One nice things about these forums is the ability to share different approaches to the same problem, and then you can make your decision as to which way you wish to travel. And neither side is completely wrong (unless you get way overboard on assymetry, and then you are on your own.) As Ted says, it is a compromise, no matter what you do.
And, as Ted mentions, he uses assymetry, and he has done quite well with his flying using that approach. And David flies the same plane, so... But as Ted once said (I am paraphrasing now) so many of the top planes are so well designed that any of the top flyers could probably swap each other's planes, get in a few practice flights, and do very nearly equally as well. (Did I quote that pretty close?) Still, there is nothing like flying your own plane. Like a comfortable shoe you know what it can and cannot do.
But we are never done trimming. Never! Matthew discovered this past week end, after some 800 flights or so on his current plane, that he had too much tip weight in. Todd Lee had noticed a slight tendency to hinge on the bottom that neither one of us had noticed.
On the subject of tip weight, however, we aren't carrying that much. I guess we will have to go back and weigh this one "just to see", but, as Ted said, you do add by trial and error to get it right. And it will vary with line length, line rake, aircraft speed, and so on, in addition to design. And when you make changes in one area, you will often need to go back and make changes in others. And Matt has currently gone to a larger prop and increased the turn rate on the plane, all of which will affect other things.
We measure tip weight, not by the amount we add, but by holding the plane upside down by the prop and the tail wheel and placing the outboard tip on a gram scale. Since you add a tip weight box to the outboard tip (I have built some boxes so heavy I didn't have to add ANY weight to them) and have a leadout guide and leadouts in the inboard wing, plus the differences in material weights used in the construction--and, maybe even, size--the weights of the individual panels are different anyway. And flaps, well, that is the next story.
I do remember on the Stuka 97, we weighed it this way after 400 or so flights when we had it pretty well in trim, and it came out at 1.7 ounces of additional weight in the outboard tip--this with equal panels.
I agree with Ted (and others) in their assessment that the outboard wing, flying faster in the circle, will develop more lift. Such additional lift will depend on line length, wing span, etc., but I calculate the "average" difference to balance this out to be about 3/4 of an inch if you are adding assymetry for this reason. Since we are, also, trying to balance out the weight of the lines, some people will go for more. It sounds like an easy solution to keep from adding additional tip weight, but...
Tip weight can be beneficial. When you put a rock on a string and swing it, the rock swings to the outside of the circle. If you put an airplane on the line and weight in the tip and swing it, the airplane will hold out. You can swing the rock overhead, and with enough momentum it will hold straight out (up). What would happen now if you put the weight on the inboard tip of the airplane and swung it in the same way? Building the inboard wing longer and adding the leadout guide and leadouts, etc. does just that. It is minor, admittedly, very minor. But it is there.
But there is one area where assymetry does not work. Since it is supposed to be the additional lift that balances things out, what happens when the airplane is pointed straight up? We go into the wingover, squares, etc., and the plane is pointed straight up, and suddenly there is no lift balancing out the differences. And the inboard wing weighs more than the outboard wing. And the line weight is still there pulling down on the inboard wing. And line drag is now added to all this pulling down on the inboard wing. And there is now no lift difference and no tip weight to compensate. Did you ever wonder why some airplanes get loose in certain areas of the pattern?
Line drag is, also, a factor that needs to be reakoned with. And sometimes in strange ways. One thing that Ted did not mention, but that he and a number of others have discovered, is that, ragardless of which style you choose, you should have more outboard flap than inboard. This can be accomplished with longer flaps outboard (if you don't take them all the way to the tip) or with a wider tip in the outboard flap or adding a "wart" as Ted did to the outboard flap.
The purpose of this is to help prevent the "banging" in the bottom corner of the maneuvers (mostly the triangles and hourglass where it is the most noticeable). Different theories as to why this becomes necessary have been presented, but I think it happens primarily from line drag.
Since it is most noticeable at the bottom right corner, I will explain it from there. When the airplane is coming straight down, gravity is working on the plane, there is no lift on the wing to compensate for anything, we have tip weight on the outside, but, most noticably, we have drag on the lines pulling the inboard wing UP! Since the leadout is moved back to compensate, this pull has no effect and the airplane flies straight down. (That is the reason we need to move the leadouts back, and by an amount that will vary with airplane speed and line thickness and line length.)
Now, when you snap the corner hard, think of what happens. The plane rotates rather quickly, but the lines don't immediately catch up. The plane that was aiming straight down is now aimed to the left and ready to move in that direction, but the lines are still pointed up from the drag and momentum and all. Our leadout guide that was aimed back to compensate is now ineffective--for just a brief moment--but in that moment the line drag pulls the inboard wing up and the outboard tip then drops.
So, if we add just a little more flap to the outboard wing, the added lift generated will compensate for the pull of the lines, and we now eliminate (mostly) the tendency to bang in the corner. Of course, if we still have too much tip weight, the outboard wing will drop. Or it will rise if we don't have enough. We still need to trim, but this is just one more tool to help.
And you need that extra flap area whether you are using equal panels or lots and lots of assymetry. The same forces are still at work. The amount needed will vary, however, with design, speed, etc.
And in the rounds, the forces are less, but so is the amount of flap deflection, so this still works.
And, by the way, the "banging" affect mentioned above is at work in all corners, but the forces of gravity affect the plane differently, so it is most noticeable in the bottom right corner.
There, more than you asked for, but a lot to chomp on.
There is a lot of agreement, but, also, a lot of diversity in this hobby. We chose our weapons, and then learn to handle them. And each chooses what is most comfortable to him.