[CIAM-F6-Working_Group] Re: HTG final task options

  • From: Robert Herzog <v679093@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: ciam-f6-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:05:12 +0200

Guy Revel wrote:
At 07:31 31/07/2009, you wrote:
/ Detecting a good tip catch is going to be an interesting engineering problem
as the plane never really stops flying.

However I agree, it is an awesome idea. /

Hi Mark,

Obviously there are problems to solve, but the main thing is that it can be done. We all have a natural tendency to keep what has been used for as long as we can remember without even asking the question whether there is another and better way. For instance, we can imagine that the launch moment with F3B or F3J could be detected from an electrical contact on the towhook or a pressure gauge. With F6D or F3K we can imagine a contact detector on the launch peg inner side or, again, with an accelerometer (the beauty of the thing with accelerometers is that the timing system could be entirely self-contained, just a drop-in unit in the fuselage with no connection to be done inside the glider, even electrical power could be in). Then the moment of catch or landing could be defined in the software with something such as: contact with the peg *OR *positive lateral acceleration (a tip catch)* OR *negative longitudinal acceleration (a landing). As said earlier, development would need experimentations and I am sure most of you would be ready to experiment. Another example: a landing/catch would normally be detected with a shock detector (longitudinal accelerometer) and experiments would be needed to define the minimal value , such as 60 G / 0.05 s (a small shock) or maybe 30 G / 0.5 s (a catch), etc. The main thing is that we must decide to launch the project, then built up a group of specialists in the needed domains (software, electronics, etc.). Finding the suitable detection methods is a matter of defining what /may /be suitable, then experimenting to validate it. We may need one, three or five years or more to develop a suitable system, but the basic thing is : do you really believe that, if nothing is done, in ten of fifteen years from now we will still be using hand held stopwatches (if such outdated devices are still available) to select a winner in a duration or speed event or at an F3J World Championship ?

At this time, the only question is : do you think it worthwhile to start the project ? If yes, then we'll have to find the proper specialists (probably mostly out of our group) and begin development. Tomas mentioned that he approached Jeti and that they may be willing to work on such a project, but before this stage we must first define what we want.
So please, are you in favour or not ?

This leaves the initial question unanswered : what are your proposals to break a tie in the final round ? At least for 2011 and probably up to 2013 at least, we have to rely on hand held stopwatches, we need an agreement and a firm proposal by next October.

Guy R.
I am in favor of the development of an automated onboard timing system. It should be self powered (tiny plug-in Lithium batteries are used e.g. by the free flight community for their homing systems to find back landed models after far away D/T. - dimensions 4x35 mm, weight 0.8 g) and self contained in a compact package. Dimensions should be kept minimal, overall mass preferably less than 5g. We should probably start developing the system for a specific category, and F3K/F6D seems appropriate, and thereafter integrate/add the requirements for the other categories. Timing the duration flight in F3B is by far not the most demanding part of the organiser's task in an F3B competition. Detection and timing of base crossing is much more demanding ;-)

The solution for breaking the tie in F6D has been proposed here: Increase slot time by increments till the winner emerges. The total duration of the contest is in principle not an issue. At the wag, the slot times for various categories was in principle limited but some flexibility was effectively available. Thus, if we require e.g. 45 minutes to fly all eliminatory and finals, let us ask for an extra 15 min in order to break a possible tie. This would allow for extra 4, 5 and 6 minutes fly-offs needed to break an inprobable tie.
Robert

--
Robert Herzog
Elewijtsesteenweg 190
B-1980 Eppegem BELGIUM
T.+32 15 621004 Fax no longer active.
GSM +32 495 303954
http://mail.map24.com/herzog-robert

This list set up for FAI/CIAM F6 Working Group.
Archive of the list available at : ciam-f6-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Other related posts: