I wonder if DJI is staying clear of CF because of liability, due to possible contact trama from the inherent carbon fiber “knife-edge” design??? I’m starting to think it’s better to stick with DJI. If the drone ever gets erratic and strikes someone, the injury will be much worse with CF.
Blade Test Results- DJI vs CARBON FIBER
- Thread starter RunnerGuy
- Start date
There's a fine line between efficiency and safety. Just seeing how many people started using Low Noise props on MP's, and getting unwanted vibration, means to me that the blades were not designed to be used on the MP. Yes, you can get them to work by adjusting the settings, but then you are going outside the parameteres of what DJI spent hundreds of hours perfecting.
As for me, I will stick with my ugly, noisy, OEM 8330's on my MP. lol
FoxhallGH
Well-Known Member
In that case the design is quite different for my CV 8331 props. They are actually thicker and overall heavier than the stock props. I'd actually rather be hit by my CF props because the leading edges are rounded ... The stock 'quiet' props are like blades at the tips! Does go to show that there are a lot of variations on the theme out there.
the company that make the UAV DJI in this case spend a lot of time designing the props for their products and when my expensive thousand pound plus UAV is in the air i would much rather have the props made by DJI than aftermarket ones that is not to say they are no good it is down to personal choice which type of prop you use they all work so choose which ones you are happy with
Who makes your CF props? I didnt know that DJI made CF. I thought the 8331's are plastic.
It's possible. Im thinking that DJI knows there will be a zillion newbies buying their $1500 Mavic 2 Pros, and if they crash, it's better to have a more flexible prop break than a brittle one.
DJI have some pretty smart propulsion engineers that put a lot of effort into the design of the whole propulsion system which includes the motors, ESCs and props.
CF might look cool, but does it do anything any better?
Who's to say that the flex that DJI's engineers designed is a problem at all?
SInce it's a camera drone, does it need to have the sharp, instant response of CF or is the shock-absorbing property a desirable feature?
If I was convinced that DJI's props were less than ideal and that something would actually be better, rather than just looking cool and/or costing more, I'd buy some.
But after 5 years flying DJI props, I still haven't seen any compelling evidence.
CF might look cool, but does it do anything any better?
Who's to say that the flex that DJI's engineers designed is a problem at all?
SInce it's a camera drone, does it need to have the sharp, instant response of CF or is the shock-absorbing property a desirable feature?
If I was convinced that DJI's props were less than ideal and that something would actually be better, rather than just looking cool and/or costing more, I'd buy some.
But after 5 years flying DJI props, I still haven't seen any compelling evidence.
Lapeer20m
Well-Known Member
Creating more lift at less rpm does not necessarily mean a prop is more efficient it simply requires the motor to produce more torque at a lower rpm. More torque equals higher current draw.
Yep. I think the MPP motors are higher torque than the MP. They swing a softer, higher pitch prop.
FoxhallGH
Well-Known Member
These are the prop's I buy ... The 8331 designation must be a design-shape as these prop blades are identical in shape and pitch to the stock 'quiet' DJI 8331's on the MPP.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07848L...colid=X5BS0IJUTCGA&psc=0&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it
FoxhallGH
Well-Known Member
If that was the case, then I'd expect to see a significant reduction in flight time, because by the same logic; More current draw equals faster battery drain, and reduced flight duration. As mentioned above, I have done rpm testing, but now you have convinced me that I need to put aside an hour or so and do a 'duration' hover test on the two types of prop's. My experience is telling me that I'm getting 'similar' flight times, but I shall do the experiment and let you know.
Another consequence I'd expect to see if the motors were working harder, is that they would be hot [hotter] after a flight ... That doesn't seem to be so either.
Last edited:
FoxhallGH
Well-Known Member
I've tried to find out if there is a different part number for the motors used on the MP and those on the MPP - but there doesn't seem to be a reference to this as the MP and MPP motors seem to be supplied as spares with the arms included. @Thunderdrones - Do you have any info that shows the motors to actually be different?? My understanding was that the motors were the same on the two models, however the MPP controlled the motors diffidently. Is that the case??
Last edited:
inverted
Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2018
- Messages
- 21
- Reactions
- 11
- Age
- 46
Crashes do happen sooner or later
DJI OEP props probably could be a lot stiffer or even made out of CF but when drone hits something, it's far less stres to the motor and arm with props that are more flexible.
In addition, because of their flexibility and materials used, after smaller impact on a branch, tree, brushing against the wall (all common scenarios these days) DJI OEM pros do get chipped and damaged but drone could possibly recover in such a situation where if CF prop shutters on impact, drone is going down.
DJI OEP props probably could be a lot stiffer or even made out of CF but when drone hits something, it's far less stres to the motor and arm with props that are more flexible.
In addition, because of their flexibility and materials used, after smaller impact on a branch, tree, brushing against the wall (all common scenarios these days) DJI OEM pros do get chipped and damaged but drone could possibly recover in such a situation where if CF prop shutters on impact, drone is going down.
FoxhallGH
Well-Known Member
That might be the case with non-articulated prop's like you have on a Phantom 4, but when you have the hinges on the hubs like the Mavic Pro and 2 Pro have, then it's the hinge that's allowing the prop' to get some level of survival out of the branch or wall-strike. The CF prop's I have referred to have the same 'hinge' mechanism.
DagDerniT
Well-Known Member
Carbon fiber props never made my quadcopters fly better than the stock or plastic props. Never really noticed a major difference in sound that would make really a difference. If they hit the ground, they would break just like the plastic and I would have to replace in order to fly good again. It was always more of a purchase for appearances. Carbon fiber to me just looks sexy 
Here is a article about it: Phantom Carbon Fiber Propellers - Fiber vs. Plastic
Here is a article about it: Phantom Carbon Fiber Propellers - Fiber vs. Plastic
Last edited:
Beachboy
Active Member
I recently contacted Master Airscrew about carbon props and therereply was “ we will be releasing new carbon props sometime in late January 2019, for the Mavic Air”
Last edited:
As sound has a very wide range of levels its measured in a logarithmic scale, so 3dB's is double, -3dB's is half the sound level, so the take off sound level is only about a quarter of the dji prop and landing with the dji prop is 2db's higher so is some what louder as 3dB''s is double the sound. The sound from hovering seems to be the only one similar.
DJI Drone Deals
1. Mini 2
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
New Threads
-
-
-
-
-
Air 3 Binghamton, NY | CONFLUENCE OF FAITH | Project Arjun- Started by projectarjun
- Replies: 2