Jump to content

CAD drawings for Long-EZ. (Link to ez.org)


Spodman
 Share

Recommended Posts

"Tony Malfa has generously provided a set of CAD drawings for the Long-EZ. The drawings include NG30, F22, F28, Instrument Panel and the front and rear seat bulkheads.

 

The zip file contains six Autocad drawings that can be printed to full scale at most Kinkos. Tony has spent a large amount of time on these drawings and they have been used on his long-nose Long-EZ. Each drawing includes a stock drawing and a corrosponding modified drawing next to it so you can see exactly what has been changed about the original. Tony reports that all measurements are in fractions (Yuk!) to make it a bit easier (??!)to measure and all measurements where made from an original set of plans. Tony can also supply them in decimal inches if required (I should think so too!). You must view these in Autocad to get the full appreciation of the detail involved. You may also use Turbocad and it can be purchased from most office supply stores."

 

Or just the link: Long-EZ CAD

 

You would still need more drawings to make your cheapie-cd off ebay work, but it's a start.

Mark Spedding - Spodman
Darraweit Guim - Australia
Cozy IV #1331 -  Chapter 09
www.mykitlog.com/Spodman
www.sites.google.com/site/thespodplane/the-spodplane

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very cool. I'm not sure where you can get a cheapie drawings CD from though. The TERF CD is $300.

 

I'm waiting to hear back from my local drafting shop to see if they can print them full size for me. Something for the den wall while I acquire pieces and parts and full templates and plans.

 

-dave

This is not a sig. This is a duck. Quack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spod, thanks for the post. I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw it yesterday, and set a personal download speed record.

 

However, for those looking for complete CAD drawings (including seatback, landing gear, and firewall bulkheads), unfortunately these are not it.

 

CORRECTION: I understand Tony is working on these... so patience...

Jon Matcho :busy:
Builder & Canard Zone Admin
Now:  Rebuilding Quickie Tri-Q200 N479E
Next:  Resume building a Cozy Mark IV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spodman

 

The reason for the fractions instead of the decimal is that I simply rounded the dimensions for the long nose modification to the nearest 1/16 have you tried counting 59/64ths :irked: you practically need the hubble telescope to measure that with a ruler then we mark it with a felt tip permanent marker god knows how many 64ths that is? then certainly adding insult to my eyeballs I'm going to cut the foam with a hacksaw :confused: are you kidding me? We're not building a swiss watch here. I drew those cad files in fractions so that it would be easier to read your ruler and still keep the tolerances as Burt intended. I sent the drawings to Ez.org in PdF and DXF format in fractions and also in decimals. I still rounded the dimensions to the nearest 1/16 . which 99.9% of the time was less than a 1/32 I'm not sure anyone ever realized that.

 

Glad you like them

 

Tony

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I vote to not bother with the decimal inches. Reason being is that 99.9% of the tape measures do NOT have tenths of inches on them AND a tenth of an inch is LESS PRECISE than 1/16th of an inch.

 

Tony, perhaps you could consider providing measurements in 32nds for the original dimensions. For the new construction dimensions, you could get away with anything you like.

 

Thanks for the great work Tony!

Jon Matcho :busy:
Builder & Canard Zone Admin
Now:  Rebuilding Quickie Tri-Q200 N479E
Next:  Resume building a Cozy Mark IV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon

 

 

I can go back and measure those drawings to the 32 I'll need my magnifying glass though :scared: . or, I can have autocad convert the measurements and rescale the drawings to the tighter dimensions. But in your honest opinion do you really think anyone can hold a 1/32 tolerance while building? I think a 1/6 is far easier to hold a tolerance than a 1/32. I want people to use these drawings but I can't make everyone happy. We need to figure out what tolerances everyone wants and go from there. I don't have alot of time for this kinda thing. I'm just real busy. Not trying to be sarcastic.

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But in your honest opinion do you really think anyone can hold a 1/32 tolerance while building?

No, not for any foam and fiberglass parts. 1/16th of an inch would more than suffice. I'm sorry I brought it up -- I hereby rescind the request. :)

 

I drew those cad files in fractions so that it would be easier to read your ruler and still keep the tolerances as Burt intended.

That says about all of it.

 

I want people to use these drawings but I can't make everyone happy. We need to figure out what tolerances everyone wants and go from there. I don't have alot of time for this kinda thing. I'm just real busy. Not trying to be sarcastic.

Absolutely agree w/you, and of course, I think I can speak on behalf of others when I say, "Thank you!"

Jon Matcho :busy:
Builder & Canard Zone Admin
Now:  Rebuilding Quickie Tri-Q200 N479E
Next:  Resume building a Cozy Mark IV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You bet, :) I was glad to do it. When I have some time I will work on the landing gear portion of the plans.

Pretty cool Tony. I'm working on getting a new set of CFD/FEA models of the Long, and although I have the wings more or less taken care of, the fuse is giving me fits (no plans or templates to measure from...yet). The first set of nose area DWGs helped quite a bit, and I'm salivating over the thought that you might do the rest too. :D

And yes, I do plan on modeling both the stock unit and a few mods, with yours probably the first, since it looks to be documented so nicely.

 

-dave

This is not a sig. This is a duck. Quack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's great news Dave in the end we'll have an Ez.org canard :) when your done I would like to see your Fea model. I'll try to get to those gear drawings next week I think though we need to make everyone understand these don't substitute for plans they go hand and hand with them you agree?

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be pretty cool have all the best modifications drawn to scale and use the plans as a "guide" to the modification. Say "14-2 insert drawing 3 here will give you this mod". Yeah! that would be cool. Heck don't stop at the Long Ez might as well throw the cozy in there. I don't know the mods that the cozy guys have come up with but I bet someone out there wants something better than stock. Jon might know. I'll draw what I can But I need dimensions for every part of the modification. Maybe we can get Avery over at Ez.org to make a special section for mods. I think we need to keep the format strictly autocad. you can't print drawings accurately using Adobe.

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Tony,

Not trying to be sarcastic

Erm, I was! Understand how somebody who is used to dealing in inches & fractions thereof would prefer to do so, and have had not a small amount of fun flinging barbs at those who do.

 

I was brought up on the metric system and was prepared to put up with the inches in my Cozy plans because Nat (& Burt) had met me half way with decimal inches. But that is just my preference. I don't own any measuring device with fractions of inches on it, just metric or the decimal inches one.

 

Splendid drawings. I probably won't ever build a Long but its very interesting to ogle the differences, both between a standard Long and a long Long, and to a Cozy, so I downloaded them with little happy baby-bird noises as soon as I saw them :)

Mark Spedding - Spodman
Darraweit Guim - Australia
Cozy IV #1331 -  Chapter 09
www.mykitlog.com/Spodman
www.sites.google.com/site/thespodplane/the-spodplane

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad you like them Spodman

 

I was in your neck of woods a few years ago went to the usuall tourist places, Bondi, Manly, Harbor. Didn't meet to many Ausies thought. lots of Kiwi and Englanders the English where A-holes. Hoping to go back next year with my wife. Getting pretty warm over there now. Maybe Brisbane this time around. :cool:

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be pretty cool have all the best modifications drawn to scale and use the plans as a "guide" to the modification. Say "14-2 insert drawing 3 here will give you this mod".

Exactly! The best part is that this approach couldn't ruffle anyone's feathers about copyright issues, given that you're not (so far) talking about publishing a complete set of Long-EZ-based plans.

 

Heck don't stop at the Long Ez might as well throw the cozy in there. I don't know the mods that the cozy guys have come up with but I bet someone out there wants something better than stock. Jon might know.

There's quite a list: widened rear, widened cabin, retracts (I don't wan't 'em), forward opening canopy, electric nose lift, electric speed brake... and many others. Add them all up and you have an updated Cozy. Maybe the 'Cozy Mark IV 2006'.

 

Maybe we can get Avery over at Ez.org to make a special section for mods.

That's part of the challenge -- there's a section here titled 'Modifications', but that's not enough to manage a package of updates. Looking at an open source model for software, which can very much apply here, there's a governing "body" (or person) that approves the multitude of changes (and differences of opinion) that will develop. Managing the process can be as much a challenge as the design itself.

 

With all that said, please don't let anything stop you with what you're doing. I think it's great -- it also get's me thinking about setting up some software to encourage this sort of thing.

 

Thanks!

Jon Matcho :busy:
Builder & Canard Zone Admin
Now:  Rebuilding Quickie Tri-Q200 N479E
Next:  Resume building a Cozy Mark IV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think though we need to make everyone understand these don't substitute for plans they go hand and hand with them you agree?

Completely.

 

<disclaimer>

I probably won't release anything but the finished data, or do analyses on request. I had a very nice chat with the company lawyer over lunch yesterday, and it looks like there's no way I could ever escape the liability m(copyright is a nonissue at this point). I'll be using any and all data folks give me license to, and I'll try to contribute my drawings to the project, but the sum total of the data will never come from me. The models, while accurate, will likely be woefully incomplete to build from, and there's no way I can bear the risk. :scared: No discussion here, just a statement of fact. Nothing resembling plans will ever come from me. Just data and purdy pictures I think.

</disclaimer>

 

I DO think a repository of drawings is a great idea. If everyone tosses in a few pages, we could easily build what the cozy guys have for the Long. I think John's idea about the open-source contribution model is the way to go.

 

A few notes on what I AM doing: :cool:

 

The CFD will be first, since it's easier, and will be primarially an effort to reproduce the flow diagrams that are floating around so I can study the effect of some small aerodynamic modifications, primarially fairings and smoothed contours. I'm not putting out a schedule on purpose, as the nature of my job (product development consulting) has a wildly variable workload.

 

The FEA will be a very long and arduous process. Calculating the structural characteristics for the parts of the plane is far from a punch-n-add exercise, especially if I want accurate calculation of torques and forces that aren't on cardinal vectors to the model.

 

If anyone has known material properties for Long-EZ structures they want to contribute, feel free to fill up my PM box.

 

Once I get things sussed properly, I'll probably select projects for the models via poll or something similar. Since this is a side project, I can't just take everything at one. There will probably be months of evenings and weekends at the office tweaking the models to accuracy, and then making the changes to them to model things people want to see. This is decidedly a process, not a short project.

 

There is already an unauthorized Cozy IV in CAD on the Cozybuilders web site, just waiting for someone to modify it.

 

-dave

This is not a sig. This is a duck. Quack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave

 

Great Idea to model the CFD of the Long Ez I don't have that ability :sad: My buddy is the Chief composite engineer at General Atomics who has that capability but he uses a super computer to run it. Really neat. So you'll post a sort of a "frame" of the mod that is requested? I'm guessing as to the terminology. Is it like Autodesk Animator? from some of the software I have seen you seem to have more control than Autodesk. I have some pics here Dave, have you seen these? Also this is what I'm working on for my long Ez R/G the drawings are very crude at this point but you'll get the idea. the scoop acts much like an f-16 style scoop gear retract forward and gear doors close around them to finish the scoop. Gear legs are from Grove. Cooling air is routed through the legs and into the radiator located behind the firewall. I'm using an exhaust diffuser which will eliminate any overheating during long taxis. What do you think? To dragy?

 

Tony

post-1222-141090153244_thumb.jpg

post-1222-141090153247_thumb.jpg

post-1222-141090153249_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tony-

 

Yup, the CFD should be fun. The MEs at the office do everything in Solidworks, and that's where I'm playing right now. It's a lot easier to learn than Inventor or the rest of the (IMO, pathetic) AutoCad lineup, and we have in-house tools for CFD, FEA, thermal, EMI, and a few other modeling methods at work. Everything runs on the dual processor workstations under everyone's desks, one per person, no renderfarm. We'll be picking up dual proc dual core (quad proc effective) stuff in February, which should make my EE stuff fly, as well as the ME's stuff, and my after-hours ME adventure.

 

The term I think you're looking for is views or ports. The coolest version I've seen so far is a QuickTime VR movie of the model, with all the pressure mapping applied to the surface, so that it's totally rotable, no more single-view stuff. :D

 

The thing that started me on the hunt for CAD files for a Long were the two pressure diagrams you posted. I got some good ideas about where to smooth things out and where to put engine cooling stuff from those. I'd love to know who did them originally, but no one seems to want to share if they know.

 

As for your side view, it looks like your gear will mount near the plans location, and pivot up and in, kinda like a 172RG but fore instead of aft? Are you going to be using any kind of suspension, or just relying on the Grove legs to mounce a little? What about the retract mechanism? I'm curious. It looks pretty solid, but my main concern would be about the impact to the fuselage. It would also bring back the male look to the plane, but with P-51 style proportions. I like the look. I'd want to know more about the structure before I form a valid opinion though.

 

Hmm..looks like you have a lot more of the plane modeled than just the nose....

 

:D

 

-dave

This is not a sig. This is a duck. Quack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to know who did them originally, but no one seems to want to share if they know.

I don't remember you asking about them.

 

The aerodynamic analysis of the Long-Ez (and a couple of other planes, IIRC) were printed in a Sport Aviation article from April, 1997. The article was written by David Lednicer, who's an aerodynamicist in Washington who has worked with/for John Roncz. In multiple conversations with David, he threatened to do a COZY MKIV analysis as well, but never did (AFAIK).

 

He ran those analyses in VSAERO, which is a panel code, NOT a full blown Navier-Stokes analysis. It is much simplified, and isn't useful for looking at flight regimes near stall, I'm led to believe.

 

From the standpoint of figuring out where to modify a L.E. to reduce drag, you'll get a lot more bang for your buck by reading back issues of the CSA newsletter, and looking for all the articles on drag reduction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave

 

I have some more of the Long Ez drawn. I just haven't posted them yet. I want to finalize my measurements to make sure I did it right. Sometimes it's hard to read that ruler at midnight, so I have to stop myself and start the next day. Yes The gear will fold forward like a 172 However unlike a 172 gear which, I initially tried to use. My retraction is only 90 degrees unlike the 172 gear which is 180 degrees. My trunion is much stronger than the 172. You are right the gear will be located in the same area as the stock bow. So far as I can tell the Grove gear will be slightly stiffer but that will increase my ATOG. The final numbers are not done yet. My base is 62"in tire center to center at 50 degrees leg orientation to the fuselage of course I can increase this by increasing the angle of the leg relative to the fuse which will now give me a longer leg and decrease landing load K? but will increase my moment arm so I have to be carefull not to rip my retract box out. I think that is right. I'm following Pazmany's book on landing gear design I'll have to look at the actuall numbers. here is some more pics of my gear.

 

Tony

post-1222-141090153253_thumb.jpg

post-1222-141090153257_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marc-

 

That's probably because I only found this forum recently, and I asked about the pressure maps some time ago, when I saw a copy of them (reduced to a single sheet) on the cubicle wall of a guy I used to work with. He'd been forwarded the jpegs by a guy who got them from someone who..well, you get the idea. I completely gave up until this discussion popped up. Thanks for clarifying it for me. As for CSA backissues, I'm working on it, slowly. Since I can't build yet (no plans, no templates, still searching for both) I'm doing all the flights of fancy in the interim.

 

Tony-

 

That looks like an interesting design. I haven't checked the copy of Pazmany's book out of the library in a few years, but I think I might this weekend, if I"m not up to my elbows in plumbing (remodeling my house...forever). It looks like a better solution than the 90 degree bend in the Velo legs, and it'll make the anti-spar-attach folks happy too. Those pivot blocks look pretty solid. I assume they're machined from billet Al? The gear bulkhead might need some beefing up too I think, due to the radically different stress points. I'll be following this very very closely :D

 

As for 1am ruler reading, I know about it all too well. I spent most of the weekend rebuilding countertops that were originally constructed in a very late night building session. It fit my Navy friend's definition of government work though: Measure with a micrometer, mark with chalk, cut with a chainsaw. :P

 

-dave

This is not a sig. This is a duck. Quack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave check out my project at

 

www.myairplane.com

 

upper left hand corner click on construction log

scroll down to Tonyslongez

I was keeping it under raps untill my project was out of the "ugly duckling stage"

 

this will give you an idea of where I'm going with all of this. Some of the pics are a little older. I have since changed my nose to blue foam and incorporated the E-Cobb method. I haven't glassed the nose in yet, the reason is, I'm designing a really cool stearable nose gear this one is going to blow you out of the water really simple. Trunions are in fact machined out of 7075 fortal billet Al, the side casting are as well. I may change the side casting slightly to give me one more mounting shoulder. The new shoulder would allow me to attach the side casting to a bulkhead at the bottom of the fuselage, this would complete the "box" that hold the retracts to the fuse. I'll draw it for you and see if you agree. give me a day or two.

 

-Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks good Tony. I'm incredibly jealous of your throttle. It looks like a simplified version of the uberthrottle JD designed (too many buttons and hats for me...for now). I'm a little curious about the consoles though. I was under the impression that they were structural, and that the only safe way to gain access was with removable side panels, while keeping the horizontal surface intact (forming a T beam with the fuse side).

 

7075 Fortal...wow. That's some hard stuff. Higher Silicon content IIRC, so it should be pretty easy to machine? The last time I saw any was when back in college when the old shop guru was making a new tooling plate for one of the mills...something like a 4" thick plate of the stuff that he had sent over from France(?).

 

Those pedals sound cool too. Articulated toe brakes perhaps, or just keep with the normal rudder...Rudder...RUDDER...brakes! method?

 

I love the TV counterweight too. I've got you bookmarked now :D

 

-dave

This is not a sig. This is a duck. Quack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks good Tony. I'm incredibly jealous of your throttle. It looks like a simplified version of the uberthrottle JD designed (too many buttons and hats for me...for now). I'm a little curious about the consoles though. I was under the impression that they were structural, and that the only safe way to gain access was with removable side panels, while keeping the horizontal surface intact (forming a T beam with the fuse side).

 

Dave, the throttle believe it or not is from a thrustmaster throttle for computer games all I did was gut it and replace all the sitches with aircraft grade switches then, I machined the armature out of aluminum. The plastic is just for looks and form. On the inside I poured a casting resin that can be machined worked great. As far as the console goes I had my composite engineer buddy look at those he THINKS they may be structuall but probably not enough to matter I'm not quite done with those. Not sure exactly how the final ones will look.

 

7075 Fortal...wow. That's some hard stuff. Higher Silicon content IIRC, so it should be pretty easy to machine? The last time I saw any was when back in college when the old shop guru was making a new tooling plate for one of the mills...something like a 4" thick plate of the stuff that he had sent over from France(?). The people I get that from is here in the U.S. called superior Die Set. Yeah machining that stuff is great I love it. The trunions and sides will be made of that stuff. :D

 

Those pedals sound cool too. Articulated toe brakes perhaps, or just keep with the normal rudder...Rudder...RUDDER...brakes! method?

 

Well yeah kinda you still have that only you are steering the nose gear as well and if you press harder you get into the breaks . For simplicity this I think is the way to go for a little more work you can do the toe break thing. I'm looking at the inverted forks from a Kawasaki 250R dirtbike I can machine them down and still have a nice and lite shock absorber.

 

I love the TV counterweight too. I've got you bookmarked now :D

 

-dave

I'm glad yoou like that I had to get creative I had about three layups going all at once. Only thing is, it may be for not because the scoop for the gear goes right over the airbrake. I think that when I drop the gear and the air hits that big bulkhead back there I'll slow down plenty. I'll be posting that firewall to the Ez.org guys tonight trying to finish some landing gear details now I know why plans cost so much money drawing this stuff is hard work on the eyeballs :envy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information