Welcome Inspire Pilots!
Join our free DJI Inspire community today!
Sign up

How to balance the new 1345T quick release props...

Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
88
Reaction score
10
Location
Maryland
Hi Terry,

Sounds like a good plan. I'll be around and I get notifications on my phone too so if you run across anything odd, get in touch, I'll reply promptly.

You can also start a conversation with me in private and I'll give you my cell number if ya want. We can always try to work through it over the phone as well.
Depending on what you run across, I may be able to offer you some other things to try.
Did you try to find any places that look sort of dull (like where a dab of compound used to be?)
If you're not sure what I mean, have a look at the photo I posted above that shows where the blue compound is located on the motor. I had to use a flashlight and a small magnifying glass to see where one of mine had come off. I'm a little old so I had to use a magnifying glass, you may not need to. :). Mine may have been taken of by the factory though cause it's still in balance.

Thanks, Terry and good luck!

Joe
Thanks, for posting the info on the balancing/checking the motor, first. So, I meant to ask this, yesterday.
I put the 1345T's on myself, based on the design, it looks like they would throw the motor out of balance to start with. Have you tested them with the locks "locked" for balance? Are they balanced with them "unlocked"? Seems like I need to verify the motor is balanced first, without them on, then with locks on, then with the props on.... Or am I going overboard?
thanks,
steve t
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2016
Messages
68
Reaction score
29
Age
54
Location
Hattiesburg, Mississippi
Website
terrylowe.com
OK....got a break this afternoon, so set up the laser vibration sensor.

I checked the 4 motors and 12 props. None needed adjusting. Because nothing ever seems to go that right, I thought that maybe I had messed something up, so tried sticking tape on the prop to intentionally unbalance it. The laser changed from a dot to a line as it should have. No C-shape observed.

I don't have a rod balance kit yet, but will be getting one of those too.
IMG_4404.JPG
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
88
Reaction score
10
Location
Maryland
OK....got a break this afternoon, so set up the laser vibration sensor.

I checked the 4 motors and 12 props. None needed adjusting. Because nothing ever seems to go that right, I thought that maybe I had messed something up, so tried sticking tape on the prop to intentionally unbalance it. The laser changed from a dot to a line as it should have. No C-shape observed.

I don't have a rod balance kit yet, but will be getting one of those too.
View attachment 6905
Terry,
That is great news, everything is OK. Interesting that everything is OK. In the past on the phantom2 I found unbalanced DJI props. The Inspire 1 props, the screw on ones, I found one that was out of balance out of 12 I had. Static balancing on both. This dynamic balance makes so much more sense. But, a lot more work.
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Messages
355
Reaction score
180
Checked recently 4 sets of props, only 3 out of 16 were OK.

Terry: don't run the motors without props!

Chris
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
97
Reaction score
28
Age
59
Thanks, for posting the info on the balancing/checking the motor, first. So, I meant to ask this, yesterday.
I put the 1345T's on myself, based on the design, it looks like they would throw the motor out of balance to start with. Have you tested them with the locks "locked" for balance? Are they balanced with them "unlocked"? Seems like I need to verify the motor is balanced first, without them on, then with locks on, then with the props on.... Or am I going overboard?
thanks,
steve t
Very, very good question, Terry!

I didn't realize that you had installed the 1345T locking hub conversion kit.

Mine is the Pro version which come with the 1345T props and locking mechanisms. Mine has the 3510H higher KV motors (made for being able to handle the 20 ounces of extra weight of the X5 and X5R cameras).

If I'm not mistaken, didn't the Inspire 1 come with a screw on prop first, then they offered a snap on cap to prevent the prop from spinning off, then they come up with a 1345S prop that locked over top of a center piece that attached to the original E800 3510 motor (adapter kit for the 1345S props), then finally come up with the 1345T prop that was designed to work with the 3510H higher KV motor?

I don't see how the 1345T prop with the locking tab mechanism would work right with the E800 3510 motor since that motor shouldn't have the counterbalance weight inside of the motor housing like the 3510H motor housing, "Unless" the new 1345T add on conversion kit was made especially for the E800 3510 motor "And" has the needed counterweights built into the conversion kit itself.
Are your motors the E800 3510 model?

Can you do me a favor? Have a look at the photos in one of my earlier posts that show the screwdriver with the black marks on it stuck in the side of the motor at the top (through the vent holes). There is a 3mm difference in depth from the locking tab side and the side that is 90° from that position? (with the tabs in the locked position)
Do the same as I did with measuring the depth of the vent holes and if the distance from the outer part of the of the housing to where the small screwdriver bottoms out is the same, then the new conversion kit "Must" have built-in counterweights. I would say that those conversion kits can't be used on the new 3510H motors which already have the counterweight inside of the motor housing.

To answer your question, yes, it does look like these new add on locking hubs would throw it out of balance on the E800 3510 motor "unless" they added some type of counterweight to the add on conversion kit.

It would make sense to see if the motors are balanced with the locking hubs on those E800 3510 motors with the locking tabs in the locked position. There will still be a very, very slight imbalance there without the props since part of the tab weight is calculated into the balance of the props themselves. That very slight imbalance would be nothing to worry about if they in fact "DID" add weight to the add on kits only.

Either way, I am very curious if there is a difference in the depth in the vent holes on the E800 3510 motors.

You're line of thinking on this is spot on!! It makes perfect sense unless they did make the add on kits especially for the E800 3510 motors and "NOT" the new 3510H motors.

My two filming associates both have the Pro models too so "we" don't have access to the Inspire 1 model with the E800 3510 motors.

It wouldn't make sense for the original E800 3510 motors to have counterweights built-in since they originally used those screw on props.

The depth of the vent holes to the center should be the same on every vent hole on the E800 3510 motor if I'm right about the add on conversion kits being made only for the E800 3510 motors.

I hope this helps.

I know that if you or someone could let me know about the depth of those vent holes on the original motors, it would go a long way toward us knowing exactly how they worked this out.

Keep in touch and thank you! All of this is helping everyone here.

Sincerely,

Joe
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
97
Reaction score
28
Age
59
Checked recently 4 sets of props, only 3 out of 16 were OK.

Terry: don't run the motors without props!

Chris
Hi Chris,

I very respectfully disagree with this advice.

The motors get very little airflow from the props and the airflow from the props blow down on the outlet side of the air coming out of the motor which means that the airflow from the motor blows the prop airflow to the side since the airflow from the prop is less than the airflow coming out of the motor (at the point where it meets the motor and yes, this was just tested moments ago using smoke with the prop on). The air (and smoke) is all completely blown away from the motor. These motors have their own very efficient cooling system. Air flows into the bottom and flows out of the top.

If you think about it, most electric cars and trucks don't have external fans for the motors unless they are very, very high power racing cars and trucks that draw huge amounts of current, even then they usually use large heat sinks on the housing and they are usually inrunner motors which are worse at dissipating heat than outrunners. Yes, there are many cars and trucks with outrunners too. The only thing that has a fan on it on a car or truck is the ESC. The ESCs on these Inspires are sealed and handle less current than you think (only about 4 amps each). Have a look, they're sealed up by the housing at the end of the arm. Even the S800 ESCs are on the bottom of the motor completely out of the airflow of the props and sealed as well.

Have a look at >>>>THESE <<<<< motors, yes, some have a little more in the way of a heat sink but these are high end, high power 540 motors designed for 155 amps of load. I used to build and race these things when my son was growing up.

These Inspires only draw an average of 14 amps and that's for all 4 motors, that's only 4 amps per motor.
High amperage = high heat dissipation requirements. Low amperage = low heat dissipation requirements.
Low heat = efficiency and longevity.

I've used a Fluke temp gun with an extremely reliable emissivity setting feature made for various materials like dull cast aluminum and measured the temp of the motors running with and without the props and there was only about 2 degrees difference in the temperature and that was a test done on my Inspire Pro. I've done this test with several of my RC machines to test for efficiency and excessive heat. I test and evaluate everything I buy or build before I fly it or run it so I know what is safe and what is not. What will last and what won't, etc.

Another example are many types and high end brands of electric helicopters where the motors are completely blocked from airflow from the main rotor. Many helicopters have the motor in the middle of the airframe and are completely blocked from direct airflow.
Like >>>>THIS <<<< one. The electric motor is completely blocked by the canopy! It's a 700mm class electric helicopter made by SAB which is a very well known and very reputable brand. The one in the link is a competition helicopter. It doesn't have any additional heat sinks or a cooling fan, I know, I own one and never had a problem. These things are designed for temps at 160° F and the Inspire is no different!

I even put a K type temp probe complete with a zero degree cold junction compensator and an AD595 processor on an electric multirotor motor to record the temps in flight.
The temps in flight were more than twice that of one running with no prop on the ground and.....in the house at room temperature.
Without the prop, the motor is not under load and again, has it's own efficient cooling system.

Sorry, but I just couldn't help but to chime in on this one considering my extensive background in all aspects of these machines.

It does not hurt to run the motors without props.

I promise, I'm not trying to start an argument here at all. I just have more data than I really need to backup my words. If needed, I could load this thread up with the hard data to back up what I just said. Data straight from manufactures of these motors that include maximum temps.

You can run an Inspire with no props wide open all day long and never get it above warm to touch (which is much lower than the temps they run at during flight).

Someone earlier was saying not to pick the copter up by the motors. What? Uh, that's how the copter is picked up and flown to begin with. I'm NOT comparing your statement with this one!!!! :)

I'm trying to help people by sharing years of deep and extensive experience and research, not discourage them or confuse them.

I really tried to ignore this but people don't need to be afraid to run an electric motor at no load with it's own completely efficient cooling system when it's designed to run at temps much higher and under a much, much higher load.

Very respectfully,

Joe
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
97
Reaction score
28
Age
59
OK....got a break this afternoon, so set up the laser vibration sensor.

I checked the 4 motors and 12 props. None needed adjusting. Because nothing ever seems to go that right, I thought that maybe I had messed something up, so tried sticking tape on the prop to intentionally unbalance it. The laser changed from a dot to a line as it should have. No C-shape observed.

I don't have a rod balance kit yet, but will be getting one of those too.
View attachment 6905

That's Great news and it's a great looking setup!! If and when there is a "Next Time", you'll have everything needed to do it again with very little effort.
Thanks for posting the photo too!

I haven't flown my S1000 but twice since I've had my Inspire Pro. That was only cause I needed to use a Black Magic Pocket Cinema Camera for a specific project.
I wish my others were as easy to setup and as user friendly as these are.

Very glad it worked out for you. :)
3 out of 8 of my props were out of balance but not by a much. I chose to sand mine this time instead of adding the monocote strips like I did with the S800 and S1000, there's less to sand on these :)

Good job!

I think there's enough material in this thread for others to know just by reading to be able to figure out what to do.

Joe
 
  • Like
Reactions: Terry Lowe
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
97
Reaction score
28
Age
59
Checked recently 4 sets of props, only 3 out of 16 were OK.

Terry: don't run the motors without props!

Chris
Chris,

I sincerely hope I didn't offend you or embarrass you by my first reply to this statement!!!
If I did, I sincerely and wholeheartedly apologize!!!

Please accept my apology if I did offend you or embarrass you?

Sincerely,

Joe
 
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
176
Reaction score
13
Gentleman, does anyone know of a balancer that can be used to balance the 1345T quick release props used on the Inspire V2.0 model, for those who may want to static balance the props, over the dynamic balancing method as shown. : )

Hey Joe R, with all your knowledge and know how, maybe you would consider fabricating a balance rod which can merely slip into the inner hub of the 1345Tquick release props? : )
I'm sure there are many who would be interested in such an item.
I do realize the more precise balancing method may be by accomplished using the laser method with attaching hubs, but I'm also thinking the static method of balancing propellers had been actively used on many RC aircraft too over the years, and such a balance rod for these props would be welcomed by many as well. : )

Regards,
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
97
Reaction score
28
Age
59
Hi Skynet1,

I totally agree that something needs to be made to be able to static balance the 1345T props.

I've been thinking this whole thing over from time to time and here's what I've come up with so far:

The motors can be checked just by spooling them up "without" the props and held by hand at the arm next to each motor to see if they are out of balance, there should be a very, very slight vibration because a slight portion of the props contribute to the final balance and without the props, that portion is missing.
I confirmed this by using a broken prop that one of my photography colleagues had from his Inspire Pro (of all things, the prop was dropped and accidentally stepped on, go figure). I cut the blades off of that prop, then put the center part of that prop on one of the motors and suddenly there were NO vibrations at all.

Then to static balance the props, a slight modification to gray52's design could be used to balance the 1345T props with a high degree of accuracy.
All that would need to be done is add a little side weight to gray52's design to make it dead on.
I was thinking that a round disc could be added toward the bottom of his design, then add weight similar to the portion of the actual locking tabs that would fit exactly where the locking tabs are placed when they are in the locked position. In other words, the balancing adapter would have a thin tab of it's own on each side of the disc to lock onto the prop. It wouldn't really have to lock though, just have the right amount of weight there and be in the same place as they are when in use.
The disc would hold the mock locking tabs and serve another purpose at the same time, you would press the prop on to the point where the bottom of the prop is against the disc so it would assure that it spins true.

I could do a drawing in CAD (a step file or a solids works file or whatever is needed), then have someone like gray52 (Hint, hint) make them so they would slip over a standard balancing rod (just like what he already did with the one he has now). That should do it. One for CW and one for CCW and you're all set.
Note: One of them would have to be made as a prototype, then tested to make sure it is in fact the right amount of weight on each side.
I can use a calculation method that accounts for the density of the carbon fiber reinforced plastic. All I have to do is weigh a certain size portion of the broken prop that I cut up to find the density of it.
It would be just an educated guess in the calculation part and a prototype would still need to be tested, then after any mods are made (if any are needed), then it could go into production.
I also think that there's an acceptable level with all of this when it comes to the prop balancing adapter. It shouldn't have to be "Dead" perfect to work good enough but it should be very close.

One last thought on this subject (for the moment). "IF" there are still obvious problems after checking the motors by hand while running the motors and static balancing the props, then you could take it to the next level by doing a dynamic balance test. In other words, the dynamic balance method could be used as a last resort.

I'll have to admit that I'm not that familiar with 3D printing but I assume they can print these things out just as accurate as having them machined by a CNC milling machine (usually an aluminum casting first, then machined for parts like this) I know how the 3D printing system works, I've just never used or tested any parts from one.

gray52 has photos of his design and there's some discussion about his design on page two of this thread.

Thank you Skynet1 for bringing this up! It truly is a group effort. We're dealing with a new complex design that requires collaboration between the actual users in my opinion! So, Thanks again!! :)

Not forgetting EJ Harris here. Maybe he is interested in getting involved in this?

I'd be happy to take care of the design, the calculations and the CAD thing but I'm not interested in the production end. Just don't have the time but I will take the time to do the calculations and the drawing.


Below are links to photos of gray52's design
Image 1 - http://www.inspirepilots.com/attachments/image-jpeg.5464/

Image 2 - http://www.inspirepilots.com/attachments/image-jpeg.5463/

Kindest regards,

Joe
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Messages
355
Reaction score
180
Chris,

I sincerely hope I didn't offend you or embarrass you by my first reply to this statement!!!
If I did, I sincerely and wholeheartedly apologize!!!

Please accept my apology if I did offend you or embarrass you?

Sincerely,

Joe

Hi Joe,

relax, all is good! I know it is difficult these days were everyone is offended by opinions from others, no matter which subject ;-)

At first, i'm not an engineer for motor design nor an electronics genius like some others here AND I agree, if you have just the motor in focus, temperature is propably not an issue. But it is not that easy because there are other components playing in the game. I hope a can explain it with my 3rd grade english ;-)

1. The rev limit for the controller could be reached or exceeded. The electronic commutation in the controller may not be as fast as the motor would like to rotate at the given voltage, the controller could get into a synchronism loss, sudden breaking and other reactions from the confused controller could cause a damage through too large magnetig forces or currents.

2. The rev limit for the motor could be reached or exceeded. If you exceed the speed limit of an inside running motor (not the case with the i1!) the magnets could simply fly off from the shaft. That's not an issue on the outside runners but you still have a mechanical rev limit (manufacturers recommendation!) to prevent a "wobbling" motor flange etc...

As mentioned before, i'm not an expert, i got my information from a small company which builds custom designed brushless motors (AHM - but i don't know if he is still in the business) and also from the guys from HiSystems (mikrocontroller.com). You will find a lot if their knowledge in DJI products (just a guess) ;) but that's another story.

I don't say that running the motor (especially on full throttle) without props kills immediately your copter but there are too many variables and it could be dangerous to give a general "ah no problem!"-advice to the people.

Chris
 
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
176
Reaction score
13

Joe R Quoted I'd be happy to take care of the design, the calculations and the CAD thing but I'm not interested in the production end. Just don't have the time but I will take the time to do the calculations and the drawing.


Below are links to photos of gray52's design
Image 1 - http://www.inspirepilots.com/attachments/image-jpeg.5464/

Image 2 - http://www.inspirepilots.com/attachments/image-jpeg.5463/

Kindest regards,

Joe


Precisely, Joe.
I know I've had fairly good success at balancing the propellers on my phantom models using the static balancing method, and so such a balancer as you have described would get us pretty close to perfect are my thoughts.
Thanks for inputting your thoughts on design of this, hopefully we can get someone with the required equipment and time to take the bull by the horns, so to speak. : ), and take this concept to the next level.
I realize this project is not something which is going to make someone rich, but would probably make many pilots more than willing to purchase such a prop balancer.
I believe you yourself at first may have been one who had thought EJ's prop balancer was of such in design that would permit easy attachment to the 1345T props without the need of detaching the motor assembly hub to balance. I purchased EJ's balance rod thinking the "hub" referred to in his product description was that of the center portion on the propeller itself, and not the portion of the hub which had been part of the motor assembly. Oops! my bad. : )

Thanks again,
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
97
Reaction score
28
Age
59
Joe R Quoted I'd be happy to take care of the design, the calculations and the CAD thing but I'm not interested in the production end. Just don't have the time but I will take the time to do the calculations and the drawing.


Below are links to photos of gray52's design
Image 1 - http://www.inspirepilots.com/attachments/image-jpeg.5464/

Image 2 - http://www.inspirepilots.com/attachments/image-jpeg.5463/

Kindest regards,

Joe


Precisely, Joe.
I know I've had fairly good success at balancing the propellers on my phantom models using the static balancing method, and so such a balancer as you have described would get us pretty close to perfect are my thoughts.
Thanks for inputting your thoughts on design of this, hopefully we can get someone with the required equipment and time to take the bull by the horns, so to speak. : ), and take this concept to the next level.
I realize this project is not something which is going to make someone rich, but would probably make many pilots more than willing to purchase such a prop balancer.
I believe you yourself at first may have been one who had thought EJ's prop balancer was of such in design that would permit easy attachment to the 1345T props without the need of detaching the motor assembly hub to balance. I purchased EJ's balance rod thinking the "hub" referred to in his product description was that of the center portion on the propeller itself, and not the portion of the hub which had been part of the motor assembly. Oops! my bad. : )

Thanks again,
Hi Skynet1,

Yep, I too thought that EJ's balancing tool wouldn't require removing the hubs from the motors (CW & CCW) to static balance the props. The photos on Amazon didn't show much in the way of closeup details which made it difficult to determine how it is used so I just assumed that I could simply attach the prop and do the balancing.

If gray52 or EJ aren't interested in making the revised design, I can ask gray52 for permission to use his part of the design and get a friend of mine who does have the time to make the new design (who also has a 3D printer). They'll have to workout the legal stuff between themselves. I'll be staying out of that one. :) I'm sure they can come to an agreement "if" gray52 isn't interested in producing these himself.

My time involved in doing the "working" drawings in my CAD system will simply be my contribution without monetary compensation. I just want to help out in any way I can. "Working" drawings means that anyone can take the file and print it or machine it without having to make any adjustments to the drawing. The file can be uploaded directly to the CNC's interface and start machining. They'll have to do their own tool paths if they are going to be machined. I'm sure of the exact process for 3D printing so I won't comment on that part.

I'll send gray52 a message to see if he's interested and as soon as I finish the drawings, I'll do a screenshot of it and post it here for all to see what it'll look like.

I've also have had very good results many times by static balancing alone. I used the dynamic balancing method on my S800 and S1000 to make everything as smooth as possible to prevent overworking the sensors in the IMU and to remove as much vibration as possible from the gimbal dampers.

Thanks, Skynet1,

I'm confident we can get this thing off the ground somehow and hopefully very soon. :)

Sincerely,

Joe
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
97
Reaction score
28
Age
59
Hi Chris,

First, I commend you on doing your homework and much of what you wrote is true. You might should have done your homework before making your first statement and it would have been even better if you had done your homework on the Inspire motors in particular and not just RC electric motors in general. Theses are much different than sport helicopter and airplane motor/ESC combinations.

To begin with, the electronic gyros and accelerometers in the IMU are worked much harder during flight than they are while the copter is sitting on a table, this is particularly true while flying in windy and gusty conditions. I made people aware that they should run the motors while in the atti mode vs GPS mode which prevents the sensors from needless output signals from the IMU to the aircraft's computer and finally to the ESC and motors..

The current firmware will not allow the motors to spool up close to what the rpms that these motors are designed for. See the document below that points out that the firmware prevents the motors from achieving fast climb rates and prevent fast forward flight in an effort to prevent the motors from drawing too much current from the battery and thereby preventing the battery's overload protection circuitry from shutting down while in flight. It's kind of like an electronic governor that is controlled by the firmware and aircraft computer rather than the ESCs governor (not even sure if the Inspire's ESCs have a governor, probably not since the motor speed is controlled primarily by the aircraft's computer and firmware).

The 3510H motors are rated at 420KV which means that they will turn 420 rpms for every volt applied to the motor. Not getting into wattage, torque and number of coil wire turns since the kv rating is tested and rated under a No Load condition by the manufacturer.

Before telling people here that they could run their motors without the props on, I tested the rpms at full speed with the battery at 25.7 volts. (Which I just replicated because I didn't take photos of my first test).

25.7 volts at 420 rpms per volt comes to 10,794 rpms which is what these motors are designed to turn at based on the current battery voltage, diameter of the motor, height of the motor and the the number of coil wire turns.

I measured the rpms using a photo type tachometer which uses a strip of reflective tape placed on the motor housing to determine the motor speed. (See document below that shows and explains the type of tach I used). I've had this tach for a few years and I primarily use it to test industrial motors. When compared to other higher end tachs, this one was found to be highly accurate and reliable.

As you can see in one of the photos below, the maximum rpms were 8,499. That is only 78% of the rpms this motor was designed to run at so there IS NO overrunning of the motors going on with the Inspire copters while on the table with no props. This also means that there are no high feedback voltage signals feeding back into the ESCs or the aircraft's computer.
Hall effect sensors are placed on the motor's outer edge inside of the motor and feed motor speed information back to the ESC and to the aircraft's computer.
I don't know it the Inspires have hall effect sensors or not but when they are used, that's where they are placed (I didn't have the need to research whether or not Inspires use hall effect sensors).

Another photo shows where and how I put the reflective tape on the motor housing. Another document below shows that placing the reflective tape on the outside of the motor housing is a standard and acceptable method.

I'm not asking anyone to just believe my photos or my words but I do challenge anyone to do their own test to prove to themselves that they will get very close to the same results that I did.
Please, go ahead, test it yourself, don't take my word for it!

As far as overrunning an electric motor goes, you would have to have an external force applied to it to overrun the motors.
Example: While flying one of my electric competition 700 class single rotor helicopters and while in a competition one day, I put the helicopter in a high altitude nose down dive at midstick and when I flared it out, the rotor rpms shot up to over 800 rpms higher than it was designed for, again, that was rotor rpms, the motor went much higher than that considering the 7:1 gear ratio. Not good AT ALL so I had to be sure not to do that again (I used the data from an in flight data logger that is built into the ESC to gather that information).
Note: RC single rotor helicopters are highly capable of landing safely by performing an autorotation without power. An autorotation is where you lose power and when that happens, you put the helicopter in a steep dive (but not straight down), the rotor will lose a considerable amount of head speed during that dive. As soon as you flare the helicopter near the ground, the rotor rpms will very quickly increase to produce the needed lift to be able to land it under control. During the autorotation, the motor is not engaged because of a one way bearing that disengages the motor from the rotor which also prevents drag on the rotor by the motor and gearing.

Another example: A friend of mine put his electric airplane in a nose dive without reducing the throttle and seriously overrun the motor. He lost power in that stunt and we think it was because he fried the electronics (not sure if it was the ESC or something else, I didn't follow up with him to learn exactly what happened but I do suspect it was the ESC). He really should have throttled back during that nose dive!

I wish there were a way to autorotate a multirotor but there isn't because they don't have collective pitch props. The only solution for multirotors is to use an emergency parachute (which I have).

In case you didn't know this and I'm not saying that you don't but if the motor is not being controlled and run by a battery and an ESC, you can connect a drill to the output shaft of the motor, I'm not referring to the Inspire motors because there's no place to connect the drill, I'm referring to a standard outrunner or inrunner with a straight output shaft that's configured to add a pinion gear, then hook up a volt meter to the wires. Turn the drill on and you will see that voltage is being produced by the motor itself which means that these motors also act as a generator (that's the principle behind gas powered electric generators). "IF" you overrun a motor while connected to a battery and ESC, it will start producing excessive voltage that will feed back into the ESC and immediately conflict with the electronics in the ESC, in many cases to the point where it can and likely will fry the ESC.

I am "SERIOUSLY OFFENDED" by your statement of "give a general "ah no problem!"-advice to the people". YOU DON'T KNOW ME!
DO NOT assume that you know what I did or didn't do "OR" what was in my mind! You have no clue what trouble I went through to make sure that it was in fact OK to run theses motors with no props!!!
You just "Attacked my Character" "WITHOUT ANY" basis "Or" evidence so I will NOT apologize for what I just wrote this time!!!

I know you wanted to defend yourself but you really should know exactly what you're talking about first, and know what I did (backed up by evidence) before attacking me (or anyone else for that matter).

I don't normally write like this. I pride myself on treating people with respect and kindness and I always try my best to be helpful, BUT, I DO have the right to defend my character when it's being attacked like this!
You stepped over the line, sir when you attacked my character by stating that I blindly and carelessly advised people that it was safe to run the motors without the props!

If this gets me kicked off of here, then so be it. I try to help people and this is what I get.

This has happened before on another forum a few years ago while trying to help other people that were stumped on something, I wasn't kicked off but the other person was! I chose to quit because I don't need this C**P!
I should have known better than to get involved again. It seems to never fail that "someone" in the crowd wants to attack me with no evidence or probable cause.

I was very polite and even apologized deeply to you but you still attacked my character. WHY did you do that? (That's a rhetorical question, meaning I don't expect a response)

I'm done with this discussion with you.

BT47 Battery Voltage.jpg

Photo Tach (Photo Tech Brand) Reflective Tape on Motor.jpg

Inspire motor 3510H RPM Test.jpg

Inspire 1 Pro and V2.0 Firmware Changes.JPG

Proper Method of Measuring Motor RPMs - Unloaded.JPG

I do still wish you all the best and I do pray that all of your flights are safe ones!!

Joe
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2016
Messages
355
Reaction score
180
Hi Joe,

i have just overflown your posting and I'm a little shocked, my comment was not meant as an attack (or anything like that) in any way against you nor was it meant to be disrespectful. If you got it that way, then sorry.

I will read your posting tomorrow carefully and try to understand it, as I said, I'm not a professional.

Chris
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
97
Reaction score
28
Age
59
Hi Joe,

i have just overflown your posting and I'm a little shocked, my comment was not meant as an attack (or anything like that) in any way against you nor was it meant to be disrespectful. If you got it that way, then sorry.

I will read your posting tomorrow carefully and try to understand it, as I said, I'm not a professional.

Chris

Your statement "give a general"ah no problem!"-advice to the people" clearly insinuates that I did not have any data to back up my advice. It blatantly insinuated that I just posted it without knowing what I was talking about or had any regard for people's motors or electronic equipment.
It was also done without any evidence that I "Didn't" have any data to back it up.

Sorry you can't see that!

Be careful what you say. If you didn't mean it that way, you should have worded it much differently.

You and everyone else here can count on ONE thing!
IF I do not KNOW what I'm talking about or have any data to back it up, I will NOT pretend that I do know and I will state that I do not know about it!
Like the 3D printing subject, I clearly stated that I didn't know much about it which was a clear indication that I won't pretend to know about something that I clearly do not know about.

Joe
 
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
176
Reaction score
13
I'm confident we can get this thing off the ground somehow and hopefully very soon. :)

Sincerely,

Joe

OK then, hopefully we can move forward with this so all of us may make our Inspire model all that it can be. : )

Thanks,
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
97
Reaction score
28
Age
59
I'm confident we can get this thing off the ground somehow and hopefully very soon. :)

Sincerely,

Joe

OK then, hopefully we can move forward with this so all of us may make our Inspire model all that it can be. : )

Thanks,

Absolutely! :)

I just got back from one of our Sunday afternoon 3 miles hikes. That always helps to keep the blood flowing and clear my head. :)
I've already done the calculations for density and the drawing of the center hub of the prop. I'll begin working on the drawing of the balancing adapter tomorrow afternoon.
I should have it done by Tuesday or Wednesday.
My CAD software has a motion and balance analysis tool that helps a lot. It isn't perfect but it does put me in the ballpark.
It also does an analysis on mating parts (for proper fit). It will let me know if I did something wrong. In my case, that's a great tool!! Lol

We'll getter done (as we say here in my neck of the woods). :)

Thanks, Skynet1.

Joe
 
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
176
Reaction score
13
Absolutely! :)

I just got back from one of our Sunday afternoon 3 miles hikes. That always helps to keep the blood flowing and clear my head. :)
I've already done the calculations for density and the drawing of the center hub of the prop. I'll begin working on the drawing of the balancing adapter tomorrow afternoon.
I should have it done by Tuesday or Wednesday.
My CAD software has a motion and balance analysis tool that helps a lot. It isn't perfect but it does put me in the ballpark.
It also does an analysis on mating parts (for proper fit). It will let me know if I did something wrong. In my case, that's a great tool!! Lol

We'll getter done (as we say here in my neck of the woods). :)

Thanks, Skynet1.

Joe
No, Thank you for all your efforts. ;)
 

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
19,134
Messages
188,164
Members
28,205
Latest member
Silverbird