Hi 6,
The UDI motors seem to be as decent as the Walkera QR Ladybird motors and many have used them successfully. If you mean V997 Mini Pet props, then yes they will fit the UDI and other 1mm shaft motors.
Cheers,
Jim
Quadrocopter and Tricopter Info Mega Link Index

Originally Posted by 6sharky9

So of the H36 and UDI motors; any comparison power wise?. And will the UDI motors accept the J997 props?

Just make sure you use prop motor guards if using the UDI motor\arm assembly and Mini Pet props.

I got my H36 parts from MO yesterday, so I assembled my frankenquad using the V202 board. It was a very clean and simple mod.

When I made my first test, I almost shot the thing through the ceiling. Wow, it reminds me of an old country western song, "I've got a tiger by the tail." We started a snow storm last night, so I had to do my initial testing indoors. This thing is EXTREMELY responsive and powerful. I dialed it down to 20, just to keep from bashing into the walls.

I measured the resistance of the H36 motors and the V202 motors and they both show 1.6 ohms., But I'm wondering if the H36 motors have better magnets. I can't believe that shedding just 3 grams would make this much difference.

Well, it will be two or three days before I can go outside and see what this puppy (or should I say, tiger) will do. I will definitely install lights so I can see the blur as is goes screaming by. Can't wait to do some flips after dark.

Thanks, Romeo, for your efforts in this new r/c addiction.
Swilson50
Stan in Dodge City

Good job Stan.

Boom length has a pronounced affect on these quads (as if you didn't already know). I put the UDI booms inserted all the way into the mainframe and the diagonal rotor distance shrunk about 5mm. The quad can no longer do flips, well it can occasionally but you have to hold the stick over longer and it overcompensates. Now this could be do to the UDI motors as well, but but I need to do more testing.

How are the arms attached?...if by a screw cant you move the arms out 5mm and re-drill another hole to screw the boom in place...That may solve that issue if length is the problem....Or see if you can just replace the motors without changing booms if in fact the udi motors are better. Im having thoughs of maybe some PC boards giving alittle more voltage output than others to the motors..1 tenth of a volt is huge on these small motors. maybe someone can test that theory. Im picturing disconnecting the motors and making sure the quad is level then test voltage output at full throttle and see how much power is being sent to the motors. Some boards may be better at stability while others may provide alittle more power to motors...Would be interesting to see a test between a V939,H36 and V202 board as far as power output is concerned

Originally Posted by 6sharky9

How are the arms attached?...if by a screw cant you move the arms out 5mm and re-drill another hole to screw the boom in place...That may solve that issue if length is the problem....Or see if you can just replace the motors without changing booms if in fact the udi motors are better. Im having thoughs of maybe some PC boards giving alittle more voltage output than others to the motors..1 tenth of a volt is huge on these small motors. maybe someone can test that theory. Im picturing disconnecting the motors and making sure the quad is level then test voltage output at full throttle and see how much power is being sent to the motors. Some boards may be better at stability while others may provide alittle more power to motors...Would be interesting to see a test between a V939,H36 and V202 board as far as power output is concerned

Well my booms look like a pimply-faced teenager from moving the arms in and out. I've moved them out so that they're equal to the original H36 size and even swapped boards to make sure that wasn't the issue. I wish I had an RPM gun (timing light couldn't be modded could it?) to see if the motors are providing too much or too little thrust.

I suppose I could try another thrust test using the scale.

I'm going to locate some 3mm carbon and some magnet wire. Apparently kite fanatics use this kind of carbon boom material so it should be readily available in long lengths. It'll be fun to experiment with longer/shorter booms.

I gotta find a better way than solder and heat shrink for wiring though. Maybe there is an insulating dip we could use on wire connections?

There are some audio recording apps for iphone or android that could be used to get an idea of how fast the props are spinning. They will show a frequency spike that relates to the prop speed. You'll probably have to do one motor at a time.

Well I did the thrust test and the UDI and H36 motors provided about the same amount of thrust (57 peak grams with 51 steady) from all 4 motors using Mini Pet props.

MO, would you do thrust test for every props in your stock?
I'd like to see the result
Thanks

Originally Posted by bangkomit

MO, would you do thrust test for every props in your stock?
I'd like to see the result
Thanks

I think I can do that, but believe it or not all we have are X4, Mini Pet, H36, V202, and UDI (if I can find them)

cyberbillp, you asked :Maybe there is an insulating dip we could use on wire connections? . You can get liquid tape at a Home Depot(4 or 5 different colors) for about $5. I have been using it on my small wires for some time, I usually apply it with a toothpick. I got white so I can change the color if I want to. I still use shrink tube, but some of the wires are so small, liquid electrical tape works better.

Originally Posted by MassiveOverkill

Well my booms look like a pimply-faced teenager from moving the arms in and out. I've moved them out so that they're equal to the original H36 size and even swapped boards to make sure that wasn't the issue. I wish I had an RPM gun (timing light couldn't be modded could it?) to see if the motors are providing too much or too little thrust.

I suppose I could try another thrust test using the scale.

I would still check voltage output to the motors from the different boards...One company may use a motor with less RPM but have more torque or vice versa..And too many variable in props with different pitches and lengths.

I recall reading about where you used an X4 board on a hybrid but the end result was it being alot slower...The test im suggesting would reflect rather it was the board supplying less voltage to the motors compared to the other board(s) which resulted in faster flight..Would be an interesting find should it end up being that.

or maybe you meant slower as in response????

As far as props are concerned you only need a prop angle guage to determine rather one prop would give better lift or not..Higher the pitch the greater the thrust?.(but more stress on the motor)..so using a better prop wont necessarily mean its better...One motor or PCB may be weaker and it becomes more apparent when trying to turn a higher pitched prop...Hence the output test im suggesting to see if its the board or not thats weaker.

I would still disconnect the motors before testing and make sure the quad is level so the gyros dont interfere by sending different voltages to different outputs.

I would still check voltage output to the motors from the different boards...One company may use a motor with less RPM but have more torque or vice versa..And too many variable in props with different pitches and lengths.

I recall reading about where you used an X4 board on a hybrid but the end result was it being alot slower...The test im suggesting would reflect rather it was the board supplying less voltage to the motors compared to the other board(s) which resulted in faster flight..Would be an interesting find should it end up being that.

It's more likely that it's the board's programming. Stonecutter did an X4 RX on a V202 frame\motors and experienced the same slowness that I did with my X4 RX on the H36 frame\motors. We've sold our stock V202 motors to customers for various repairs and I've only had one question about variance out of 100 motors that were sold. I would think customers would complain saying "Hey tell your customers not to use these motors on such and such quad because now my quad flies unevenly". I suppose I shouldn't make a final judgement for a couple more months as some of those motors were probably bought for future repairs\spares and haven't been installed yet

or maybe you meant slower as in response????

Both and the response was smoother, which makes sense

As far as props are concerned you only need a prop angle guage to determine rather one prop would give better lift or not..Higher the pitch the greater the thrust?.(but more stress on the motor)..so using a better prop wont necessarily mean its better...One motor or PCB may be weaker and it becomes more apparent when trying to turn a higher pitched prop...Hence the output test im suggesting to see if its the board or not thats weaker.

You're not accounting for prop length or width. You're assuming all props have the same dimensions, which they don't, but prop pitch does have a large effect, but it just can't used alone to determine what prop is best, and prop balance has a large effect on performance as does the board's programming

I would still disconnect the motors before testing and make sure the quad is level so the gyros dont interfere by sending different voltages to different outputs.

This is a valid point, but if the quad is intialized in the holding fixture and the quad doesn't move at all during the tests, the gyros\acclerometers should come into play

im aware of length and width also being a consideration for prop performance..Just trying to help determine a proper test of motors and PC boards as far as power is concerned and not bring props into the equation as testing a motor or PC board....Thats a whole different test of its own.