View Single Post
  #19  
Old 10-16-2012, 04:28 PM
ACE-OF-ACES's Avatar
ACE-OF-ACES ACE-OF-ACES is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NM
Posts: 2,248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by klem View Post
Yes ROC is not right.
You might like to think about:
Z_Accel_x = cur_Plane.getParameter(part.ParameterTypes.Z_Overl oad, 0);
Z_Accel_y = cur_Plane.getParameter(part.ParameterTypes.Z_Overl oad, 1);
Z_Accel_z = cur_Plane.getParameter(part.ParameterTypes.Z_Overl oad, 2);

x = accleration fore/aft
y = accleration left/right
z = accleration up/down

z lets you know if you are accelerating up or down (changing height).
Not right? I guess that depends on your point of view, in either case, using the ROC velocity or accelerations to filter the MAX TAS is better than using neither! The only down side to using the accelerations is they are never zero, so you will have to do some testing and thinking about what values of acceleration to use as the pass fail.. Where as the velocity is a little more intuitive, granted, the velocity alone has issues, in that a transition from the pos limit to the neg limit through zero could result in a bad MAX TAS being called good, where as using the acceleration would not be fooled by such a transition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by klem View Post
I 'filter' by eyeball when assessing the records I get back, looking for 1.0, +/- about 0.03 to get a stable string of records. I also cross check for stable altitude +/- a few feet but within about 20 feet of the test altitude and for the IAS or TAS staying at best speed for good level flight. Its surprising how quickly it settles down, maybe 5 minutes, and how stable and predictable the returns are even over minor changes in height and Z_Accel_z ('G'). Makes it easy to see where speed is changing and why and to pick out the most appropriate result.
The eyeball method is great when you have just a few of your own tests to review.. But it starts to become a very big task once the number of tests increases or you have to start reviewing the results of other peoples tests.. Which is something I use to do for people 10+ years ago when this sort of testing was done with IL-2.. But these days I am just too busy to do that, which is why it is my goal is to provide tools that anyone can to use that automate such tedious process and to make it more standardized.
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
Reply With Quote