Silent Super Efficient Propeller!

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

Of course you would. Since you're an idiot, you couldn't understand any
of it. Since you're an idiot, you can't differenatiate between someone
who has a pretty good idea of what he's talking about and a not-even-
wannabe.


it's just who you are.


Be proud, k00k.





Bertie

Nonsense Kaptain Klueless, I know exactly that you are nothing but a wanna
be troll.

I am into vtol craft and thats why i am into the most efficient not so huge propellers, i pilot rc models and am currently testing several designs

the propellers is the most important part of a vtol


engine ofcourse has to be light but todays engines are superb in that aspect

Originally Posted by Lonnie[_3_]

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

Of course you would. Since you're an idiot, you couldn't understand any
of it. Since you're an idiot, you can't differenatiate between someone
who has a pretty good idea of what he's talking about and a not-even-
wannabe.


it's just who you are.


Be proud, k00k.





Bertie

Nonsense Kaptain Klueless, I know exactly that you are nothing but a wanna
be troll.

"Leviterande" wrote in message
...

I am into vtol craft and thats why i am into the most efficient not
so huge propellers, i pilot rc models and am currently testing
several designs

the propellers is the most important part of a vtol


engine ofcourse has to be light but todays engines are superb in that
aspect


Have you reviewed the propeller and rotor types currently flying on state of
the art VTOL aircraft?

"Lonnie" @_#~#@.^net wrote in :


"Leviterande" wrote in
message ...

I am into vtol craft and thats why i am into the most efficient
not so huge propellers, i pilot rc models and am currently testing
several designs

the propellers is the most important part of a vtol


engine ofcourse has to be light but todays engines are superb in that
aspect


Have you reviewed the propeller and rotor types currently flying on
state of the art VTOL aircraft?

Real helpful google boi.


Bertie

"Leviterande" wrote

I am into vtol craft and thats why i am into the most efficient not
so huge propellers, i pilot rc models and am currently testing
several designs

the propellers is the most important part of a vtol


engine ofcourse has to be light but todays engines are superb in that
aspect

I put this to you.

If you look at the latest VTOL series of rotorcraft, since the basic
helicopter design, you will find the answers you seek.

Hint: they don't have screw shaped rotors, for their lift producing
devices.

The Osprey has main rotors about halfway between helicopters of that weight
and prop planes of that weight. Very roughly.

Don't you think they would use the most efficient, smallest, lightest form
of prop that could be invented to do the job?

Hint: The answer is yes.
--
Jim in NC

yes, I have been looking into todays vtols, they either have a complicated large merry go arround rotor system or a very very highly concentrated plumes of air as in the harrier/F35 jet

both are very expensive to maintain, complicated and yet not so practical unless in military.

so some kind of a propeller/ fan/ rotor with no moving part must do the job somehow to get rid with the complexiity and cost and SPACE!



I was just thinking of testing a thick-chord fan with 4 blades and a medium AOA. it should be geard to the motor unless the motor has a very high torque. My idea is that efficiency should go up when one use a geared system

example:

my model vtol/thrust test rig weights around 700grams and teh thrust is around 880g, the power from the electric motor is around 166w

the propeller is a standard slowfly 10x4,7
rpm is around 7000-8000
if we instead took a 7 inch impeller with larger blades moving more air at one revoltuion , i tmeans it makes more drag and resistance to the motor shaft.. now if one calculate the required data and put reduction gear to the motor. the thrust out put should be equal at less rpm and smaller propeller and with the same efficiency!

I could be way wrong but that is just what i think could be possible

On Sep 8, 5:01*am, Leviterande Leviterande.
wrote:
yes, I have been looking into *todays vtols, they either have *a
complicated *large merry go arround rotor system * or a *very very
highly concentrated plumes of air *as in *the harrier/F35 jet

both are very expensive to maintain, complicated and yet not so
practical unless in military. *

so some kind of a *propeller/ fan/ rotor with no moving part *must do
the job somehow to get rid with the complexiity and cost and SPACE!

I was just thinking of *testing a *thick-chord fan with 4 blades and *
a medium AOA. it should be geard to the motor * *unless the motor has a
very high torque. My idea is that efficiency should go up when one use
a geared system

example:

my *model vtol/thrust test rig *weights *around 700grams and *teh
thrust is around 880g, * the power from the electric motor *is around
166w

the propeller is a standard slowfly 10x4,7
rpm is around 7000-8000
if we instead took a 7 inch impeller *with larger blades moving more
air *at one revoltuion *, i tmeans it makes *more drag and resistance
to the motor shaft.. now if one calculate the required data and put
reduction gear to the motor. the thrust out put should be equal at less
rpm and *smaller propeller and with the same efficiency!

I could be way wrong but that is just what i think could be possible

--
Leviterande

I have seen battery powered conventional shaped RC models accelerate
upward vertically. while spinning what seemed like unremarkable props,
so they clearly had thrust exceeding weight. I'm trying to understand
the problem you're trying to solve. Has it to do with using a smaller
engine for a given airframe?

On Sep 8, 3:01 am, Leviterande Leviterande.
wrote:
yes, I have been looking into todays vtols, they either have a
complicated large merry go arround rotor system or a very very
highly concentrated plumes of air as in the harrier/F35 jet

both are very expensive to maintain, complicated and yet not so
practical unless in military.

so some kind of a propeller/ fan/ rotor with no moving part must do
the job somehow to get rid with the complexiity and cost and SPACE!

I was just thinking of testing a thick-chord fan with 4 blades and
a medium AOA. it should be geard to the motor unless the motor has a
very high torque. My idea is that efficiency should go up when one use
a geared system

the propeller is a standard slowfly 10x4,7
rpm is around 7000-8000
if we instead took a 7 inch impeller with larger blades moving more
air at one revoltuion , i tmeans it makes more drag and resistance
to the motor shaft.. now if one calculate the required data and put
reduction gear to the motor. the thrust out put should be equal at less
rpm and smaller propeller and with the same efficiency!

Helicopters and other VTOLs are complicated because they have to
be. One of the things that bugged the early experimenters was
gyroscopic force; any time we change the plane of rotation of a prop
or rotor we get precession, which results in a loss of control unless
the system is designed to deal with it. A fixed-pitch rotor can't do
that, and the larger it is and faster it turns the worse the effects
of precession. Current helicopter designs all take advantage of
precession to tilt the rotor disc, applying blade lift at 90 degrees
ahead of the desired blade rise.
The other factor is the necessity of being able to glide. No
fixed-pitch rotor is going to do that (unless it's an autogyro, with
an undriven rotor and very low pitch angles) and even some sink could
cause blade stall and loss of control.
Do the research. Find out, the easy way, whcy others couldn't
make work. Google "Moller," for instance.

Dan

On Sep 8, 8:37*pm, wrote:
On Sep 8, 3:01 am, Leviterande Leviterande.



wrote:
yes, I have been looking into *todays vtols, they either have *a
complicated *large merry go arround rotor system * or a *very very
highly concentrated plumes of air *as in *the harrier/F35 jet

both are very expensive to maintain, complicated and yet not so
practical unless in military.

so some kind of a *propeller/ fan/ rotor with no moving part *must do
the job somehow to get rid with the complexiity and cost and SPACE!

I was just thinking of *testing a *thick-chord fan with 4 blades and
a medium AOA. it should be geard to the motor * *unless the motor has a
very high torque. My idea is that efficiency should go up when one use
a geared system
the propeller is a standard slowfly 10x4,7
rpm is around 7000-8000
if we instead took a 7 inch impeller *with larger blades moving more
air *at one revoltuion *, i tmeans it makes *more drag and resistance
to the motor shaft.. now if one calculate the required data and put
reduction gear to the motor. the thrust out put should be equal at less
rpm and *smaller propeller and with the same efficiency!

* * Helicopters and other VTOLs are complicated because they have to
be. One of the things that bugged the early experimenters was
gyroscopic force; any time we change the plane of rotation of a prop
or rotor we get precession, which results in a loss of control unless
the system is designed to deal with it. A fixed-pitch rotor can't do
that, and the larger it is and faster it turns the worse the effects
of precession. Current helicopter designs all take advantage of
precession to tilt the rotor disc, applying blade lift at 90 degrees
ahead of the desired blade rise.
* * *The other factor is the necessity of being able to glide. No
fixed-pitch rotor is going to do that (unless it's an autogyro, with
an undriven rotor and very low pitch angles) and even some sink could
cause blade stall and loss of control.
* * *Do the research. Find out, the easy way, whcy others couldn't
make work. Google "Moller," for instance.

* * * * *Dan

Because models are so overpowered compared with full size, could some
of those problems be solved with air blowing over controllable fins? A
smaller diameter prop would get a lot of velocity across the fins, and
that could be used to offset rotation and could tilt the axis for
translation. It might take a little computer power, or maybe just a
skilled pilot, for easy control.

It would have to be a labor of love, I doubt there's a DOD or
commercial use for such a device.

"Lonnie" @_#~#@.^net wrote in :


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

Of course you would. Since you're an idiot, you couldn't understand
any of it. Since you're an idiot, you can't differenatiate between
someone who has a pretty good idea of what he's talking about and a
not-even- wannabe.


it's just who you are.


Be proud, k00k.





Bertie

Nonsense Kaptain Klueless, I know exactly that you are nothing but a
wanna be troll.



Nonsense. I'm an excellent troll.


Bertie