Feb 08, 2013, 03:48 AM Registered User Australia, NSW, Sydney Joined Mar 2012 1,051 Posts Discussion Myth #1 - 3 bladed props give more thrust than 2 bladed ones I am going to start this mini series of myths - TV series mythbuster style. We find a myth - Confirm the myth then verify/ bust/ plausible it. This is an easy one - but anyone who has verified it through practical tests using any means is more than welcome to post their findings. You can even propose an accepted engineering formulae from a scientific journal or wiki (?) Feel free to add your own myth but for the sake of continuity please number them sequentially.
Feb 08, 2013, 07:09 AM
Member
Edina, MN, USA
Joined Oct 1999
11,328 Posts
Busted!

# Images

 Feb 08, 2013, 07:25 AM Detroit 2-stroke junkie USA, CA, Oceanside Joined Jul 2008 3,055 Posts MYTH 2 - The tip of a wing can stall and not the whole wing.
Feb 08, 2013, 07:27 AM
Registered User
Aberdeen
Joined Mar 2006
10,467 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by jrb Busted!
I'm not so sure. It all depends what other variables you want to hold constant.

For instance if you take an electric set up with a two blade prop and you swap the prop for a three blade (same diameter, pitch and blade shape) thrust will indeed increase (along with watts). So in that respect three blades do give more thrust than two, so ‘myth’ is verified.

If the question was re-phrased to say:
“'Watt for Watt' do three blades make more thrust” the answer would be “No”.. In fact the opposite is true, as your thrust/power graphs show.

Morale of the story is:
 Feb 08, 2013, 07:29 AM I hate waiting for parts United States, NC, Garner Joined Apr 2001 6,254 Posts I've always heard that multi-bladed props give less thrust than 2-blade props. That has also been my findings as well with some models. I had a 3-blade prop on a .60-sized P-40 and a 4-blade prop on a .60-sized Spitfire. Both looked awesome on the ground and in still photos while in flight but they were definitely slower than their 2-bladed glow-powered counterparts (even though mine were electric and superior in every other way ) I kid... I kid... don't anyone get their knickers in a twist. Performance went up significantly in both cases after switching to a 2-blade prop. So is that to say that if WWII fighters such as the F-4U, P-51. etc., had 2-bladed props they would have been even faster? Assuming ground clearance for the prop wasn't an issue of course. Latest blog entry: I gots me a Goblin!
Feb 08, 2013, 07:30 AM
Registered User
Aberdeen
Joined Mar 2006
10,467 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by 1320fastback MYTH 2 - The tip of a wing can stall and not the whole wing.
Thats perfecty possible and in fact occurs very often on wings with high taper.

http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/...aca-tn-713.pdf
 Feb 08, 2013, 07:39 AM Flying electric since 1986 USA, IN, Brownsburg Joined Oct 2000 1,760 Posts The only thing that needs to be "busted" are blanket statements. Some 3 bladed props give more thrust than a two blade, others less. Some wings can tip stall, some won't. There are very few absolutes in this world, it's all shades of grey. Latest blog entry: Stevens Aeromodel Skybuggy 100
Feb 08, 2013, 07:44 AM
Registered User
Aberdeen
Joined Mar 2006
10,467 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Mike_Then So is that to say that if WWII fighters such as the F-4U, P-51. etc., had 2-bladed props they would have been even faster? Assuming ground clearance for the prop wasn't an issue of course.
No, because RPM and diameter are limited due to need to prevent the prop tips going supersonic. So the only option once you get to a certain power level is more blades, even though less blades are more efficient in terms of basic momentum theory.
This is not an issue on models due to much smaller props.
Feb 08, 2013, 07:45 AM
Registered User
Aberdeen
Joined Mar 2006
10,467 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by mark wolf the only thing that needs to be "busted" are blanket statements.
+1 ...
 Feb 08, 2013, 08:02 AM Registered User Aberdeen Joined Mar 2006 10,467 Posts Here's one that I think is a real 'Myth' (Myth 3 on the list) "If your plane climbs too much when you open the throttle, it needs more nose weight" I've lost track of how often i've seen people advise to do this when it's possibly the very opposite of what's needed.
Feb 08, 2013, 08:03 AM
I hate waiting for parts
United States, NC, Garner
Joined Apr 2001
6,254 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by JetPlaneFlyer Here's one that I think is a real 'Myth' (Myth 3 on the list) "If your plane climbs too much when you open the throttle, it needs more nose weight" I've lost track of how often i've seen people advise to do this when it's possibly the very opposite of what's needed.
If a plane climbs when power is applied, I would think it's a thrust angle issue, not a balance issue.
Latest blog entry: I gots me a Goblin!
 Feb 08, 2013, 08:05 AM Registered User Aberdeen Joined Mar 2006 10,467 Posts And another (Myth 4): "The optimum CG position for any plane is 25-30% chord" (insert whatever % range you like, the myth has variations)
Feb 08, 2013, 08:06 AM
Registered User
Aberdeen
Joined Mar 2006
10,467 Posts
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Mike_Then If a plane climbs when power is applied, I would think it's a thrust angle issue, not a balance issue.
Yes, possibly, but counter intuitivly it could also mean that it's nose heavy (i.e. you need to remove nose weight)
 Feb 08, 2013, 08:24 AM Member Edina, MN, USA Joined Oct 1999 11,328 Posts Out runners are similar to IC in that you simply can't blame the prop when it's simply swapped! Will performance be increased going to 2 blades from the stock 3 of the micro Corsair? Back in the day when we used gear boxes you could actually get equal performance at the same watts from the motor with various props by changing the gear ratio. Though they key point here is w/too many parameters it's just babble.
 Feb 08, 2013, 09:34 AM Registered User Joined Jan 2009 7,643 Posts The Myth of Sisyphus is one of my favorites.