down elevator to do an inverted climb out. At that point something happened, not sure what, might have been too little throttle. But it drifted out of my sight and in behind some trees. Then I just gave it full up elevator and killed the throttle while I waited for a crunchy sound. [:@] This time only the landing gear gave in, prop made it and no other scratches or dents on the plane. [X(] Two crashes for one flight might be a new record! [:D] Here´s a short clip of the actual flight, not the best as I just put my cellphone on top of the roof of my car so the actual takeoff is not seen. https://vimeo.com/43410342 Thank you all again for the time taken to help me out! [:)] Next time I will have a better landing gear and plan my flight a little better...
Posted on: 6/4/2012 3:05 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11106299

RE: Beginner question regarding CG
Hi "da Rock" I did actually use the calculator at geistware at the early beginning, that together with (probably) hundreds of pics of different ARF´s to get a "feel" for what´s in use. The British used the old "if it look right, it will probably fly right" principle and I tried the same (but with a little help from various software/calculators) . [:)] Things did however change during the build, I decided to use ailerons that I had and those added some slight chord. I also messed up the stabilator slightly (the control surface, not the mechanics) and that added some unwanted weight that forced me to move the wings slightly aft. I don´t have any hopes for that I have found the final solution for all planes, I just want it to fly right now and then I can use what I've learned for the next plane (what ever that will be). [:)] One thing is for sure, the more I learn the more ideas I want to try. This is a great hobby! [:D]
Posted on: 5/16/2012 5:01 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11082750

RE: Beginner question regarding CG
I have used (and reused) the calculator at geistware to do the math for me and it´s easy to use. I did use designFOIL at the very beginning but have misplaced that right now so I don´t have any aerodynamic data to look back at. So I will start of with the numbers from geistware and take it from there. My two biggest issues right now is the weather and a tach that wont measure... [:o] But that has nothing to do with aerodynamics! [:)]
Posted on: 5/15/2012 1:51 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11081969

RE: Beginner question regarding CG
Thank you "kiwi4", that was probably what I have read somewhere. I will take this in to considerations when setting it up for the first flight.
Posted on: 5/13/2012 3:54 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11079501

RE: Beginner question regarding CG
Thank you all for sharing your experiences! [:)] Here´s my contribution to "The Pig Squardon"! [;)] (Slightly poor quality due to mobile phone camera, but I guess it helps in this case... [:D]) [image][/image]
Posted on: 5/13/2012 9:45 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11079158

RE: Beginner question regarding CG
[quote]ORIGINAL: da Rock [quote]ORIGINAL: Nitrovein Yes ''da Rock'', it´s so simple that even an idiot like me can use it! [:)] But to my defense, I do feel like a Wright brother right now... I somewhat recalled reading somewhere that you should take aerodynamic forces into account, but don´t remember any dept/truth about that. But as you and several others has pointed out
Posted on: 5/12/2012 5:11 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11078415

RE: Beginner question regarding CG
Yes "da Rock", it´s so simple that even an idiot like me can use it! [:)] But to my defense, I do feel like a Wright brother right now... I somewhat recalled reading somewhere that you should take aerodynamic forces into account, but don´t remember any dept/truth about that. But as you and several others has pointed out, easiest way is to start safe and work the rest out by flying. I don´t doubt all of those that have given us the math to work these things out, I just started to doubt my self! [;)] I thank you all for your help! [:)]
Posted on: 5/12/2012 5:39 AM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11077850

RE: Beginner question regarding CG
Thank you "edsplane", I will try to make my landings happy! [:)] This is not my first plane, it´s my third plane, just my first own design of an airplane. I have a trainer too, but never flown it yet... Just started to question my self and if I thought of it in the right way. [:)]
Posted on: 5/11/2012 5:10 PM by Author "Nitrovein" in the forum "Aerodynamics"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11077406