WATCH 
3 pages [ << < ( 1 ) 2 3 NEXT >> ] 6837 views  POST REPLY 
RunRyder  Scorpion Power 
ProModeler
rrElite Veteran Sanford, FL (Orlando area) 
Why a 135° swashplate is superior to 120° or 140° units We've made a 135° swashplate, PDR0081 Swashplate, Aluminum, 120°/135° and no, we're not the first to think of this because as in all model helicopter endeavors, and probably all other mechanical devices, we stand on the shoulders of giants.Anyway, our 135° swashplate is in the hands of a few pilots to test. So far, the differences in flight are very slight . . . but mechanically it's a better and more pure device than either a 120° or a 140° swashplate. Then again, the differences in mechanical setup, i.e. ensuring the servos are perfectly at 90° when in the neutral position is very slight as well, but those seeking mechanical perfection work very hard to base their setups on a proper mechanical foundation whilst others don't even know to care. In my opinion, it's the cumulative effect of several very slight differences, which when combined, will result in differences even ordinary pilots can feel.Anyway, it's a pretty big expense to CNC a swashplate, and because there will be those who don't understand the mathematics behind it we've made it versatile so as to satisfy both requirements, i.e. 120° and 135°. Regardless, here's a very well written thread by one of the fellows who pioneered in this area, which does a pretty decent job of explaining the whys of it.Unfortunately, there will be those who simply can't follow middle school mathematics and thus, will argue what they don't understand. One thing is clear however, there are benefits derived from 135° and hence, we're making our unit as both 120°/135° for the obvious pecuniary reasons (and leaving discusions of which is better for others to persue). Ultimately, 135° is more pure mechanically, this makes it better, so we'll leave it at that. Those who seek every advantage, i.e. mechanical perfection on which to base their programming, will be quite satisfied. Furthermore, those whose radios aren't capable of using the advantages of 135° swashplates will be satisfied with the advantages brought about by the CNCed swashplate's precision even if they're relegated by technology to using 120°.Frankly, it's not an easy thing to do from a manufacturing point of view because the benefits are tangible to only a few. For example, while we're going to offer it as an upgrade, we can't afford to, nor is it practical to, dump our tooling for 120° swashplates for our popularly priced helicopters.Meanwhile, I've taken liberties with another fellow's picture where we've been discussing the pros and cons of swashplate (Main Discussion) for the purpose of this thread.
First of all, whether it's from the ball on the lower left, "or" the ball on the lower right (the aileron balls, if you will), if you measure the horizontal distance to the main shaft center; they're the same, i.e. exactly = X. Do you agree? These two servos act through an arm displaced from the mainshaft (X) along a vertical (yellow) line going through the main shaft center. The distance is equal and we've agreed to call this distance X.Now measure the vertical distance to the main shaft center from the northernmost (elevator) ball and you'll see that again, the dimensions are the same, i.e. also exactly = X. This servo, just like the other two, is thus working through an arm which is displaced from main shaft center by distance X, but it's working along an axis which is horizontal (magenta) as opposed to vertical (as we view Roo's image).Notice, how the distance from main shaft center to the center of the two southernmost balls (aileron) is also distance = X.Consequently, presuming all three servos are working through the same servo arm length, then because the effective distance for each ball to its respective axis is the same for all three, the angular throws are exactly the same regardless of whether angular change is in the fore/aft axis (the magenta line extending horizontally through main shaft center), or in roll (the yellow line extending vertically through main shaft center).However, if you examine the 120° swashplate, the foreaft axis distance is X + Y, the foraft distance form mani shaft center for the two southernmost servos are operating through an arm length = Z, hence you get interaction.Here's a picture of the new aluminum swashplate. They are clearing customs today, or tomorrow, and I expect them the first of the week. I trust it's been worth the wait. I'll put it on the website with the price once I've got my invoice in my hands and know exactly what they cost me.Regards, John Beech AMA # 47381 IRCHA #745 
SHARE PM EMAIL Attn:RR Quote 
djMidnight
rrApprentice Petaluma, California 

SHARE PM EMAIL HOMEPAGE Attn:RR Quote 
ProModeler
rrElite Veteran Sanford, FL (Orlando area) 
John Beech AMA # 47381 IRCHA #745 
SHARE PM EMAIL Attn:RR Quote 
Billebob
rrVeteran Timbuck2 
what's available on the aftermarket are swashplates of either 120° or 140° mixing, both of which I knew positively are wrong. Anyway, we all know the mantra . . . "If you want something done right, do it yourself." . . . no interaction when connected to the 135° balls! If you have a radio that can use 135° swashplates, you're the cat's meow! Also, for what it's worth, if your radio only does 140° swashplates, go for it because it's plenty close enough for mere mortals. dear Curtis , why its called 140 ccpm, i think its more geometrically correct to have 135 degrees ,am i missing something here? just curious. ive read the manual for the 8103 and you get an option in the swash section to use exponential, but i can not figure out if i should use it nor what it really does change maybe you have some info. regarding this. thanks a lot.  martin nielsen bergen, norwayAnswer The number 140 is fairly random. The idea is for the forward balls to be the same distance (frontback)from the main shaft as the rear balls. The exact angle would change depending on how wide the two front arms are apart. If you go wide enough it would be 120 degree again but that did not fit in a practical manner into the canopy.When we made the 140 CCPM we just took the standard 120 and moved the front balls straight forward. We then measured the angle, like you said a little over 135 degrees. We decided to call it 140 CCPM just because it sounds better.Answered on April 15, 2004BB 
SHARE PM EMAIL Attn:RR Quote 
ProModeler
rrElite Veteran Sanford, FL (Orlando area) 
John Beech AMA # 47381 IRCHA #745 
SHARE PM EMAIL Attn:RR Quote 
spog
rrVeteran Ontario, Canada 
Unfortunately, there will be those who simply can't follow middle school mathematics and thus, will argue what they don't understand. While your Billiebob screen name may be a pun, the unfortunate fact is all I can presently do is suggest remedial mathematics beginning with 7th grade prealgebra or 8th grade geometry textbooks, 
SHARE PM EMAIL GALLERY Attn:RR Quote 
VSNT
rrNovice Toms River, NJ 
if you look at johns 120 drawing, you will notice that the front arm and rear arms dont line up, thus with even linkage you will not get even throw.2. Johns design removes this flaw by relocating the 2 rear links to an even position, thus if all linkages are even the throw will be even.Billibob, you should go home until you learn to respect others!Spog, I at least partialy agree with you, John, you cant back lash at people bad pr but John and His Wife are good people and mean well as well as offer solid products at good prices. No im not endorsed or paid by him, i do fly and sell his products and can say that he is truly an inovator and LOVES this hobby and business so much that he is often times misunderstood. 
SHARE PM EMAIL GALLERY Attn:RR Quote 
ProModeler
rrElite Veteran Sanford, FL (Orlando area) 
John Beech AMA # 47381 IRCHA #745 
SHARE PM EMAIL Attn:RR Quote 
kangarooster
rrApprentice Orlando FlUSA 
Answer
The number 140 is fairly random. The idea is for the forward balls to be the same distance (frontback)from the main shaft as the rear balls. The exact angle would change depending on how wide the two front arms are apart. If you go wide enough it would be 120 degree again but that did not fit in a practical manner into the canopy. Even CY doesn't understand what is going on. 
SHARE PM EMAIL GALLERY Attn:RR Quote 
classic
rrElite Veteran All over the place! 
Even CY doesn't understand what is going on. From what I have seem up close at the field of your helis, nice helis but like all of them, I would think there could be other more important inprovements you could be working on to better the heli than trying to make a 135 degree swashplate.But don't misunderstand, I think any improvements are a good idea and a step in the right direction.I didnt read Billybob's reply in the other post, but his reply here seemed pretty civil, not sure why the agressive personal attack from John?? Looked like he was just stating his opinion with an engineer's posted thought's on the matter? very unprofessional.{edit} Ok, I just read Billibob's comments in the other post, and still think you are way off topic! John, You make comments about topics and then find a way to almost always throw in a little advertising with it, things like "we at audicity feel this is the best...." If your going to make a comment on something, GREAT! But does it ALLWAYS have to be an 'advertising' plug?? Yes, he made a "blowing smoke" comment but you really have to be pretty thin skinned to think that was disparaging.He didn't do what YOU did, he didn't make fun of your name, and he didn't imply to you {or anyone else here on RR} that his education was higher or better then yours or anyone elses. 
SHARE PM EMAIL GALLERY Attn:RR Quote 
ProModeler
rrElite Veteran Sanford, FL (Orlando area) 
John Beech AMA # 47381 IRCHA #745 
SHARE PM EMAIL Attn:RR Quote 
kovar
rrApprentice West Chester, Ohio 

SHARE PM EMAIL Attn:RR Quote 
classic
rrElite Veteran All over the place! 
It has been implimented already. I used to work on UAV helicopters, It had a four servo set up. It had it's pros and cons also. F.Y.I, The yamaha rmax also uses a four servo set up.{they dont actually use servos, more of an eleberate actuator pushpull thingy}John, I can see your point about the 135 and looking at the pics, but it does look to my simple, non engineer self that the 135 drawing you have sure looks like a JR swash. I have to wonder, will a 135 really make that much differance? For example, Some of the arguments posted about how the swash will travel the main shaft differantly when at differant angles did seem pretty coherant, And there is always going to be some sort of interaction or 'slop' among the linkage that has to be taken into consideration.Also, You have to consider that all servos, even the same brand and style{ie,9252ect...} are Not created equal. For example, When setting up servos at exactly 90 degrees with a four sided horn, you don't always use the 1 an 3 arms on the horn. Sometimes you use the 2 an 4 arms to get that perfect 90 degrees. My point is, they are not all perfectly equal, the tollerances in mass producing the servos out there is not machinest stringent.Thats why my comment about are you really focusing on the 'right' or best improvment needed for your heli? 
SHARE PM EMAIL GALLERY Attn:RR Quote 
ProModeler
rrElite Veteran Sanford, FL (Orlando area) 
A) Roll axis, which I've depicted with a YELLOW line. B) Pitch axis, which I've depicted with a PINK line. C) Collectivepitch axis, or vertical motion of the entire device.Furthermore, don't confuse Pitch with CollectivepitchConsequently, a) On the roll axis, the model rolls axially, i.e pure aileron rolls. b) On the pitch axis, the model tumbles, i.e. pure elevator inputs. c) One the Collective Pitch axis, the model goes up and down.I feel that where some folks are getting hung up is that in a 120° swashplate, the distance from the main shaft center to the ball center is the same in all three control ball, while in a 135° swashplate, it's about 40% longer (sqrt2 to be exact) for the two aft balls. This is simply a matter of confusing linear distance from main shaft center with effective distance of the control arm. Quite simply, THIS DOES NOT MATTER. What we need to concern ourselves with is the distance from the ball center to the respective AXIS, i.e. not to the main shaft center!Let's discuss A) Roll axis. The critical thing to realize is that during a pure aileron input, the forwardmost ball doesn't move. Only the two aft servos move. Once you realize that, then you need to get your brain around the concept of effective distance, i.e. the distance from the ball center to the roll axis . . . not the main shaft center!What I mean is that the axis for the roll movement of the swashplate, the couple, is centered about an axis extending the length of the helicopter, which is the YELLOW axis on the drawing. Notice the YELLOW axis, or roll axis, goes straight through the main shaft and the forwardmost ball. This is the reason this ball doesn't move during a roll motion, i.e. it's stationary. When you look at the drawing you'll see the distance from ball center of those two aileron balls to the YELLOW, or roll axis is exactly the same as the distance from main shaft center to ball center of the forwardmost (nonmoving ball). The swashplate is pivoting on the mainshaft center and the elevator ball.This is why the swashplate angle change for a roll "or" a pitch input is the same for a 135° swashplate but not the same for a 120° or a 140° swashplate!Remember, the important thing here is for the distance from ball center to the roll and pitch axis to be exactly the same. It's the only way to get roll and pitch swashplate angles to be the same for the amount of input. When you examine the drawing, you'll see how this is true for the pitch motion as well because the distance X is the same about the PINK, or pitch axis.********************************************************************** I'm sorry but we need a little bit of mathematics about now to finish nailing this down. Skip down if you don't abide mathematics.We'll remember from geometry that the "only" right triangle where two legs can be the same exact length is the 45° angle. We also remeber how to calculate the length of the hypotenuse when the values of the two legs is know as being a derivative of the formula, a²+b²=c². The special case of the 45° angle is where a=b, in which case the formula is a²+a²=c², which can be rewritten as 2a²=c².When you solve for the hyppotenuse (c), you simple take the square root and since, sqrt(c²)=c and sqrt(a²)=a, we're really figuring the sqrt(2)*a=c (where c is the length of the hypotenuse).In the drawings, the value X stands in for the length of the distance from ball center to each respective axis. Because this can only be true for a 45° right triangle, and when you add up two 45° angles (one for each aileron ball) you get a 90° angle, and because there are 360° in a circle, this means that 360°90°=270°, which when we divide by 2 (since the angular distance from each aileron ball is replicated to the forwardmost ball, i.e. there is an aileron ball on each side of the model) you get 270°/2=135°. **********************************************************************Summarizing the mathematics section, the ONLY possible 3input swashplate configuration, which results in putting ball centers such that roll input delivers the "exact" same anglular change as pitch inputs is a 135° swashplate. Consequently, a 120° swashplate and a 140° swashplate are quite simply, wrong . . . and it doesn't matter whether JR designed it, or anybody else, it's not right.Finally, as to whether this is a productive place to spend time and money in improving the Pantera.a) Customers have been asking for a better swashplate. b) If I'm going to go through the effort and expense, I'm going to do it as "right" as I economically can  else, why bother?Presently, we have other aluminum upgrades for the Pantera, specifically PDR0081 Seesaw Arms and PDR00232 Yoke. In time, others will follow . . . but give me time.But remember, the whole goal of the Pantera is to deliver a beater, i.e. a great flying model that is relatively spaking, inexpensive. There are plenty of folks flying the stink out of this model without spending a dime on upgrades.I attribute this to the basic and fundamental strength of this model. For example, the Pantera 50 clutch is "much" larger than that of a TRex600N. Do you ever hear of folks having trouble with the Pantera clutch? I don't think so. Furthermore, the bearings supporting the main shaft are 40% wider, but more importantly, there are three of them instead of two!Furthermore, if you break a Pantera frame it costs you $29 to replace. On the popular carbon TRex 600N it's $165 (though significantly less on the sport model, but still not as inexpensive as a Pantera).The dominant models the Pantera 50 competes against these days are the Raptor 50 and the TRex 600N. There are other players but these are the two biggies. Both of these are headquartered in Taiwan, but manufactured in Communist China and thus, you have precious little input to determine the future direction of the companies or their product. With the Pantera 50, if you don't like something, pick up the phone and speak with me  easy as that! Maybe your call moves us in a direction, maybe it doesn't, but this surely is more satisfying and beats the heck out of shouting at the Great Wall of China and being ignored!Warmest regards, John Beech AMA # 47381 IRCHA #745 
SHARE PM EMAIL Attn:RR Quote 
Al Austria
rrElite Veteran Sacramento, CA  USA 

SHARE PM EMAIL GALLERY Attn:RR Quote 
ProModeler
rrElite Veteran Sanford, FL (Orlando area) 
John Beech AMA # 47381 IRCHA #745 
SHARE PM EMAIL Attn:RR Quote 
Rennster
rrVeteran Hawaii 
One thing about ALIGN that I don't understand is that no matter what problems surface there seems to be a healthy following. ALIGN is quick to remedy the problem with version 1.2, 1,5, 2.0 etc. 
SHARE PM EMAIL GALLERY Attn:RR Quote 
VSNT
rrNovice Toms River, NJ 

SHARE PM EMAIL GALLERY Attn:RR Quote 
Rennster
rrVeteran Hawaii 
I think there may be a market for a heli in between the 400 electric and 600. If Audacity were to make one I'd definitely look into buying one. 
SHARE PM EMAIL GALLERY Attn:RR Quote 
ghostrideroo7
rrNovice perth amboy ,new jersey 

SHARE PM EMAIL GALLERY Attn:RR Quote 
WATCH 
3 pages [ << < ( 1 ) 2 3 NEXT >> ] 6837 views  POST REPLY 
RunRyder  Scorpion Power 
Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 
Tuesday, November 12  6:06 am  Copyright © 20002019 RunRyder EMAIL • Enable Cookies