Originally Posted by rgoble

I just added a new feature to that site that was suggested to me by bbjsw10, and I would like some feedback about it. He suggested that I add a way to find other motors that are similar to the one your looking at, which I though was a great idea so I added it to the site. Here is a direct link showing similar motors for a Dualsky - XM 2822 CA-24

Previously when viewing a motor there was a "Compare" link located under its name. I replaced that with a "Show Similar" link. When you follow it, you will see a table with the name/weight/kv/dimensions of the motor you were viewing and below it is a second table showing the same fields for all "similar" motors.

Right now a "similar" motor is one that is within +/- 10% of the weight and +/- 20% of the Kv.

I'd like to know what you think about the values I used to find similar motors and also if there is something you don't like about the way its being displayed. Any other feed back is also welcome.

Thanks,
Robert

Hi Robert
Good
An option could be to enter
a) The motor to show "the similar ones"
b) or directly the weight AND the Kv (if there is no motor in the forks answer would be "no close motor found")
Louis

Originally Posted by rgoble

I just added a new feature to that site that was suggested to me by bbjsw10, and I would like some feedback about it. He suggested that I add a way to find other motors that are similar to the one your looking at, which I though was a great idea so I added it to the site. Here is a direct link showing similar motors for a Dualsky - XM 2822 CA-24

Previously when viewing a motor there was a "Compare" link located under its name. I replaced that with a "Show Similar" link. When you follow it, you will see a table with the name/weight/kv/dimensions of the motor you were viewing and below it is a second table showing the same fields for all "similar" motors.

Right now a "similar" motor is one that is within +/- 10% of the weight and +/- 20% of the Kv.

I'd like to know what you think about the values I used to find similar motors and also if there is something you don't like about the way its being displayed. Any other feed back is also welcome.

Thanks,
Robert

Thanks, Robert for taking my suggestion and going through with it. I tried it out and that is a great feature now I can find options rapidly. I was always a doubter of the "make suggestions box" but this changed my mind a little.

Originally Posted by Fourdan

Hi Robert
Good
An option could be to enter
a) The motor to show "the similar ones"
b) or directly the weight AND the Kv (if there is no motor in the forks answer would be "no close motor found")
Louis

Louis,

The has had the ability to "b" for quite a while. On the search page there is a link to the advance page which takes you to http://www.flybrushless.com/search/advance

On that page you can enter the min and max ranges for several of the motor properties such as weight, kv, etc.

I have something similar in the works for looking at props.

Robert

Originally Posted by Romauld Kerba

Hi,Have you ever used Motors from http://xxxx ? Please recommend me some motors,my hotmail is xxxEMAIL]

Romaud,

We will need a little more information to respond to your question. What kind of plane do you want or need a new motor? Is it EDF, glider, scale warbird, helicopter, or what?

Bill

Bill, this guy is a salesman trying to push his product IMO. All his started threads are for products from the one company YINENG CHINA HOLDINGS GROUP CO., LIMITED. I would ignore.

Just my 2c

John

Originally Posted by Prof100

Romaud,

We will need a little more information to respond to your question. What kind of plane do you want or need a new motor? Is it EDF, glider, scale warbird, helicopter, or what?

Bill

Originally Posted by jj604

Bill, this guy is a salesman trying to push his product IMO. All his started threads are for products from the one company YINENG CHINA HOLDINGS GROUP CO., LIMITED. I would ignore.

Just my 2c

John

Somebody reported him to the admins. That's good.

Prof100, I would almost edit post #350 to remove his link. Just my .02

Phil needs to do that, if he wants to.
He is the moderator of this thread.

Walt

All he has to do is click the edit button on his post and delete the links. Anyone can edit their own posts.

Originally Posted by bbjsw10

Prof100, I would almost edit post #350 to remove his link. Just my .02

I edited the quote section so the link is gone.

Okay, to return to databases, are we all interested in a prop database similar to the motor one? Collect whatever is available from the OEMs and measure everything else? Do we end up with thrust versus RPM, drag coefficient, max RPM, max efficiency RPM, yada yada yada?

Also, I'd like to see a prop database contain lots of hub information. For instance, all the GWS EP series "slow fly" props that go directly on to 3 mm shafts also have that phunky hex nut boss, but they vary in the depth of the boss. Therefore, some prop savers fit snug to the face of the boss and some of them smack the bottom of the boss, so the prop wobbles on the saver. Is this the kind of info we can collect?

I have though about how I could use all of the existing test data to show information to compare props but I wasn't quite sure what to show.

I thought about making a graph that showed all of the measured rpm/thrust data on a chart to let you compare props. Or even something like current vs rpm/thurst etc.

If you can give me specifics on what you would like to see I can get some charts put together (assuming it uses the existing data on the site).

Robert

Well, I still believe we need to chase down the prop OEMs and start demanding thrust vs RPM and maximum RPM data. They should be able to provide this, eh? I mean, if there's anybody who has a handle on how a prop will perform it's the OEM, wouldn't you agree? And if not, then why not?

We should be holding the propeller OEMs feet to the fire. If they want us to buy their product the least they can do is provide some numbers that they must have generated themselves even before building a prop. If we can get their research into our grubby little mitts then we can apply further science to determine efficiency, etc.

I am hoping the prop OEMs can give us standardized numbers like thrust per RPM at sea level, 25° C, 75% relative humidity, yada yada. If so then we really can compare apples to apples.

Heres an example graph of an APC SF 9x4.7 showing thrust and g/W vs RPM.

Robert