aileron/bellcrank

You may be able to use bent 'golden rods'

However weight of one big servos as against two little'uns is not so great as to make this an automatic solution, nor are bellcranks weight free...

Alternate to the nyrods is to go back to basics.

Every Hobby shop carries 90-degree bellcranks.

You need a flat plate in the wing where you will be positioning the bellcrank.

However, if you have a half-inch to 3/4ths of an inch, that;'s more than enough room for a mini or micro servo with comparable power to the old basic servo.

Advantages are direct connection, positioned exactly where you want the rods to go, complexity only in the mounting of the servo and cover plate. Of course, you'll have complexity no matter what you do, you'll still have a bit of fiddling to get things right.

Make a scrap wing on paper to get the positioning right and then check the rib height to get the design right, then build the wing.

Ray, we sed to use linkage with bellcranks or bent goldenrods in the old days but all that stuff usually resulted in sloppy ailerons(and flutter)....go with micro servos an you will be happier.

Phil AMA609

Raym> I need some strategies as to use

"pcoopy" wrote in news:1152310987.345945.212100 @b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

I have to concur - every clevis, bolt, bushing, and inch of goldentrod is a source of drag and slop in the linkages. Not that it can't be done, and even done well, but it's really tough to beat 2 small servos, each with a short, straight link to its aileron.

As far as weight - the trade is 1 big servo plus all the linkages (goldenrod runs or bellcranks& pushrods) vs. 2 small servos and the Y- cable, so the weight difference may be smaller and may even favor the dual-servo setup.

Of course, the s>> I need some strategies as to use

Ray Having been there, done that , I would agree with the servo in each wing, Even a heavy micro servo is only 10-12 grams. No slop and easier to install. They can be easily hidden in the wing. Also nothing buried in the wing that you can't get to without 'uncovering'

Ken

Bellcranks are a poor last choice., when nothing else will suffice. Go with servos - better with a minimum of problems.

Trust us, use two servos. There's no way to avoid slop in the bellcrank setups. That's why we all went to two servos years ago. Nyrods aren't much of a solution either. By the time you add the bellcranks, the extra music wire, etc, you'll be heavier than two small servos!

As much as I like separate servos, bent Golden Rods do work well.

Ed Cregger

----------

I didn't use them, a friend of mine did and I flew his airplane. He used them on a .40 powered model.

One correction that I should make is that he used engine throttle (metal) cable with a plastic outer jacket. No discernible slop with that set up.

Personally, I would go with the two micro servos, but I'm lazy. Sorry for not being precise and clear the first time.

Ed Cregger

wrote

Did you use them on a small model?

I tried it on a small one, and I don't know if it was the small size, or what, but I didn't like it. I had way too much slop (not even close to acceptable) and seemingly too much friction.

I wonder what the difference was?

"Morgans" wrote in news:Ioetg.111$1P7.63 @fe06.lga:

On a small model, there's not enough room in the wing to give yourself a nice gentle bend (the bend radius is too small) - that'll give you serious friction in the golden rods. A bigger wing won't have so much trouble.

As far as the slop - bear in mind that a big plane can tolerate a little slop; a little plane can't. Since the control horns are much shorter on a small plane, a little slop can allow quite a bit of surface deflection.

Not that I approve of control linkage slop, even on a big plane!

"Mark Miller" wrote

Yep, that about parallels my experience.

I think so too.

You CAN, with careful routing, get gentle rod bends in..but its SUCH a hassle..two servos or torque rods is simply EASIER for all but some scale applications..where you want to make the linkages look scale..