I would need:
CLtail = f(alpha_tail, delta_elevator)
where alpha_tail = alpha_aircraft + horizontal_stab_angle - Epsilon
src/jsbsim --aircraft=c172x --catalog
The --catalog option will give you a list of all the properties that JSBSim
defines and knows about. That is separate from
First, thank you all for the direct answers to my question.
Now, regarding the 737 sample case, it should be checked which
flaps-slats combinations are normally possible; it may be the case
where let's say flaps 20 cannot come with retracted slats (if there is
a problem with the slats deployment
Finally, one short question: why there is no dedicated horizontal
stabilizer property available in JSBSim, and we need to use for this
the speedbrake property? Just curious...
Fabian
Are you talking about JSBSim, or DATCOM? I'm not sure I understand your
question. There is a property
Quoting Fabian Grodek
Now, regarding the 737 sample case, it should be checked
which flaps-slats combinations are normally possible; it may
be the case where let's say flaps 20 cannot come with
retracted slats (if there is a problem with the slats
deployment you are allowed to use
On the topic of calculating downwash at the tail, and the effects thereof,
rather than make a four dimensional table it might be better to think
outside the box and consider alternative ways to do what you need. Modeling
ground effect is one example of that. It's a function that is calculated
On the topic of calculating downwash at the tail, and the
effects thereof, rather than make a four dimensional table it
might be better to think outside the box and consider
alternative ways to do what you need.
I agree. That's why I brought it up in the first place, to see if anyone
See my comment after quotation...
2. I think what you are saying is:
epsilon = f( alpha, flap, slat )
I don't think that you were advocating using two 2-D table
epsilon(slat=0) = f ( alpha, flap )
epsilon(slat=20) = f ( alpha, flap )
If you were, there would have
Indeed, I was talking about two 2-D tables, wrongly
guessing that JSBSim would interpolate the data in case,
let's say, the current slat position is not any of the
specific slat for which the tables are defined. Such an
interpolation would be quite accurate, being better the more
We could probably use the existing code to do that interpolation between two
or more tables. It would just be really ugly. In the case of DATOM+ output,
I'd have to generate that ugly code automatically.
Well, it may be ugly and inaccurate, but for some cases the phisics
could probably be
Indeed, I was talking about two 2-D tables, wrongly guessing that
JSBSim would interpolate the data in case, let's say, the current slat
position is not any of the specific slat for which the tables are
defined. Such an interpolation would be quite accurate, being better
There certainly is
No assumptions are made for the horizontal stabilizer, whether it is
all-moving, or is fixed with a movable surface. There is only a deflection
associated with the surface, and that is used to index into an aero table. I
am not quite sure what you need, or what you are referring to here.
I would need:
CLtail = f(alpha_tail, delta_elevator)
where alpha_tail = alpha_aircraft + horizontal_stab_angle - Epsilon
We should be able to do this.
Some time ago I've been told that this can be done using the
speedbrake property (indeed this is the way it is done in the 747
example)
Curerntly, as far as I understand, JSBSim does not support the buildup of
the aerodynamic characteristics by taking the wing-body alone and adding the
tail contribution. This is essential for example in investigating an
aircraft behaviour during ice contaminated tailplane stall, a hot subject
Hi,
IIRC you can specify functions (e.g. tables) in JSBSim which are in a
first step completely unrelated to lift, drag, sideforce or any of the
moments. The files output by DATCOM+ do this for the ground effect by
establishing a table of additional coefficients based on the ratio of
height AGL
Fabian wrote:
Currently , as far as I understand, JSBSim does not support
the buildup of the aerodynamic characteristics by taking the wing-body alone
and adding the tail contribution. This is essential for example in
investigating an aircraft behaviour during ice
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon S.
Berndt
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2007 12:48 PM
To: 'FlightGear developers discussions'
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Epsilon,alpha_tail and independent tail
contributions
Fabian wrote
Bill G. wrote:
Now, is this a little overkill? Maybe, since most trainers that I've seen
don't go into such details. It is possible to generate data for these cases,
and I think it would yield higher fidelity trainers than anything seen
before, simply because that kind of data hasn't been
Jon Replies:
I've been thinking about these issues for some time. I've
actually considered just guessing. :-) I wonder how much
data is too much data? It would be great to have this level
of fidelity modeled.
Jon
Any chance JSBSim could be expanded to do infinity number
Jon Replies:
I've been thinking about these issues for some time. I've
actually considered just guessing. :-) I wonder how much
data is too much data? It would be great to have this level
of fidelity modeled.
Jon
Any chance JSBSim could be expanded to do infinity number of
Any chance JSBSim could be expanded to do infinity number of dimensions
of tables (if it doesn't do it already)?
Bill
We might actually be able to effectively do that, since we could have
multiple tables defined that create multipliers that could be used later.
Jon
Any chance JSBSim could be expanded to do infinity number of
dimensions of tables (if it doesn't do it already)?
Bill
We might actually be able to effectively do that, since we
could have multiple tables defined that create multipliers
that could be used later.
Jon
Well,
We might actually be able to effectively do that, since we
could have multiple tables defined that create multipliers
that could be used later.
Jon
Well, that was going to be my initial approach, but it's a real pain to
remove one dimension like that out of a 4-D table to make it two
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jon S. Berndt
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2007 2:49 PM
To: 'FlightGear developers discussions'
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Epsilon,alpha_tail and
independent tail contributions
We might
Jon Replies:
I've been thinking about these issues for some time. I've
actually considered just guessing. :-) I wonder how much
data is too much data? It would be great to have this level
of fidelity modeled.
Jon
Don't know if anyone noticed, but the flaps are already split
24 matches
Mail list logo
