al1

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Longer wingspan, 4s support #52038
    Avataral1
    Participant

    Interesting. A friend managed to stretch the wings to 1600mm total wingspan while reducing the part count to 4 and still kept it compatible with a common format prusa. Either way, such a modification is considered a completely new model unrelated to this one and will be sold separately, did I understand correctly?

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by Avataral1.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by Avataral1.
    in reply to: Longer wingspan, 4s support #44769
    Avataral1
    Participant

    Thanks for the response, buddy

    What is the reason for not going with larger wingspan? I’m just trying to understand the logic, you probably know your plane better than me.

    As for improvements, here are my thoughts so far

    1. Towards the root, the wing doesn’t need to be split for printing. Parts 1 and 2 combined with part 5 can be made into two pieces instead of three and still fit on most printers.

    2. All wing segments can be made slightly taller, thus reducing the wing parts count from 4 to 3. Less joints make for a much stronger wing.

    3. The mesh of the wing doesn’t need to be so tight, you can increase the gaps inside the mesh thus reducing the weight of the wings by a lot. You can even justify using a single carbon rod through the entire wing this way, it will still be lighter and we won’t have to cut a perfectly good carbon rod, thus destroying it permanently.

    4. The fuselage needs a lot of reinforcement. It breaks very easily between the layers, even with print temperature increased to 235 for extremely good bond. I’ve seen hollow models add a mesh along the inside surface similar to the one you used on the wings. It makes for a very rigid body with minimal added weight and you can still print it without supports. Just wrap your wing mesh structure around the inside of the fuselage. 1mm is plenty.

    5. Open the front bay slightly more, just 1 or 2mm on each side to fit a 4s battery.

    6. The tail boom uses a 10mm carbon rod which is not exactly common. Maybe use a 14mm one, which is often used as a multicopter boom and is very common? If you really want to reach a very broad customer base, even think about using a tapered fishing rod segment as a tail boom. They can be bought for a dollar or two into any fishing supply store, they are readily available always and anywhere and are of universal dimensions anywhere in the world.

    Let me know what you think. Myself, I’ll probably be building foam wings by modifying wing part 1 to only have the base plate that screws into the fuselage and the wingtip. I’ll glue the foam wing to the base plate and then mount the wingtip on the other side of the foam wing. This way I can have any wingspan I see fit and still maintain the ability to disassemble the airplane for transport. The current wings are still too heavy for my taste. I know it’s going to fly, but what’s the point of having a glider that doesn’t also glide 🙂

    in reply to: Longer wingspan, 4s support #37679
    Avataral1
    Participant

    Really? No response whatsoever? I’m surprised.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)