I have seen some discussion of 3 blade props for the P3. Should the props be shorter than a 2 blade to conserve battery yet generate the same lift? Do they create more drag swinging 3 blades than they create? Does the extra blade in the rotation smooth the vibration transmitted to the craft, and does that effectively remove vibration from the camera in an SE? I'm thinking rigid props right now, but what effect would folding props have in this discussion? Is this a deep rabbit hole?
3 blade props
- Thread starter P3$E pilot
- Start date
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,303
- Reaction score
- 9,247
Somehow I think DJI's propulsion engineers might have worked out a better solution than you'll come up with by finding some random 3-blade props and slapping them on your aircraft.
Is there a particular issue that you feel could be improved?
As a photg, I'm always trying to stabilize any support device as best I can. 3 blades would stabilize the AC but would cost energy with extra drag. And there could also be a discussion of pitch angle and even dihedral of the blades that could advance developement as well. But maybe I have created a rabbit hole...
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,303
- Reaction score
- 9,247
I'm not aware of any problem with stability with the stock props.
Are you sure that 3-blade props would do anything better than the way your Phantom already performs?
Do you have a problem that needs to be fixed?
DJI has some very clever propulsion engineers that designed and matched the battery, ESCs, motors and props to work properly.
They didn't just slap together whatever cheap components they had lying around.
It's extremely doubtful you would achieve any improvements but there's a good chance you would have difficulties getting 3-blade props that were balanced.
Here's what's been discussed around 3-blade props previously: Search Results for Query: 3-blade | DJI Phantom Drone Forum
I'm sure you're right, but DJI also focused on the "medium" and that opens up a whole new world for aftermarket solutions to specific issues that need to be addressed. OK, "Innovation" gets used too much, but its actual meaning is the gradual advancement based on prior knowledge, NOT disruptive companies that break all the rules to get to where they are.
Sorry. /rant
That said, I want to explore the benefits of 3 blade props and expose their deficiencies. You can discuss their composition (Plastic vs CF or whatever) but also discuss tech details like blade pitch and dihdral.
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,303
- Reaction score
- 9,247
What's the issue that needs to be addressed?
My Phantoms have always been perfectly stable and I haven't seen any issue or heard of one from other operators.
I think DJI already took care of this in their design stage.
The results of that search above should be a good place to start.
All the posts I've seen about experimenting with tri-blades, have concluded (at best) no improvement and many have been more negative than that.
A tri-blade will need to provide the same thrust for a given RPM as the DJI offering to meet the performance criteria of the flight controller programming. If it provides more thrust the propulsion system will be commanding a lower RPM for a given thrust with the effect of the motors drawing higher current. The least of the worst detriment you might expect here is lowered efficiency.
N017RW
Premium Pilot
More blades = less efficiency.
The use of multiple blades is to reduce disc diameter for a given application such as ground or fuselage clearance.
They are not performance enhancing per se.
The use of multiple blades is to reduce disc diameter for a given application such as ground or fuselage clearance.
They are not performance enhancing per se.
I think I will once I get more experience as PIC! In the meantime, thanks everyone for the discussion. I'll check out your link, Meta4. Guess I should have searched first.
Funny i just searched this because i saw a quad advert with 3 blade props and i was intrigued if they were any more efficient but after reading thru here i found a very valid point. 3 blades would require less rpm to maintain the same thrust and since this electrical design uses precisely controlled ESC motor drive which is an algorithm of watts, lower voltage need does indeed equate to higher amperage draw, which is the variable that does the most damage and causes the most power demand issues (amps generate the most heat compared to voltage) it makes sense that a faster less loaded rpm is best.
Similar threads
