HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Dec 06, 2012, 05:04 PM
Tragic case
davidleitch's Avatar
Sydney Australia
Joined Feb 2002
5,866 Posts
Its the pilot that wins these events not the system that said I read Wolf was on 8S, Piermario on 10S, Remo on 10S. The Swiss were on 6S.
davidleitch is offline Find More Posts by davidleitch
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Dec 06, 2012, 11:23 PM
Registered User
Italy,Russia,Kazakhstan...
Joined Aug 2007
588 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Shering View Post
If you are talking about the motor I do not understand. .........................................
Dear George, while I am only talking about the demagnetization of the rotor running at 6S in a higher current. And it is clear that this can be observed in the maximum amount only in a competitive practice. Flying in hobby mode does not show any characteristics drop.
At the same time, I have not noticed the effect of demagnetization rotor setup 10S perhaps this is due to the lack of information yet, and probably the fact that the current load is much lower.

Using the 6S motor in constant practice, I want to note that as a minimum twice a year is necessary to change the rotor. Well this is the case, if you really plan to compete. And will not use 4S setup with 400A shunt. Or 8S setup with a 150 A shunt....
Golikov is offline Find More Posts by Golikov
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 12:42 AM
Registered User
epwierman's Avatar
United States, CA, Los Angeles
Joined Aug 2004
3,073 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golikov View Post
I was and remain a constant opponent of any kind of innovation, while operating equipment is not completely given to its maximum performance. So I was an opponent of the transition to 10S. But the efficiency of the system with 10S battery, even with a very small volume of tests, making me spend just as much time on the development of these systems.

It is possible that if a single purchase system 6S are cheaper now. (I have a lovely new battery 6S2600-75C that I can offer at 50 euros per pack.) But if you plan to use the system in a competitive practice, it is a year of sports operating system 10C shows its economic efficiency, greater than 6S. Rotor magnets, the system operating at 220-310A (6S), lose their power is quite noticeable (data logger) after 70-100 flights. In the system of 10C, making about 100 flights on currents 180-210A, I do not notice a decrease in the effectiveness of the motor.

Yes, and I was, would be very interesting to try to budget the controller! Suddenly, there really is no difference? Then why pay more?
Goli,

Can I say this?

I love you man!

(probably a very bad Russian to Italian to American English translation, true... But some in the US will be find this humorous and understand that your input in our hobby is indeed valuable, despite some "popular" opinion of your badboy trouble making style)

Cheers,
E
epwierman is offline Find More Posts by epwierman
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 12:48 AM
Registered User
epwierman's Avatar
United States, CA, Los Angeles
Joined Aug 2004
3,073 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerben View Post
I will discuss that 10S setups are harder on equipment, on the lipo's to be precise. Since I went to 10S in 2012 I never spent so much money on Lipo's, trying to figure out which pack would at least hold up and get me some decent voltage under load, whilst still fitting in the fuse and having a moderate weight. Luckily in the end I found the Dinogy packs. Lipowise 5-6S was better, which makes sense from a volumetric perspective.

The only brand that seems to have made a remarkable improvement with >6S was Plettenberg, but that makes sense as I never found their 4 and 5S motors all that efficient. My 6S Neu motor was definately more efficient than those 40 and 42 Plettis, gained 2 laps by switching over.

Anyway, while we're on the subject of the ICE160HV, I thought I'd show what mine look like these days.
Rear caps 'reversed' so they now lie on the controller making it shorter (easier to fit the 2x5=10S packs in the Avio fuse now), changed all the wires to 10AWG from the original 8AWG and moved the front two backwards a bit so the
controller can be soldered very close to the motor now. It weighs 90grams as shown on the pics, will be even lighter wenn all wires have the correct length.





Regards,
Gerben
Gerben,

I understand your frustration, been there. In the case of ten series lipo, no need to reinvent the wheel. The packs that Steve and Goli are using are best ever, and definitely best value when you consider ongoing flight costs.

You can easily get by (and do well!) with Hobby king 6S packs. Really! Patrick Hausler will tell you how they are good for 20 or so flights and cheap.

But, the new stuff is worth looking at, and from my experience (cost and reliability), you simply can't ignore the current 10 s systems.

Ciao,

E
epwierman is offline Find More Posts by epwierman
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 12:52 AM
Registered User
epwierman's Avatar
United States, CA, Los Angeles
Joined Aug 2004
3,073 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Shering View Post
I think the idea is to match the rpm of the prop to the forward speed of the plane so that the prop angle of attack stays close to a high efficiency value. Maybe not its maximum efficiency as this may not be high enough power, but far away from stalled at one end and just stirring air at the other.

Ideally you want to measure the forward speed of the plane and adjust the prop rpm to suit. I tried using prop rpm at approximately constant voltage as a measure of the forward speed, we know that the prop speeds up and the current declines as the plane's speed rises. But I could not get it to work, it was not sensitive enough to plane speed and too sensitive to battery voltage and maybe air conditions. Maybe if I could divide the rpm by the voltage to get an on-load Kv this would be better. But the best way would be to measure the
airspeed with a sensor.

In the mean-time an open loop ramp is just an approximation to what is needed.
George,

Will you please (finally) make us a modern ESC for F5b?

You know what we need, and have the ability to produce it.

My big mod CC180 allowed amazing progression.

You current visions would be spectacular.

?

Eric
epwierman is offline Find More Posts by epwierman
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 01:01 AM
Registered User
epwierman's Avatar
United States, CA, Los Angeles
Joined Aug 2004
3,073 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMagic View Post
So why are people spending loads of money on 10s? We've not seen any empirical data posted comparing drive efficiency (or did I miss that?).

Is 10s a fad? or just born out of the lack of 6s controllers (until Joe's new introduction).

What am I missing?

Roy,

As you know, Place your wisdom up there with the best of the best.

You have an amazing ability to understand things ahead of time, while I am often using trial, error, observation and try again.

That being said, one major difference is heat, motor/esc/batt.

You'd have to help to understand and quantify the meaning of that, but from other opinion leaders that I hold dear, heat is our enemy. So, I will share that my 10 s set up need non cooling holes, Nd require little to no cool off time between flights. Very different from my standard 6s set ups. On the heavy weight 6s motors (1516 to 1518, perhaps a different story.)

Loving your calc program btw...

E
epwierman is offline Find More Posts by epwierman
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 03:43 AM
Needs to do 52 legs !!
jjmouris's Avatar
Verenigd Koninkrijk, Fareham
Joined Aug 2008
7,097 Posts
Guys, i know this is going off topic and the only reason why i consider this as relevant is because i want people to know there is a more cost effective alternative to the CC ICE or indeed YGE controllers. More easy to use and more suitable for the average pilot.

I am fed up with hearing senceless stories about how much more efficient 10S is and how we all should throw our useless old 6S setups in the bin and buy the latest and greatest 10S equipment. Reality shows like George already wrote, there is no real difference if you compare things equally. What does that mean? That means i can compete against the latest and greatest 10S system with my cheap 6S system and there will be no real difference in performance. Not even 1%.

There are several important and interresting discussions going on at the same time in this thread. It is perhaps time to step back and re-evalate your own understanding of things. I keep changing my understanding of things all the time. You never have to much experiance or are to old to do this.

Vladimir, your point about the rotor lifespan is interresting. I guess that if there really is an issue (and this may depend on how hard you push things on your power system anyway) it is probably to do with the rotor temperature and the magnets de-magnatizing over time. It could be that if all other things are the same, that your 10S setup drives the rotor in a better way (ESC settings) and heats the rotor up less. This simply means we need to investigate what is going on. Having said that, i find my 10S motors to get hotter on the outside (hard to measure inside) for the same power and mass of the motor. So maybe indeed it has to do more with how we match things together.

Please be aware that the efficiency number we care about is the one that you get when you compare the Energy you have consumed against the Energy that is in the plane at the end of the climb minus the Energy in the plane at the start of the climb. You can actually measure this using todays tools. I suggest people start doing this before making any more comments about how efficient their amazing 10S setup really is. The second important value is the motor run time. If you can put the same amount of Energy into the plane in a shorter time with the same efficiency, you will save your self time to fly legs. However, testing has shown that the efficiency tends to drop when we run a more powerfull setup. This is mainly due to the propellor efficiency, running higher angles of attack. So when you compare efficiency, you should also note the run time. Either number is useless without the other.

Having a big ramp so that you put more of the energy into the plane at the end of the climb when the plane is flying faster and the prop AoA is lower makes sence at first glance. However you will raise the AoA at the end of the climb by doing this and drop the prop efficiency as a result. My tests seem to show that it is worth ramping at the start of the climb to avoid excessively high prop AoA but after this it actually makes no difference at all. Better to concentrate your efforts on other parts.

Propellor design, this is a very interresting subject and i still don't understand why some people choose to use propellors with a profile on them that resambles more the shape of a badly built boat then an airfoil section. Specially the outer 1/3 of the propellor blade should have perfectly reproduced airfoil sections and the join of the bottom and top mould half should be done perfectly at the leading edge. What is the point in designing a profile if you are not going to actually reproduce it on your propellor? Changing the prop can give you easily a 5% improvement in drive efficiency going from 40% to 45% and this means you now have more then 10% extra Energy in the plane at the end of the climb. ( 5 / 40 x100 = 12.5% )

Do you know what the AoA is on your prop at the start of the climb? At the end of the climb? What point on the prop? How about 25% diameter point? And 75% diameter? The most simple question of all, what is the pitch distribution on your prop?!!! WAKE UP PEOPLE, this is what you should be looking at!!!

Here is one example of how to do your home work.
jjmouris is offline Find More Posts by jjmouris
RCG Plus Member
Last edited by jjmouris; Dec 07, 2012 at 04:01 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 03:58 AM
Needs to do 52 legs !!
jjmouris's Avatar
Verenigd Koninkrijk, Fareham
Joined Aug 2008
7,097 Posts
For the record, this is what my budget drive looks like.

Good for 28 - 29 seconds of motor.

jjmouris is offline Find More Posts by jjmouris
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: My F5B saw tooth props
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 06:08 AM
Registered User
Italy,Russia,Kazakhstan...
Joined Aug 2007
588 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjmouris View Post
.......................................
Do you know what the AoA is on your prop at the start of the climb? At the end of the climb? What point on the prop? How about 25% diameter point? And 75% diameter? The most simple question of all, what is the pitch distribution on your prop?!!! WAKE UP PEOPLE, this is what you should be looking at!!!

..............................
Nice to hear those words ... That's one more person comes to understand that all that is in your batteries and all your motor only needs to turn the propeller. And how much will be effective propeller turning its rotation in traction, so will be effective F5B your flight.

I do not understand the origin of graphs shown are higher, but it was, would be important to their correct execution.
Same propeller, so the same number of RPM in the early climb and at the end. Same speed, same traectory, same height, in the same weather conditions. And two different systems which give him the energy. And banal assessment which system 6S or 10S used more watts / min for the execution of this result.

As I write this, the system to 6S in the overwhelming majority have not yet reached their maximum efficiency. And there's something to do. But! The rotors demagnetization problem working with currents 300+ A makes it quite expensive this tests. It's easy to see how, after 50-70 flight to achieve the same speed, the motor with demagnetized rotor, consumes more power. I was just because of this PRO's to change to 10S.

And more! Do not quite understand why this debate. It was a very interesting post from Steve, and important update for CC controller. And then the offtop for 10s vs 6s?
Golikov is offline Find More Posts by Golikov
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 07:55 AM
Needs to do 52 legs !!
jjmouris's Avatar
Verenigd Koninkrijk, Fareham
Joined Aug 2008
7,097 Posts
Vladimir, we can discuss in private or elsewhere how to create those graphs.

For now it is enough to say that this gives a really good indication of total system efficiency. You can swap out the drive system from 6S to 10S or fly with and without a big power ramp and see the difference. The final number at the 120W.min or 180W.min used point is the important one. It shows how much of those W.min consumed are now in the plane. It is what allows me to say that we do not need to adjust the ramp so much.

How we come to all of these subjects is simple, our drive systems and the possible change from 6S to 10S is a hot topic. Specially because there is at the moment no low cost 10S ESC available and many people give reasons to prefer 10S that are simply not valid.

I can see how Steve's initial post will ''motivate'' people to give CC and HV a try. I am here to say that there is a cheaper and simpler alternative.
jjmouris is offline Find More Posts by jjmouris
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: My F5B saw tooth props
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 08:24 AM
Registered User
sneu's Avatar
United States, CA, San Diego
Joined Dec 1999
7,338 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjmouris View Post
For the record, this is what my budget drive looks like.

Good for 28 - 29 seconds of motor.

One more time--please stick to the topic of the thread which is ICE controllers and motor ramps. This is not a debate about 6S vs 10S or about cheap controllers. If not thread will be close.

Steve
sneu is offline Find More Posts by sneu
Last edited by sneu; Dec 07, 2012 at 08:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 08:59 AM
Battery Puffer
Orange, California, United States
Joined Nov 2001
982 Posts
Steve, are the controller settings you posted ok if you don't use a ramp?

Mark
MarkF is offline Find More Posts by MarkF
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 09:25 AM
Registered User
sneu's Avatar
United States, CA, San Diego
Joined Dec 1999
7,338 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkF View Post
Steve, are the controller settings you posted ok if you don't use a ramp?

Mark
Yes they are--ramps are not really needed unless you are flying contests where energy limiting is enforced.

Steve
sneu is offline Find More Posts by sneu
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 10:18 AM
Needs to do 52 legs !!
jjmouris's Avatar
Verenigd Koninkrijk, Fareham
Joined Aug 2008
7,097 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneu View Post
Yes they are--ramps are not really needed unless you are flying contests where energy limiting is enforced.

Steve
Not with throttle response 10 it isn't !!!

Try 7 or even 6.

RFM props will explode with response 10, even 8 is hard core for good props.

jjmouris is offline Find More Posts by jjmouris
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: My F5B saw tooth props
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 11:13 AM
Registered User
sneu's Avatar
United States, CA, San Diego
Joined Dec 1999
7,338 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjmouris View Post
Not with throttle response 10 it isn't !!!

Try 7 or even 6.

RFM props will explode with response 10, even 8 is hard core for good props.

He is not using RFM props......

Steve Neu
sneu is offline Find More Posts by sneu
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale Lightly used F5B Sting Hotliner for sale, no electronics multi-planes Aircraft - Electric - Airplanes (FS/W) 2 Jun 25, 2012 04:32 PM
Discussion Setting up the F5B gas box when motor ramp is used David H High Performance 16 Sep 18, 2011 10:41 AM
Discussion Throttle ramps - traction control for F5B Mike Seale High Performance 37 Mar 08, 2011 09:17 AM
Use a switch as a WOT control for big brushed motors WingMan33 Power Systems 17 Feb 26, 2004 04:38 PM