MotoCalc confusion

caseih · Jun 06, 2005, 07:51 PM

I am very confused about the results from MotoCalc as well as the online motor calculator at gobrushless.com. I have purchased a BP21 (although on E-bay, not balsapr). I am pretty sure that it is 21t, delta-wired. Because I was unable to learn anything about prop sizes, amp draw, etc from the calculators I have just tried things empirically. Right now I have found that one of the best props in terms of thrust and amps is a direct-drive GWS 1060. I can get about 10 minutes of flight or more out of my 1500 mAh LiPoly battery, comparable to the old EPS-350 with a B gear. I don't know what the thrust is, but it is better than the stock system by about 30%. Maybe 12-14 oz of thrust. I dunno. According to my inductive ammeter, the motor is drawing just under 10 amps at full static load. I have been unable to replicate these numbers with this prop on either gobrushless's calculator or motocalc. I've been told that the bp21 is similar to the Hacker 40/21L parameters in motocalc, so I've tried those. According to motocalc, the 1060 should be drawing 22 amps and putting out over 20 oz of thrust. What am I doing wrong here? I'd love to use these tools to plan my own motor designs but so far I have a huge disconnect between reality and how to plug numbers into the similator. Can anyone explain what I'm missing? I've been reading a lot of forum entries on the subject, but I must be missing it. Feel feel to point me at the relavent threads.

Adam Neat · Jun 06, 2005, 09:36 PM

Try here; http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=338451

Adam

adam_one · Jun 07, 2005, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Try here; http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=338451

Interesting static motor test data, but it seems that the Power Out formula used needs some sort of prop constant as it results in efficiencies above 100% (up to 139%) in several cases...

Bruce Abbott · Jun 07, 2005, 06:14 PM

Using Gene Bond's constants with a 2S lipoly and EP1060, Motocalc predicts a miserable 37% efficiency! I got a better match to Gene Bond's data using Kv=1550 rpm/V, Rm=0.275 Ohms, and Io=0.7 Amps.

adam_one · Jun 08, 2005, 03:16 AM

Also wonder why the no load current Io is used as a constant in motor calculations despite the Io value is dependent on the voltage applied to the motor… ?

Jun 06, 2005, 07:51 PM	#1
caseih Registered User Joined May 2005 771 Posts	MotoCalc confusion I am very confused about the results from MotoCalc as well as the online motor calculator at gobrushless.com. I have purchased a BP21 (although on E-bay, not balsapr). I am pretty sure that it is 21t, delta-wired. Because I was unable to learn anything about prop sizes, amp draw, etc from the calculators I have just tried things empirically. Right now I have found that one of the best props in terms of thrust and amps is a direct-drive GWS 1060. I can get about 10 minutes of flight or more out of my 1500 mAh LiPoly battery, comparable to the old EPS-350 with a B gear. I don't know what the thrust is, but it is better than the stock system by about 30%. Maybe 12-14 oz of thrust. I dunno. According to my inductive ammeter, the motor is drawing just under 10 amps at full static load. I have been unable to replicate these numbers with this prop on either gobrushless's calculator or motocalc. I've been told that the bp21 is similar to the Hacker 40/21L parameters in motocalc, so I've tried those. According to motocalc, the 1060 should be drawing 22 amps and putting out over 20 oz of thrust. What am I doing wrong here? I'd love to use these tools to plan my own motor designs but so far I have a huge disconnect between reality and how to plug numbers into the similator. Can anyone explain what I'm missing? I've been reading a lot of forum entries on the subject, but I must be missing it. Feel feel to point me at the relavent threads.

RCG Sites

About RCG

Features

Tools

Media

Topics

Jun 06, 2005, 09:36 PM	#2
Adam Neat Registered User Winchester; Ohio Joined Feb 2001 870 Posts	Try here; http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=338451 Adam

Jun 07, 2005, 06:14 PM	#4
Bruce Abbott We want... Information! Hastings, New Zealand Joined Jan 2001 4,762 Posts	Using Gene Bond's constants with a 2S lipoly and EP1060, Motocalc predicts a miserable 37% efficiency! I got a better match to Gene Bond's data using Kv=1550 rpm/V, Rm=0.275 Ohms, and Io=0.7 Amps.

Jun 08, 2005, 03:16 AM	#5
adam_one flying low & slow SE Joined Mar 2003 362 Posts	Also wonder why the no load current Io is used as a constant in motor calculations despite the Io value is dependent on the voltage applied to the motor… ?