Jump to content

Open-EZ CAD Drawings


Vortal

Recommended Posts

Hi,

The meaning of hybrid is in fact noting more than 2 engines –electric or ‘whatever’- working together (or separated) as need demands.

In this case it’s a pair of gasoline engines designed and used for their proper purpose.

In my point of view, airplanes are born to use hybrids as they have two (by user) defined power levels. One is take off and the other is chosen cruise speed.

An ordinary 4-stroke engine, doing his job on full throttle is not bad at all, burning 1/5 liter for each HP an hour. Problem starts when operating at “economical” cruise where the engine operates in bad conditions, burning up to 3/5 liter / HP/hour.

Main reasons for this are pump losses and a no longer correct compression rate.

( for this reason they ignite the fuel faster).

Theoretic solution is rather simple: use a 4-stroke at full throttle delivering enough power

for your pre-chosen cruise. For my Ultra Light this is 15 HP at 110 km/h. (take off power = 50 HP)

The only trouble is taking off… and here we need another engine to help the ‘cruise’ engine.

In my case the cruise engine is a strongly modified 4-stroke 250cc Honda CRF delivering 15 HP @4700 rpm and the ‘take off help’ engine is an unmodified 2-stroke Honda CR engine, 56 HP @12000 rpm. Both engines can work separately, driving a single propeller.

Before this all started I was already a huge fan of the long EZ, we even have here a team EZ’s flying demo’s on air shows (the REVA patrouille/France).

It’s not that I absolutely want to build one, buying an EZ is an option too.

Replacing the installed engine with an ‘hybrid’ is the goal, cutting fuel costs in two - or

flying twice as far.

Regards Johan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the explanation - I had never thought of having a twin-IC hybrid.

One question - do engines last well on full power, or is it just a matter of tuning and designing them so that they can run on full power indefinitely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Full power is never a problem when it comes to reliability.

Tuning the full power on low piston speed is the key.

So, the design for the economic engine is a bit contrary as what we are used to.

But this is not a topic on hybrid engines, I just need CAD drawings to check out

a few idée’s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lemans said:

I think I'm missing something….. Is this “open-EZ” or “long-EZ” dead?

nop, just sleeping

you can build an open-ez with all the info provided here, so people just don't bother adding value to the project...

and also i suppose people are more interested in keeping there jobs than update a document pile

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, ok

I don’t want to start building a long EZ right away. I’m occupied building a hybrid engine for my Shadow and this will take me to the end of the year. ( BTW: this is an open project too )

However, main goal is still flying the EZ in a couple of years. So, just in case, I like to find as mush CAD files as possible from the Long EZ as I only feel comfortable after putting the whole plain virtual together (3D). I know this is a hell of a job, I’m doing the engines and the Shadow at this moment.

I think there are a lot of parts who are already on file and I it’s better to draw parts that are not on file than do the job twice.

Regards Johan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

OK, second try - I posted this last week after I had to re-register for some reason & evidently it didn't take my post

Did anyone ever actually get cad drawings of the original design done in .dwg format?

I want to upscale it slightly & the best way to do that accurately is using autocad. If nobody got that done I will have to do it this winter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 years later...
1 hour ago, GMalatrasi said:

Did this project die? Were the final drawings ever released?

I will say flatly that this project is dead and if someone can show otherwise, chime in.  The problem is that when a person starts to put these drawings into CAD, the draftsman sees things that need to be upgraded like heavier gear and engine mounts, longer nose, electric nose lift, widen the back seat(?), rollover structure (?), add a stick and throttle in the back seat(?), downdraft or armpit cooling(?).   The original drawings are also missing some dimensions that help redrafting so dimensions have to be pulled off the paper plans.    After a while it gets to be a big project.  Now the draftsman realizes he really doesn't have any copyright permission so if he finished the re-drawing, he might not be able to sell them, or if he offers them up to the public, maybe he'll be liable for something; that is unlikely but some people sweat this stuff.

So if you want to build an EZ, download the Open-ez drawings, and the build manual and go to work.  CAD drawings do not add anything and millimeter accuracy does not matter when the dimensions are estimated off the originals and you're cutting foam with a hotwire.  (BTW, the original plans are surprisingly accurate)   Most of the mods you might want to make are pretty easy to do during the build process.  Just do it!  🙂

  • Like 1

-Kent
Cozy IV N13AM-750 hrs, Long-EZ-85 hrs and sold

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Kent Ashton said:

I will say flatly that this project is dead and if someone can show otherwise, chime in.  The problem is that when a person starts to put these drawings into CAD, the draftsman sees things that need to be upgraded like heavier gear and engine mounts, longer nose, electric nose lift, widen the back seat(?), rollover structure (?), add a stick and throttle in the back seat(?), downdraft or armpit cooling(?).   The original drawings are also missing some dimensions that help redrafting so dimensions have to be pulled off the paper plans.    After a while it gets to be a big project.  Now the draftsman realizes he really doesn't have any copyright permission so if he finished the re-drawing, he might not be able to sell them, or if he offers them up to the public, maybe he'll be liable for something; that is unlikely but some people sweat this stuff.

So if you want to build an EZ, download the Open-ez drawings, and the build manual and go to work.  CAD drawings do not add anything and millimeter accuracy does not matter when the dimensions are estimated off the originals and you're cutting foam with a hotwire.  (BTW, the original plans are surprisingly accurate)   Most of the mods you might want to make are pretty easy to do during the build process.  Just do it!  🙂

Thanks Kent, I was just hoping to get the CAD drawings to I can import them and use them to do a 3D model and incorporate the mods I want in CAD first. Seems like I'll have to do it from scratch though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, GMalatrasi said:

Did this project die? Were the final drawings ever released?

The current Open-EZ 2D PDF drawings are sufficient, but are still pending the revisions that are detailed in the first post of this thread here: 

 

20 hours ago, Kent Ashton said:

I will say flatly that this project is dead and if someone can show otherwise, chime in.

The effort is ongoing, but not at the point of being able to fully "show otherwise". Several folks have contributed various items, and have expressed a willingness to do more. The project is getting additional structure and is clearly not dead. You can see an example of progress from the official Open-EZ download section being recently added here at the Canard Zone (see link above, and the Downloads menu). The first step is to move forward with the Open-EZ Tandem 2.0 drawings in CAD as faithful representations of the Long-EZ drawings.

After that a plans rewrite is possible but is much more ambitious as it would require a "proof of plans" aircraft to be built before truly being viable. Folks, including myself, hesitate to jump into this as liability concerns begin to surface from imagining a widow/er blaming the Open-EZ plans on the death of their former spouse.

20 hours ago, Kent Ashton said:

The problem is that when a person starts to put these drawings into CAD, the draftsman sees things that need to be upgraded like heavier gear and engine mounts, longer nose, electric nose lift, widen the back seat(?), rollover structure (?), add a stick and throttle in the back seat(?), downdraft or armpit cooling(?).   The original drawings are also missing some dimensions that help redrafting so dimensions have to be pulled off the paper plans.    After a while it gets to be a big project.

So true. This is why the Open-EZ Tandem 2.0 effort is 100% aligned with the stock Long-EZ. Several folks have pointed out missing dimensions which will get resolved with the effort to bring into CAD from Long-EZ paper.

20 hours ago, GMalatrasi said:

Thanks Kent, I was just hoping to get the CAD drawings to I can import them and use them to do a 3D model and incorporate the mods I want in CAD first. Seems like I'll have to do it from scratch though.

Many folks have done this, but do keep in mind that just because something is in CAD does not make it inherently any more accurate than the hand-drawn source. In other words, someone's CAD drawing could be very different and even incorrect to the point of being dangerous.

Stay tuned...

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

On 8/26/2020 at 1:56 PM, Countach74 said:

Why not draw them yourself. I have many times took a PDF snapshot copied and pasted into Autocad then traced over the lines and finally scaled it. 

I am, but it doesn't hurt to ask if someone else already did the work first. 

5 hours ago, Jon Matcho said:

Several folks have pointed out missing dimensions which will get resolved with the effort to bring into CAD from Long-EZ paper.

Yeah I'm struggling with that as we speak. 

Where do I find the station locations for these points?

image.thumb.png.ca67e7aa56e919e51912f79ad730b92f.png

 

5 hours ago, Jon Matcho said:

Many folks have done this, but do keep in mind that just because something is in CAD does not make it inherently any more accurate than the hand-drawn source. In other words, someone's CAD drawing could be very different and even incorrect to the point of being dangerous.

Yeah I'm not looking for more accuracy just utility. It's much easier to deal with 3D models and digital drawings for what I'm looking to do.

As an engineer working in the aerospace industry, I'm well aware that the quality of CAD work varies greatly depending on who did said work. You never know what can of worms you'll get when you look at someone else's work or inherit someone else's project. Lol

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

F22 is at  fuselage station 22".  F28 at fuselage station 28".  Most of the dimensions can be derived with a little plans-study and math.   For example, F28 is labeled in  your photo and the extreme left  bulkhead is F22, also labeled.  The 19.8 dimension on the left is the dimension for  F22 and it is 103 inches to the firewall.  The intervals you have question-marked are 10 X 10" increments with 3" additional to reach the firewall.   Have fun.  🙂

Edited by Kent Ashton

-Kent
Cozy IV N13AM-750 hrs, Long-EZ-85 hrs and sold

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kent Ashton said:

F22 is at  fuselage station 22".  F28 at fuselage station 28".  Most of the dimensions can be derived with a little plans-study and math.   For example, F28 is labeled in  your photo and the extreme left  bulkhead is F22.  The fire wall is at F.S. 22 + 59.75 + 36.75 + 6.5.   As I recall, sometimes the front of the firewall is used for a measurement and sometimes the aft side.  Have fun.

Yeah, I've got all those... I'm asking about the points that define the lower curve of the fuselage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/27/2020 at 6:04 PM, Kent Ashton said:

The intervals you have question-marked are 10 X 10" increments with 3" additional to reach the firewall.

@Kent Ashton that's the answer I came up with for the station points by dividing 103" by 10 segements to get 10" with 3" remaining, which I am GUESSING aligns with what was intended based on the "not to scale" diagram. I do not see how one truly knows these are 10" increments and not 9.9" (or even 5.0" with the "not to scale" qualifier) with whatever is left over at the end? I'd bet this is covered in a Canard Pusher, or old Canard Aviators (C-A) email list discussion.

On 8/27/2020 at 5:52 PM, GMalatrasi said:

It's much easier to deal with 3D models and digital drawings for what I'm looking to do.

@GMalatrasi I totally understand your point... the Long-EZ plans leave a lot to be desired. I am more familiar with the Cozy IV plans and they're better in this particular area, but still not at the level you're looking for.

The more I look at the Long-EZ plans, the more I feel the need to update the plans.

 

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

13 minutes ago, GMalatrasi said:

Not sure what CP 25 is... All I have is the build instructions and the A1-14 Templates.

CP 25 = Canard Pusher Newsletter #25. I'll get them uploaded to the Downloads section here.

@GMalatrasi what CAD software are you using?

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

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information