Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 09:38:04 +0200
From: Jannie Versfeld <qmain@intekom.co.za>
Subject: COZY: Canard-Eevator Gap

Dear Cana-r-dians,

Proud to report that I have just completed mt canard, elevators and
installed the elevators ... but .... The gap between the canard trailing
edge and elevator is sopposed to be a minimum of .2" as the plans
state.  I followed the news letter recommendation to cut the canard
trailing edge cusp 1/16" deeper to allow for the 15 deg elevator up
travel (trailing edge up).  I have aligned the L jigs perfectly and
level, my elevators are primo and true but ...... the gap on both
elevators are .2" outboard side and .25 " inboard side.

So what now .... do I fill the elevator to have an even gao or do I fill
the bottom cuso area of the canard and sand the top contour down?

Any ideas please?

Kind regards,
Jannie Versfeld
#673

Ps weight of completed canard and elevators with balance weights turns
out to be 33 Lbs?

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 06:38:06 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: COZY: Canard-Eevator Gap

A first, I was going to say add plys of BID on the bottom canard trailing edge, but that would 
increase the trailing edge thickness, not being an aerodynamicist, I don't think a good idea, but 
subject to others comments. My preference would be remove the hinge plates in the canard an reset 
them. Use an electric drill with a #12 (3/16") twist drill as a router tight to the aluminum hinge. 
Probably you will scratch the hinge, and on an important item like this I would replace them. Make 
some shims/jig to hold the elevators in the correct location, flox the hinges and use the shims/jigs 
to locate.

The elevator aerodynamics is critical, now the above will add 2 evenings work, one to remove, one to 
reset, ony bummer is make or buy new plates. This is one of numerous learning experiences I endured 
to a good flying airplane.

From: lschuler@cellular.uscc.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 09:31:21 -0600
Subject: Re: COZY: Canard-Eevator Gap 

Jannie Versfeld wrote:

>snip
>I have aligned the L jigs perfectly and level, my elevators are primo 
>and true but ...... the gap on both elevators are .2" outboard side 
>and .25 " inboard side.

>So what now .... do I fill the elevator to have an even gao or do I fill 
>the bottom cuso area of the canard and sand the top contour down?

>Any ideas please?


FWW, I think you'll be just fine.  If it were mine, I'd fret about as much 
as you, and then probably accept it as-is.  I cannot remember the exact 
language of the plans, but if it does indeed say "Minimum" 0.2 inches then 
sounds like you nailed it!  You might consider simply using a long (48" or 
more) straight sanding block to straighten out the canard trailing edge 
[remove 0.05" outboard and 0.0000" inboard].

Worst case if you leave it alone, is that you may have a canard-elevator 
combination that has a more benign stall characteristic compared to a 
"perfect" one.  The only time this is anywhere near important is:  a)you 
want the canard to stall before the main wing to prevent deep stall 
situation so as long as it does so at the appropriate time, you're fine; 
and,  b)on landing, but most folks don't like to stall the canard on 
landing because it causes a rather abrupt (uncomfortable) nose drop.  In 
any case, whether the canard begins to stall inboard or outboard first, is 
fairly irrelevant (depending on severity) since most of the lateral 
stability comes from the wings [which we hope stay flying when the canard 
stalls].

This is a hindsight question (answer here not necessary):  Did you use both 
the A and B hot wire templates per drawings or did you make one matched set 
of templates from your best-guess approximation between the two drawings?  
If you used the drawings as-is, this may account for the difference since 
the two drawings don't match.  Not earth shattering by any means, but 
important for us perfectionists.  Not having better direction at the time, 
I just made two 'A' templates since that drawing seemed to be a bit closer 
to the other templates needed.

I sure wouldn't sand the TOP of the canard.  You need that glass-glass bond 
at the trailing edge.  It's not much as it is.

My bottom line:  Seems to me that any correction would be more trouble than 
it's worth.  You can always consider first test flights in primer only and 
see how it behaves.  John Roncz likes to say if it seems right on the 
ground based on everything we know up to this point, go fly; if it sucks in 
the air, fix it.

Hope this helps.

Larry

Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 20:14:01 -0600
From: David Domeier <david010@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Canard-Eevator Gap

Jannie,

    re "So what now .... do I fill the elevator to have an even gao or
do I fill
the bottom cuso area of the canard and sand the top contour down?"

    My elevator gape is not perfect....the airplane flies just fine.

dd

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 08:46:55 -0500
From: "L. Wayne Hicks" <lwhicks@erols.com>
Subject: COZY: Chptr 11: Need Help with MKNC-12A's

Group:

Here is my problem...

If I install the MKNC-12A's onto the elevator torque tubes with the
weight counterbalance arms at angles referenced by the M drawings, then
the hinge pin hole is not in line with the NC-2's and NC-6's.  The holes
in the MKNC-12A's are rotated forward of the others.

I thought I was very careful in the orientation of the NC-2's and
NC-6's.  If I look at Figure 3&4 (Chapter 11, page 1) and Figure Figure
13 (page 6), then the hinge pin hole should be "aft" of a vertical line
through the NC's.  

This is definitely not the case with the MKNC-12A's that I got from
Brock.  The hinge pin holes are rotated forward of that mythical
vertical line.

It's simple for me to rotate the MKNC-12's to align the holes, but that
will decrease the efective lever arm for the counterbalance weights.  I
guess I could go ahead and see how well the elevators hang, or I could
cut off the arm and reweld, or I could send the pieces back to Brock and
fall 3 more weeks behind.  Or....I can find out from "ya'll" that I
screwed up with the orientation of the NC-2's and 6's. (Yuck)

My Questions:

1.  Can anyone offer help with any of these problems?

2.  Have any of you noticed the specific hole orientation problem with
the MKNC-12's?
(BTW, my plans say I can use the CZNC-12's or the MKNC-12's, which I
assume are from the  Long-EZ.)

3.  Did I install the NC-2's and 6's in the wrong orientation? 


Wayne Hicks
Cozy IV #678
Chapter 11, Chapter 11.9, Chapter 11.1 depending on your answers :-)

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 16:33:15 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: COZY: Chptr 11: Need Help with MKNC-12A's

I'm not clear on exactly whats, happening, but with the elevators traing edge down (commanding a nose up attitude) the weights 
must not touch the to canard skin, let alone project through it. With the elevator trailing edge up (nose down) the weights 
project considerably (maybe 5." - .75") down below the bottom canard surface. In this position the leading edge of the lead 
weight MUST be protected from ice accumulation by a cup shaped deflector. Without this the weight could lock in position from 
small ice accumulation.

And I don't want to hear anyone saying I'm not going to fly int icing! Four times the Cosy had light ice on it, once we took 
off beginning of September, from warm (wife and I were wearing shorts) temps, and at 8000' above airport elevation, not MSL, 
and within 30 miles of the airport light rime ice was picked up. Another time was in Tenn. on approach, just passing through a 
light cloud deck, had ground contact the full time. 

From: Wayne Hicks <WHicks@SPACETEC.Zeltech.com>
Subject: COZY: Hinge Pins and Wing Tips
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 14:21:24 -0400 


Hey group!

Any good suggestions for closing out/hiding the slots in the canard wingtip
bottoms for the elevator hinge pins?  White RTV? A little plastic cover?
Tape?  Leave it open as nobody sees it anyway?

Thanx!

Hope to see some of you at Sun-N-Fun!

Wayne Hicks
Cozy MkIV Plans #678
Chapter 11.99

From: Jim Hocut <JHocut@pxauto.com>
Subject: RE: COZY: Hinge Pins and Wing Tips
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 14:45:14 -0400 

I made a small rectangular cover out of a couple plies of BID and hold
it on w/ screws.  You can carefully cut the rectangular covers out of
the canard tip, lay up a couple plies of bid to make a recess, then flox
in nutplates on the underside of the recess.  Turned out nice and was
real EZ.

Jim Hocut
Cozy MK IV #448



From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 17:10:19 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Hinge Pins and Wing Tips

The ends of my pins are sloped to match the canard contour. They really are so small and under, that they are barely visible. 
Quite minor when you look at the details on factory built like Mooney's, etc.

Date: Mon, 05 Apr 1999 22:19:48 -0400
From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" <marcz@ultranet.com>
Subject: Fwd: COZY: Hinge Pins and Wing Tips

Lester Hicks wrote;

>Any good suggestions for closing out/hiding the slots in the canard wingtip
>bottoms for the elevator hinge pins?  White RTV? A little plastic cover?
>Tape?

Bzzt.  Bzzt.  Bzzt.  Give that man the goat.

>...  Leave it open as nobody sees it anyway?

Bingo.  Like Carl Denk says, it's tiny, it's on the bottom, and it pales in
comparison with some of the other crap you see hanging out of spam cans.

If you look at Chapter 11 pg. 4 and pg. 8 figure 24, you can see the shape
of the end of the pin.  5 minutes with a file will get you a pin that
matches the contour of the canard tip and is virtually invisible.  I
wrapped my pin with saran wrap and forced wet micro around it so that the
pin is a slip fit into the end of the canard.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin           mailto:marcz@ultranet.com
                          http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/

From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 16:10:53 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Fwd: COZY: Hinge Pins and Wing Tips

was said <wrapped my pin with saran wrap and forced wet micro around >
Not sure thats a great idea. The pin end is a cantilever, that will vibrate. I have a piece of 
polyethelyne tubing bushing at that point. a litt clearance, maybe 1/16" on diameter. The glass 
skin covers the end of the tubing.

Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 18:28:46 -0400
From: "L. Wayne Hicks" <lwhicks@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: COZY: Hinge Pins and Wing Tips

Marc wrote:
> 
Give that man the goat.

-----> Funny, I didn't see a goat in the Chapter 11 parts list.

-----> Thanks for all the suggestions.  I looked at Chapter 11 pg. 4 and
pg. 8 figure 24, and it's not for me.  I dremelled a V-groove into the
hinge pin. Pulls out quickly with a loop of safety wire.  I ordered some
oilite bushings and will micro those into the wingtips instead of the
vinyl tubes. 

Wayne Hicks
Cozy IV Plans #678
Chapter 11
More than Ready for Sun-N-Fun!

From: "Michael Schrder" <petrusjka@get2net.dk>
Subject: COZY: Canard/elevator problem
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 23:05:11 +0200

Hi All

I am not totally sure, if my problem is similar to Mark Zeitlin "carnard elevator" problem, (it looks like it) but here goes:

I am about to fit the NC-3 hinges into the canard. However, when I mount the "L" jig, the gap between the elevator and the canard TE  is less than the perscriped 0.2". It is about 0,1". 

Now, should I "lower" the elevator by lifting the "L" jigs approx. 0,1" from the canard bottom, or do anyone have suggestions?

The carnard is built to specs. and it fits in E, K, F and G jigs. 


Best regards

Michael Schroeder, Denmark #220 


Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:58:26 -0400
From: "Marc J. Zeitlin" <marcz@ultranet.com>
Subject: Fwd: COZY: Canard/elevator problem

Michael Schrder asks;

>I am about to fit the NC-3 hinges into the canard. However, when I mount the 
>"L" jig, the gap between the elevator and the canard TE  is less than the 
>perscriped 0.2". It is about 0,1". 

Look at the first paragraph in Chapter 11, section 5.  The reason to have
that space is to ensure that you'll be able to have the requisite amount of
up elevator travel (15 degrees is asked for - it says 12.5 as an absolute
minimum).  If there's any way to temporarily jig your elevator/NC-3 hinges
in place to check the up elevator travel, do so.  You may also want to use
the jig in one of the newsletters that holds the elevator in the correct
"up" position (I don't remember which newsletter it was).

>Now, should I "lower" the elevator by lifting the "L" jigs approx. 0,1" from 
>the canard bottom, or do anyone have suggestions?

I wouldn't do that.  Here's what _I_ would do, in this order:

1) If you have enough material on the T.E. of the canard to ensure a good glass
   to glass bond (at least 0.5" AFTER trimming) remove up to 0.1" of the T.E. 
   of the canard.  Check the elevator travel.

2) If there's still not enough up elevator travel, move the elevator/NC-3's
   rearward up to 0.1".  Check the elevator travel.

3) If there's STILL not enough up elevator travel, move the elevator down
   1/32".  Check the elevator travel.

4) If there's STILL not enough, buy a canard from one of the many builders
   out there (Jeff, Dennis, etc.) that do that sort of thing :-).

I'm sure others will have additional suggestions - some that even make more
sense than these :-).

>The carnard is built to specs. and it fits in E, K, F and G jigs. 

Not a surprise.  There are a lot of tolerance stack ups on the
canard/elevator assembly - I'm sure that there aren't two identical Roncz
canards in the whole world.

--
Marc J. Zeitlin           mailto:marcz@ultranet.com
                          http://www.ultranet.com/~marcz/

Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 20:52:03 -0400
From: bil kleb <w.l.kleb@larc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: Fwd: COZY: Canard/elevator problem

"Marc J. Zeitlin" wrote:
> 
> You may also want to use the jig in one of the newsletters that holds
> the elevator in the correct "up" position (I don't remember which
> newsletter it was).

modified 15-deg-up `l' jig courtesy of Tom McNeilly, newsletter #50:

  http://cozy.canard.com/newsletters/news_50.html#builder_hints

-- 
bil <mailto:w.l.kleb@larc.nasa.gov>

From: "John Slade" <rjslade@bellsouth.net>
Subject: COZY: Chap 11 - mass balance weight
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 18:21:51 -0400

Hello Builders,
I have a question about the elevator mass balance weights. Plans say it's ok
to add weight up to 0.3 lbs, but what about removing weight? My elevators
weigh approx 25oz each, the CS10s weigh 10.5oz each and the CS11s weigh 7oz
each. With all four weights attached the elevators flip nose down quite
severly, so I'm wondering if it would make sense to reduce the balance
weight a little before glassing the CS10's in place.

I tried the balance with one CS11 missing and I still get a good nose down
balance. With both CS11's but only one CS10 there is reduced nose down
tendancy.

I'm guessing I could reduce the total weight of the assembly by at least
8oz., maybe 12oz and still have good nose down balance.

Any thoughts?
John Slade, Cozy #757


From: Epplin John A <EpplinJohnA@jdcorp.deere.com>
Subject: RE: COZY: Chap 11 - mass balance weight
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 07:53:40 -0500

John,

Have you finished painting the elevators yet?  If not, don't worry about
balance till that is finished, you will add a significant amount of weight
finishing.  They should be nose heavy after finishing, weight can be removed
by drilling the weights.  I would recommend removing roughly equal weight
from each to balance per plans.

John Epplin   Mk4   #467   N100EP


Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 07:59 -0500 (CDT)
From: Michael Pollock <Michael.Pollock@wcom.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Chap 11 - mass balance weight

John Slade wrote:

>I'm guessing I could reduce the total weight of the assembly by at least
>8oz., maybe 12oz and still have good nose down balance.

If you have not primed and painted your elevators, do not remove any
lead weight yet.  You will find that you may need it when it is all
said and done.

Michael.Pollock@mci.com
Flying Velocity N173DT
Building Cozy MKIV #643


 

From: "Nat Puffer" <cozy@extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Canard question
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 11:39:17 -0500

Dear Neil,
I built my canard and elevators as shown in the first edition plans, and
then just shortened the canard and elevators by sawing off 3 inches from
the tips. This left my balance weights at the end of the elevator. But I
think I advised builders if they hadn't completed the canard and elevators
yet, to place the balance weights just inboard of the outboard hinges. On
the second edition plans, I show it done this way, that is, the canard and
elevators are 3 inches shorter. The tip of the elevator is at B.L. 70.4,
outboard hinge is still at B.L.67.4, and the balance weight 5 inches
inboard of the tip, at B.L. 65.4, which clears the hinge. I hope this
answers your question and for anyone else who might have the same question.
Regards,
Nat
 

----------
> From: Neil Clayton <harvey4@earthlink.net>
> To: cozy_builders@canard.com
> Subject: COZY: Canard question
> Date: Saturday, September 25, 1999 12:55 PM
> 
> The amended length of the canard is 141" vs 147". Newsletter #44 says to
> put the outboard elevator balance weights inboard of the outboard hinge,
> but the dimensions given translate to interfere with the hinge. What did
> folks do here?
> 
> Thx
> Neil C
> 
> 

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 08:30:10 +0200
From: "Rego Burger" <BurgerR@telkom.co.za>
Subject: COZY: Canard question

My canard's weight sits between the hinge and the cut off point.
Hope it's not a problem.

From: "Nat Puffer" <cozy@extremezone.com>
Subject: Re: COZY: Elevator in trail at cruise
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 09:08:36 -0600

Builders,
Please DO NOT change the incidence on the canard, and please DO NOT
increase the span on the canard. We went to a lot of trouble, expense, and
risk to determine the correct incidence and span for the canard. We can
guarantee that if you do either of these things, you are setting yourself
(or someone else if you sell your airplane) to an unrecoverable main wing
stall, with resultant major damage and injury. Please see newsletter 56-5
for an addition to your owners manual to make sure your airplane has
positive pitch stability and your canard has the correct incidence by
checking elevator position as a function of c.g. and speed, according to
the data plotted. A couple of builders have been talking about the
elevators should be reflexed for least drag. If you check the data we have
plotted, you will see that if the canard is set at the CORRECT angle of
incidence, the trailing edge of the elevator actually reflexes (upward) at
high speeds and mid to aft c.g.s. This will occur automatically at high
speeds. DO NOT change canard span or incidence, please. We don't want you
to get in trouble.
Best regards,
Nat

----------
> From: tcarrico <tcarrico@home.com>
> To: cozy_builders@canard.com
> Subject: COZY: Elevator in trail at cruise
> Date: Monday, December 13, 1999 8:31 AM
> 
> Is it a normal operating parameter for the elevator not to
> trail the canard in cruise?  Am I the only one that sees a
> problem with this?
> 
> Seems to me it is not the most efficient configuration.  For
> an airplane that is so efficient, why do we accept this?
> 
> are these possible options:
> 
> 	1. reduce canard incidence.
> 		1.a affect takeoff distance
> 		1.b affect cg envelope
> 
> 	2. Add the six inches back to the canard
> 		1.a get takeoff distance back
> 		1.b possibly get cg correct (more analysis needed)
> 		1.c are we back to deep stall problems (more testing)
> 
> 
> tc

From: "Larry & Jenny Schuler" <lschuler@g2a.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Elevator in trail at cruise
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 20:14:49 -0600


> Is it a normal operating parameter for the elevator not to
> trail the canard in cruise?  Am I the only one that sees a
> problem with this?
>
> Seems to me it is not the most efficient configuration.  For
> an airplane that is so efficient, why do we accept this?
>
> are these possible options:
>
> 1. reduce canard incidence.
> 1.a affect takeoff distance
> 1.b affect cg envelope
>
> 2. Add the six inches back to the canard
> 1.a get takeoff distance back
> 1.b possibly get cg correct (more analysis needed)
> 1.c are we back to deep stall problems (more testing)
>
>

Love these discussions!  One of the best ways to learn stuff (or at least
make ya think).

Personally I would't do either #1 or #2 unless  I was going to call it
something other than a Cozy.  Most definitely a different airplane in either
case in my opinion and would most definitely need full testing; including
deep stall.

Point I was trying to make (at least I have it right in my mind...doesn't
mean my fingers type it correctly) is that Klaus and a few speed-chasers I
have heard about have reduced the canard incidence to the point where the
elevator and canard have a straight chord line when in "cruise" condition
{as opposed to elevator trailing edge 'up' a bit in cruise}.

Such a mod:
    a) reduces drag
    b) increases takeoff run
    c) increases deep stall speed
    d) to keep 'c)' reasonable, reduces CG range; in particular moves aft
limit forward.
    e) increases top speed as a result of 'a)'

At least that's the way I see it.

Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 08:29:10 +0200
From: "Rego Burger" <BurgerR@telkom.co.za>
Subject: COZY: Elevator in trail at cruise

2c worth of comments next to the previous thoughts.

Rgo Burger
Tel: 0800456789
Fax:+27 41 3631465
South Africa

>>> "tcarrico" <tcarrico@home.com> 12/13 4:31 PM >>>
Is it a normal operating parameter for the elevator not to
trail the canard in cruise?  Am I the only one that sees a
problem with this?

Seems to me it is not the most efficient configuration.  For
an airplane that is so efficient, why do we accept this?

are these possible options:

	1. reduce canard incidence.   <<<<<NO!>>>>> THE ELEVATOR IS TRAILING BECAUSE THE INCIDENCE IS LOWER THAN NORMAL.
		1.a affect takeoff distance <<<<<<YES>>>>> A NEG INCIDENCE ON THE CANARD WILL CAUSE A LONGER T/O RUN.
		1.b affect cg envelope<<<<<YES/NO>>>>> IT WILL EFFECT THE RECOVERABLITY , C.G. IS WEIGHT CRITICAL,  A lower incidence canard will cause a higher AOA and this will in effect "move" a.) the weight back in relation to the C.G. and b.) Cause the wings to stall prior to the canard.

	2. Add the six inches back to the canard<<<<NO>>>> creates more lift in front raising the potential to stall the wing first.
		1.a get takeoff distance back<<<<<A + INCIDENCE IS A BETTER SOLUTION>>>>>
		1.b possibly get cg correct (more analysis needed)<<<<<CAUSE AND EFFECT>>>>>>
		1.c are we back to deep stall problems (more testing)<<<<<NAT did enough on this read the report...get it if you don't have it.>>>>>>


tc

Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 15:02:18 -0600
From: Michael Pollock <michael.pollock@wcom.com>
Subject: RE: COZY: Brock parts verification

Peter Militch wrote:

>I am working on my Canard.  Actually sanding the spar cap which will teach
me
>not to  overfill it next time. It is time to order the elevator parts from
>Ken Brock.  I don't have the plans here, but they call for two right hand
>tubes (I think it was 12A-R). Brock has a left and a right part in his
>catalog, (which seems logical). Do I have it right?  Should I be ordering
two
>right hand tubes, and if so, why is it done this way.

Peter,

If you are referring to the torque tubes with windows cut in for the NC-2
Hinge Inserts for the Cozy MKIV, then you need to order two NCTT-R tubes.
These tubes are 55.1" long and are interchangeable for each side.  The
NCTT-L tube is 72.1" long and is not used on the MKIV canard.  By the way,
if you need an NC-5A Pitch Trim Bellcrank manufactured by Brock, normally
$40.75 new, I have one unused that I will sell for $25.00 and I will pay for
the shipping.  I installed the Alex Strong Pitch Trim system instead.

If I misunderstood you earlier, and you are referring to the MKNC-12A Torque
tube offsets for $234.00 per set, then you need to order only the set.  It
includes both the left and right offsets.

Michael.Pollock@wcom.com
Flying Velocity N173DT
Building Cozy MKIV #643
Complete through chapter 14




