Carbon Fiber Props

[Digdat0]

I haven't been following this thread, but wanted to share some results. I've been playing with the OEM stock props vs Tmotor Carbon Fiber. Wanted to share my data points.

The first test was a distance test on stock battery (no camera on the aircraft) where i flew to 25k and back in both stock and CF and then out to 20k and back. "TMCF" is the carbon fiber props.

And yesterday, I did a hover test. I also added in a third set of props, some Graupner eprops. Those were run on two OLD 3rd party batteries, so i'm not giving it much credence until i can test with OEM battery. This was also without camera, but had 210g of weight strapped to it.

The data points, IMO, are inconclusive .. but do point toward the tmotor CF props taking less battery. Anyways, had to share with the community.

 

[Dounin Front]

I'm skeptical of the DJI CF props and even more so of off brands.
BTW: Dji CF props weigh slightly more than Dji OE props. Don't know why, they just do. Different plastic, I guess, or not much/any CF in them.

 

[phxbird57]

I haven't been following this thread, but wanted to share some results. I've been playing with the OEM stock props vs Tmotor Carbon Fiber. Wanted to share my data points.

The first test was a distance test on stock battery (no camera on the aircraft) where i flew to 25k and back in both stock and CF and then out to 20k and back. "TMCF" is the carbon fiber props.

And yesterday, I did a hover test. I also added in a third set of props, some Graupner eprops. Those were run on two OLD 3rd party batteries, so i'm not giving it much credence until i can test with OEM battery. This was also without camera, but had 210g of weight strapped to it.

The data points, IMO, are inconclusive .. but do point toward the tmotor CF props taking less battery. Anyways, had to share with the community.

Thanks Dig's Not sure if I can understand that..... I was thinking the same with the DJI CF props Not getting any more speed but it does seen like I get a longer flight time. Which I thing it was "with the birds" said some thing indirecting " In doing so you will need to consider the almost certain additional current demand that will result from the prop running at lower RPM for the same thrust delivery and likley loss of efficiency" If your running at a lower RPM but getting the maxim speed ( if I under stand it correctly). To me it would be more efficient . But some of you guys are way over my head.

 

[With The Birds]

Thanks Dig's Not sure if I can understand that..... I was thinking the same with the DJI CF props Not getting any more speed but it does seen like I get a longer flight time. Which I thing it was "with the birds" said some thing indirecting " In doing so you will need to consider the almost certain additional current demand that will result from the prop running at lower RPM for the same thrust delivery and likley loss of efficiency" If your running at a lower RPM but getting the maxim speed ( if I under stand it correctly). To me it would be more efficient . But some of you guys are way over my head.

I should qualify my comment re efficiency. I found that running CF prop blades and higher pitch and lower head speed on RC helis I often got shorter flight times as the motor was less efficient at lower RPM. I had assumed that DJI's so named "tuned propulsion system" would be optimised for the standard props. The above depicted figures would seem to suggest this might not be the case.

 

[Dounin Front]

I haven't been following this thread, but wanted to share some results. I've been playing with the OEM stock props vs Tmotor Carbon Fiber. Wanted to share my data points.

The first test was a distance test on stock battery (no camera on the aircraft) where i flew to 25k and back in both stock and CF and then out to 20k and back. "TMCF" is the carbon fiber props.

And yesterday, I did a hover test. I also added in a third set of props, some Graupner eprops. Those were run on two OLD 3rd party batteries, so i'm not giving it much credence until i can test with OEM battery. This was also without camera, but had 210g of weight strapped to it.

The data points, IMO, are inconclusive .. but do point toward the tmotor CF props taking less battery. Anyways, had to share with the community.

Not laboratory tests, so probably inconclusive. IMO
If you like them, use them. That's mostly how we roll.

 

[Digdat0]

Not laboratory tests, so probably inconclusive. IMO
If you like them, use them. That's mostly how we roll.

agree'd! Thought it would be interesting to share nevertheless! In theory .. they should take less battery over distance. And for me, flying 10miles, 2 minutes is 5000 feet extra and could be the difference between a record, or making it back! That said, its very subjective due to the type of aircraft and conditions. EIther way, was fun!

 

[With The Birds]

I haven't been following this thread, but wanted to share some results. I've been playing with the OEM stock props vs Tmotor Carbon Fiber. Wanted to share my data points.

The first test was a distance test on stock battery (no camera on the aircraft) where i flew to 25k and back in both stock and CF and then out to 20k and back. "TMCF" is the carbon fiber props.

And yesterday, I did a hover test. I also added in a third set of props, some Graupner eprops. Those were run on two OLD 3rd party batteries, so i'm not giving it much credence until i can test with OEM battery. This was also without camera, but had 210g of weight strapped to it.

The data points, IMO, are inconclusive .. but do point toward the tmotor CF props taking less battery. Anyways, had to share with the community.

Just having a look at the hover numbers. Arguably the hover test provides the most controlled (at least to the extent the variables are consistent and repeatable) conditions. If the tests were run with the same battery it would be a great comparison. As is based on the numbers there is no efficiency advantage realised from the CF props.

 

[Numone]

Just having a look at the hover numbers. Arguably the hover test provides the most controlled (at least to the extent the variables are consistent and repeatable) conditions. If the tests were run with the same battery it would be a great comparison. As is based on the numbers there is no efficiency advantage realised from the CF props.

Yeah, I agree. Given that, it's probably worthwhile undertaking the hover test indoors. That'll remove any external factors, albeit it wouldn't be "real world" of course.

 

[johnyoung]

I commented earlier that DJI CF props look identical to their OE props (except the color) I can see no evidence of CF on the surface, as we often do with CF products.
My question to you, since you unfortunately shredded a couple, is did you notice anything inside of them that might suggest CF?
Mine are now in my toolbox, but I'm still not willing to split one open for inspection.
Please let us know what you found.

No not at all, there were no fibre as would be expected from snapping a fishing rod for example.

Sent from my F3311 using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[strike force]

I have been using them for almost two years and I am very pleased with them.
The one time I used the DJI props, which I took out of the packaging, inspected and properly placed them on my P3Pro. I had a great flight and hit the RTH when it was time.
Then when my P3Pro was maybe 10 seconds from landing all hell broke loose. Suddenly, one of the props split into two pieces and my drone hit the ground breaking the gimbal and damaging the camera. A friend who was with me saw the two pieces of the prop fluttering down like two leaves. We looked for them for over an hour, but no luck.
Since the hub of the propeller was not on on my drone, I surmised that the prop split right at the hub.
The carbon fiber props do not break easily from my personal experience. I used the factory props that came with the Aries. That Drone had about a six second lag and my BlackBird went into a number of trees and the propellers were damaged most of the time, so I decided to purchase a set of carbon fiber props and I have used them every since. They do seem to be louder and from personal experience, they can cut skin like a knife.
I have not used DJI PROPS since that expensive experience.
I guess I will try the DJI props once again, since most of the people who fly Phantoms use the factory ones without any trouble. By the way, these propellers are a blend of carbon fiber an some kind of plastic.


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots

 

[Dounin Front]

I have been using them for almost two years and I am very pleased with them.
The one time I used the DJI props, which I took out of the packaging, inspected and properly placed them on my P3Pro. I had a great flight and hit the RTH when it was time.
Then when my P3Pro was maybe 10 seconds from landing all hell broke loose. Suddenly, one of the props split into two pieces and my drone hit the ground breaking the gimbal and damaging the camera. A friend who was with me saw the two pieces of the prop fluttering down like two leaves. We looked for them for over an hour, but no luck.
Since the hub of the propeller was not on on my drone, I surmised that the prop split right at the hub.
The carbon fiber props do not break easily from my personal experience. I used the factory props that came with the Aries. That Drone had about a six second lag and my BlackBird went into a number of trees and the propellers were damaged most of the time, so I decided to purchase a set of carbon fiber props and I have used them every since. They do seem to be louder and from personal experience, they can cut skin like a knife.
I have not used DJI PROPS since that expensive experience.
I guess I will try the DJI props once again, since most of the people who fly Phantoms use the factory ones without any trouble.


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots

Really too bad you couldn't find the missing prop pieces to get a better idea of how or why it failed.

 

[Fred72933]

Are they genuine CF? I just returned a crocodile panerai watch band, they sure did an excellent job of the fake embossing on leather. Looked the real deal but it's not what I paid for.

If the hubs are a different material keep an eye on the bonding, if they aren't look out for cracking.

I would listen carefully while flexing. Cracking sounds are bad.

These props will not allow your AC to fly faster. The flight controller will control the max pitch angle to gaurantee that.

They appear to be CF

The hubs also appear to be cast around the CF as there are no attachment points.

Sent from my SM-G900V using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[Numone]

Just seem like they're more trouble than they're worth.

 

[Dounin Front]

They appear to be CF

The hubs also appear to be cast around the CF as there is no attachment points.

Sent from my SM-G900V using PhantomPilots mobile app

1. Can you feel the weave anywhere along the edges, 2. have you tried balancing them and 3. have you compared their weight to the OE props? (Dji CF props are slightly heavier.)
Just wondering.

 

[Fred72933]

1. Can you feel the weave anywhere along the edges, 2. have you tried balancing them and 3. have you compared their weight to the OE props? (Dji CF props are slightly heavier.)
Just wondering.

1 - No, the resin and the fiber are so tightly bonded, even scrapping a trailing edge leaves a smooth surface. However, in the scrapping, you can see both clear resin and black fiber.
2 - Yes, as best I can. Only one CF prop was heavy on one blade but not much.
3 - DJI originals are 12 grams, HausBell CF props are 24 grams.

 

[Dounin Front]

1 - No, the resin and the fiber are so tightly bonded, even scrapping a trailing edge leaves a smooth surface. However, in the scrapping, you can see both clear resin and black fiber.
2 - Yes, as best I can. Only one CF prop was heavy on one blade but not much.
3 - DJI originals are 12 grams, HausBell CF props are 24 grams.

Wow - the HausBells are twice as heavy as the OE props. That doesn't sound good for many reasons.
BTW: thanks for your answers.

 

[Fred72933]

Wow - the HausBells are twice as heavy as the OE props. That doesn't sound good for many reasons.
BTW: thanks for your answers.

My bad... (fat fingers)
Hit the wrong key, CF are only 14 grams...

 

[Dounin Front]

Thanks for the correction.

 

[With The Birds]

I have been using them for almost two years and I am very pleased with them.
The one time I used the DJI props, which I took out of the packaging, inspected and properly placed them on my P3Pro. I had a great flight and hit the RTH when it was time.
Then when my P3Pro was maybe 10 seconds from landing all hell broke loose. Suddenly, one of the props split into two pieces and my drone hit the ground breaking the gimbal and damaging the camera. A friend who was with me saw the two pieces of the prop fluttering down like two leaves. We looked for them for over an hour, but no luck.
Since the hub of the propeller was not on on my drone, I surmised that the prop split right at the hub.
The carbon fiber props do not break easily from my personal experience. I used the factory props that came with the Aries. That Drone had about a six second lag and my BlackBird went into a number of trees and the propellers were damaged most of the time, so I decided to purchase a set of carbon fiber props and I have used them every since. They do seem to be louder and from personal experience, they can cut skin like a knife.
I have not used DJI PROPS since that expensive experience.
I guess I will try the DJI props once again, since most of the people who fly Phantoms use the factory ones without any trouble. By the way, these propellers are a blend of carbon fiber an some kind of plastic.


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots

Unless you were exceptionally unlucky the props was either overtightened splitting the hub or installed too loosely allowing it to spin off (unfortunately a common scenario). I have standard props with well over 300 flights in them and no issues.

 

[With The Birds]

They appear to be CF

The hubs also appear to be cast around the CF as there are no attachment points.

Sent from my SM-G900V using PhantomPilots mobile app

For the asking price to the extent real CF is employed it will likely be layed up to the external surface only.

A simple test would be to test for flex. If you can bend them relatively easily I wouldn't bother using them in preference to stock props (unless you want the look, which is a reasonable consideration).

My biggest concern would be whether the hub has similar properties to the OEM props which tend to grip the motor threads sufficiently to prevent spin off when installed correctly. The threads need to be able to deform slightly while maintaining integrity. I would be concerned these hubs may crack.