Mavic Mini uncommanded descent tests

[sar104]

I'm starting to suspect that the motor axis angles actually do have influence on how the props become deformed. It has to do with the way the props mesh when stored with the arms folded.

This diagram shows how the front and rear motors are mounted on different angles. I don't know the actual precise angle, these are just estimates, but the rear motors are noticeably canted outwards, while the front motors are canted rearward.

View attachment 102604
I've always been cautious to fold the props correctly when storing the Mini in its Fly More case, so I really don't believe I ever jammed them in there improperly. But I nevertheless received the Motor Speed warning on my first flight with the v01.00.05 firmware. I replaced the rear-left blades as instructed and haven't seen the warning again.

However, I did notice this. Previously the left and right prop blades slid neatly together when nested with arms folded. But, the tips of the newly installed fresh blades stand higher than the old ones, and they no longer slide under the other blades. Because of the way the rear motors are canted outwards, the tips of the prop blades stand higher than the opposite motor.

View attachment 102605

I subsequently also replaced the rear-right blades. They now also point higher than the opposite motor.

View attachment 102606

With fresh blades installed on both rear motors, you can see the tips of the blades now cross each other. The props can no longer be nested together without forcing one set to bend under the other set.

View attachment 102607

Storing the Mini for any period of time with the props crossed under each other will eventually cause the blades to permanently deflect. Even when stored "correctly" within the Fly More case, I still suspect forcing the blades to fold together is what's causing them to take on a permanent deflection.

This might even explain why some people have experienced Uncommanded Descents with brand new Mavic Minis straight out of the box. The Mini is shipped with the arms folded. There's no telling how long they've been stored like that before their first flight.

So how come we're seeing the Motor Speed warnings almost exclusively on the rear motors, and practically never on the front motors?

Well, with the arms folded, the fronts motors on my Mini are almost exactly level with each other, maybe even canted slight inwards.

View attachment 102609

I also replaced the front-right blades. These are the fresh blades (below).

View attachment 102610

And these (below) are still the original front-left blades which have been on the Mini since December.

View attachment 102611

When folded together, the front blades mesh easily without putting any bending stress on each other.

View attachment 102612

What do you guys think? Does any of that make sense?

That's a good point - it's quite possible that the motor axis has an effect in the storage configuration. My comment previously was only addressing effects in flight.

 

[Zbip57]

That's a good point - it's quite possible that the motor axis has an effect in the storage configuration. My comment previously was only addressing effects in flight.

Totally agreed. The motor axis angles are deliberately set that way for stability and response factors while in flight. I didn't mean to imply any disagreement with what you wrote.

It's the storage configuration that looks wonky to me.

 

[Zbip57]

I replaced the left-rear blades as instructed by the Motor Speed warning and had no problems since. But I have not again stored the Mini in its Fly More case.

Once I finally figured out how to install the Java RTE required to get CsvView to run, I plotted the motor speeds from the flight that triggered my Motor Speed warning. And I could see that the left-rear motor hit a peak of just under 16,000 rpm at one point.

There was nothing visibly wrong with the original blades. No knicks, or cracks, or blemishes. It was only upon installing the fresh new blades that I noticed the difference shown in the photos of my previous post.

Since then I did some simple indoor hover tests to eliminate any effects of wind (other than from its own prop wash). Just press auto-takeoff, let it hover for a couple of minutes, then auto-land, all without touching the control sticks.

This is with new left-rear blades, and original blades still on the other three motors. Here with fresh blades the blue left-rear motor is no longer spinning faster than the others. But the yellow right-rear motor is now the fastest.


So, even though I haven't received any more motor speed warnings, and even though there was nothing visibly wrong with the blades, I decided to also install fresh blades on the right-rear motor and repeated the hover test. Note the yellow line is now nearly equal to the blue and red. The green left-front motor speed is now the fastest.


So I also replaced the prop blades on the left-front motor and repeated the hover test. Note that now all four motors are turning at nearly the same speeds while in hover.


While it likely was not necessary to replace these other prop blades, evidently there is a very clear difference between the performance of old versus new propeller blades. And that is despite the lack of any detectable difference when visibly comparing the old vs. new.

 

[rumitcu]

I'm starting to suspect that the motor axis angles actually do have influence on how the props become deformed. It has to do with the way the props mesh when stored with the arms folded.

This diagram shows how the front and rear motors are mounted on different angles. I don't know the actual precise angle, these are just estimates, but the rear motors are noticeably canted outwards, while the front motors are canted rearward.

View attachment 102604
I've always been cautious to fold the props correctly when storing the Mini in its Fly More case, so I really don't believe I ever jammed them in there improperly. But I nevertheless received the Motor Speed warning on my first flight with the v01.00.05 firmware. I replaced the rear-left blades as instructed and haven't seen the warning again.

However, I did notice this. Previously the left and right prop blades slid neatly together when nested with arms folded. But, the tips of the newly installed fresh blades stand higher than the old ones, and they no longer slide under the other blades. Because of the way the rear motors are canted outwards, the tips of the prop blades stand higher than the opposite motor.

View attachment 102605

I subsequently also replaced the rear-right blades. They now also point higher than the opposite motor.

View attachment 102606

With fresh blades installed on both rear motors, you can see the tips of the blades now cross each other. The props can no longer be nested together without forcing one set to bend under the other set.

View attachment 102607

Storing the Mini for any period of time with the props crossed under each other will eventually cause the blades to permanently deflect. Even when stored "correctly" within the Fly More case, I still suspect forcing the blades to fold together is what's causing them to take on a permanent deflection.

This might even explain why some people have experienced Uncommanded Descents with brand new Mavic Minis straight out of the box. The Mini is shipped with the arms folded. There's no telling how long they've been stored like that before their first flight.

So how come we're seeing the Motor Speed warnings almost exclusively on the rear motors, and practically never on the front motors?

Well, with the arms folded, the fronts motors on my Mini are almost exactly level with each other, maybe even canted slight inwards.

View attachment 102609

I also replaced the front-right blades. These are the fresh blades (below).

View attachment 102610

And these (below) are still the original front-left blades which have been on the Mini since December.

View attachment 102611

When folded together, the front blades mesh easily without putting any bending stress on each other.

View attachment 102612

What do you guys think? Does any of that make sense?

Edit: Correction, I replaced the left-front leaving the right-front blades as the only ones still original.

Agreed. I had the exact same observation and posted it in this thread:

MM Folded Rear Prop Bending per DJI Instructions

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but even when the Mavic Mini rear props are folded per DJI's instructions to fit in the Fly More case, they get bent which could be a contributor to the uncommanded descent issues that many of us have been having. Here is how DJI's instructions in the case say to...

mavicpilots.com

Despite asking people to try this themselves to see the effect on their own, people basically responded saying that the props were being folded incorrectly by me and others when storing in the case. So I appreciate that you have also come to the same conclusion But still frustrated with the problem.

Pat

 

[Zbip57]

Agreed. I had the exact same observation and posted it in this thread:

MM Folded Rear Prop Bending per DJI Instructions

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but even when the Mavic Mini rear props are folded per DJI's instructions to fit in the Fly More case, they get bent which could be a contributor to the uncommanded descent issues that many of us have been having. Here is how DJI's instructions in the case say to...

mavicpilots.com

Aha! I was trying to remember where I saw this posted. It was you who first pointed this out to me.

 

[Zbip57]

Concerning carbon fibre props, over in the DJI forum someone posted a DAT file of a similar hover test using aftermarket carbon fibre props. To make a more meaningful comparison, the csv files were imported into Excel to calculate average motor speeds, not counting those under 8000 rpm while taking off or landing.

Import the csv file into Excel and average the motor speeds, not counting those under 8000rpm at takeoff & landing,
=AVERAGEIF(FL2:FL3809,">8000") In my spreadsheet the motor speeds were in columns Fi,FJ,FK, FL.

Here's a comparison of the average motor speeds in hover. It seems that fresh DJI props are slightly more efficient at hover with lower motor speeds compared to aftermarket carbon fibre props.

120ccpm's Hover Test
# New Left Back props.
Right Front: 9582 RPMs
Left Front: 9386 RPMs
Left Back: 9431 RPMs
Right Back: 9960 RPMs

Zbip57's Hover Test
With fresh L.Front, L.Rear, & R.Rear blades. R.Front remains original.
R.Front - 9756
L.Front - 9603
L.Back - 9974
R.Back - 9564

Markforrester99's Hover Test (@ Carbon props)
R.Front - 10814
L.Front - 10611
L.Back - 10820
R.Back - 10071

It remains to be seen whether the disadvantage of slightly higher motor speed is outweighed by the advantage of carbon fibre being less prone to distortion.

 

[Hill Top Rez]

Okay - here is the last piece of the puzzle resolved, I think. This test was flown with FW 0500 and brand new DJI props (A1) on the rear motors.

View attachment 100394

A few differences to note from the previous tests.

1. There is no pitch excursion on takeoff - it remained approximately level.
2. In sport mode the aircraft achieved the full specified pitch of 30° and the rated speed of 13 m/s.
3. In P-GPS mode the aircraft achieved the specified pitch of 15° and the rated speed of 8 m/s.
4. There is no sign of the front motors slowing down to try to maintain pitch.
5. Performance forwards and backwards was similar.
6. The rear motors still spin up to nearly 16 krpm, but are clearly generating more lift.
7. When flying backwards the front motors are now spinning significantly faster than the rear motors.
8. No motor speed errors were thrown.
9. No sign of uncommanded descent.
10. The last two runs in the test were sideways in sport mode -

The faster speeds required of the rear motors is interesting. The aircraft weighs 249 g, with 129 g on the front motors and 121 g on the rear motors when level, all other things being equal.

CONCLUSION

The Mini's problems appear to be due to a shockingly bad propeller design, presumably adopted to save mass. I find it really hard to conceive that DJI didn't discover this problem in pre-release testing, unless it really does only happen with a particular batch or batches of props. That seems unli thekely though, given the number of reports. Or perhaps it only happens if the props are pre-deformed in storage, and DJI never let that happen. It certainly seems to be predominantly reported by users with the Fly More combo case. Very careless, either way.

I am a newbie and the Mini is my first drone. I am hearing a lot about the forced decent and prop problems and I ordered some CF props to try. My background is in engineering and worked in a factory where I was in charge of predictive maintenance operations. One problem we ran into was resonance where at certain speeds, a fan blade would go into resonance (the natural frequency where an object will start to vibrate). Could it be that at certain speeds, the props go into resonance which could cause them to flex due to the vibration and lose it's lift? Resonance depends on speed and mass so as speed changes and other factors such as wind or angle could send the props into resonance or to start vibrating causing them to flex. If so, by changing the mass and rigidity by going with a CF prop, it would change the speed at which the props would go into resonance (hopefully above the max speed the drone is run at) and solve the problem. We would run fans with variable frequency drives from start up to full speed and check vibration levels with sensors to see if there were any speeds where the fan went into resonance then we would lock out those frequencies on the variable speed drives so they would not stay at those frequencies while trying to control a HVAC system. Just wondering.

 

[Occams Razor]

I'm starting to suspect that the motor axis angles actually do have influence on how the props become deformed. It has to do with the way the props mesh when stored with the arms folded.

This diagram shows how the front and rear motors are mounted on different angles. I don't know the actual precise angle, these are just estimates, but the rear motors are noticeably canted outwards, while the front motors are canted rearward.

View attachment 102604
I've always been cautious to fold the props correctly when storing the Mini in its Fly More case, so I really don't believe I ever jammed them in there improperly. But I nevertheless received the Motor Speed warning on my first flight with the v01.00.05 firmware. I replaced the rear-left blades as instructed and haven't seen the warning again.

However, I did notice this. Previously the left and right prop blades slid neatly together when nested with arms folded. But, the tips of the newly installed fresh blades stand higher than the old ones, and they no longer slide under the other blades. Because of the way the rear motors are canted outwards, the tips of the prop blades stand higher than the opposite motor.

View attachment 102605

I subsequently also replaced the rear-right blades. They now also point higher than the opposite motor.

View attachment 102606

With fresh blades installed on both rear motors, you can see the tips of the blades now cross each other. The props can no longer be nested together without forcing one set to bend under the other set.

View attachment 102607

Storing the Mini for any period of time with the props crossed under each other will eventually cause the blades to permanently deflect. Even when stored "correctly" within the Fly More case, I still suspect forcing the blades to fold together is what's causing them to take on a permanent deflection.

This might even explain why some people have experienced Uncommanded Descents with brand new Mavic Minis straight out of the box. The Mini is shipped with the arms folded. There's no telling how long they've been stored like that before their first flight.

So how come we're seeing the Motor Speed warnings almost exclusively on the rear motors, and practically never on the front motors?

Well, with the arms folded, the fronts motors on my Mini are almost exactly level with each other, maybe even canted slight inwards.

View attachment 102609

I also replaced the front-right blades. These are the fresh blades (below).

View attachment 102610

And these (below) are still the original front-left blades which have been on the Mini since December.

View attachment 102611

When folded together, the front blades mesh easily without putting any bending stress on each other.

View attachment 102612

What do you guys think? Does any of that make sense?

Edit: Correction, I replaced the left-front leaving the right-front blades as the only ones still original.

If you follow DJI diagram for folding the rear props, the left rear prop folds under the right prop. This is the way a new drone comes packaged. I've always thought the left prop will have a greater load placed on it with this folding configuration. This may explain why a greater number of users experience rear left motor errors.

 

[sar104]

I am a newbie and the Mini is my first drone. I am hearing a lot about the forced decent and prop problems and I ordered some CF props to try. My background is in engineering and worked in a factory where I was in charge of predictive maintenance operations. One problem we ran into was resonance where at certain speeds, a fan blade would go into resonance (the natural frequency where an object will start to vibrate). Could it be that at certain speeds, the props go into resonance which could cause them to flex due to the vibration and lose it's lift? Resonance depends on speed and mass so as speed changes and other factors such as wind or angle could send the props into resonance or to start vibrating causing them to flex. If so, by changing the mass and rigidity by going with a CF prop, it would change the speed at which the props would go into resonance (hopefully above the max speed the drone is run at) and solve the problem. We would run fans with variable frequency drives from start up to full speed and check vibration levels with sensors to see if there were any speeds where the fan went into resonance then we would lock out those frequencies on the variable speed drives so they would not stay at those frequencies while trying to control a HVAC system. Just wondering.

It's possible that there are resonances that have an effect. I'm hoping to do some high-speed video imaging of the props while spinning that might reveal if that is happening.

 

[Zbip57]

If you follow DJI diagram for folding the rear props, the left rear prop folds under the right prop. This is the way a new drone comes packaged. I've always thought the left prop will have a greater load placed on it with this folding configuration. This may explain why a greater number of users experience rear left motor errors.

I took a few more photos to illustrate how the props become bent when stored with the arms folded and prop blades crossed.

It wasn't as obvious with the original rear props because they seemed to mesh together nicely when folded. But the newly installed fresh props won't fold together unless one side or the other is bent under/over the other side. If they're repeatedly forced to mesh together and stored for extended periods like that, then eventually the blades deform to take on the deflected shape.

Here's an image illustrating the angle at which the rear motors are canted outwards. With the blades turned outward like this, you can see how high the tips of the props rest above a flat surface. In this position the weight of the Mini is resting directly on the prop hubs, attachment screws, and motors, and the prop blades are not being bent.


You can see how far down the tips of the prop blades hang when turned inboard. If the blades from both sides are turned inboard, obviously the tips of the prop blades will cross and will not easily slide over/under each other.


If set down on the table top with the prop blades in this position, the Mini's weight is resting on the tips of the blades. The blades flex and are distorted. It's really not a good idea to store the Mini resting on a table top like this.

The Fly More case is designed with a raised section to support the belly of the Mini and a deep recess into which the props can hang freely. However, I suspect that merely forcing the rear props to mesh, crossed over/under each other, to fit into that recessed area is what eventually causes permanent distortion of the blades.


In the photo below I'm standing the Mini on its tail, allowing the props to dangle down freely along the sides of the body, rather than forcing them to cross over each other across the body.

The rear motors are canted at an angle outwards, but they are not canted forward or back. When positioned longitudinally like this, you can see that the prop blades lie flat alongside the body. In this position you could set the Mini down flat on a table top with no stress applied to the rear blades. And there is no bending stress applied to the blades because they're not meshed folded laterally across the body.


I ordered a new carry case from AliExpress in which the props are stored longitudinally, rather than crossed over/under the body of the Mini. It's still not the perfect case though, as there is no space for the charger and spare batteries. But I'm hoping this will be a solution that's friendlier to the propeller blades.

I submitted the order four weeks ago but still haven't received it...
Sunnylife Protective Storage Bag Carrying Case for Mavic Mini

 

[TDZHDTV]

I took a few more photos to illustrate how the props become bent when stored with the arms folded and prop blades crossed.

It wasn't as obvious with the original rear props because they seemed to mesh together nicely when folded. But the newly installed fresh props won't fold together unless one side or the other is bent under/over the other side. If they're repeatedly forced to mesh together and stored for extended periods like that, then eventually the blades deform to take on the deflected shape.

Here's an image illustrating the angle at which the rear motors are canted outwards. With the blades turned outward like this, you can see how high the tips of the props rest above a flat surface. In this position the weight of the Mini is resting directly on the prop hubs, attachment screws, and motors, and the prop blades are not being bent.
View attachment 102833

You can see how far down the tips of the prop blades hang when turned inboard. If the blades from both sides are turned inboard, obviously the tips of the prop blades will cross and will not easily slide over/under each other.
View attachment 102834

If set down on the table top with the prop blades in this position, the Mini's weight is resting on the tips of the blades. The blades flex and are distorted. It's really not a good idea to store the Mini resting on a table top like this.

The Fly More case is designed with a raised section to support the belly of the Mini and a deep recess into which the props can hang freely. However, I suspect that merely forcing the rear props to mesh, crossed over/under each other, to fit into that recessed area is what eventually causes permanent distortion of the blades.
View attachment 102835

In the photo below I'm standing the Mini on its tail, allowing the props to dangle down freely along the sides of the body, rather than forcing them to cross over each other across the body.

The rear motors are canted at an angle outwards, but they are not canted forward or back. When positioned longitudinally like this, you can see that the prop blades lie flat alongside the body. In this position you could set the Mini down flat on a table top with no stress applied to the rear blades. And there is no bending stress applied to the blades because they're not meshed folded laterally across the body.
View attachment 102836

I ordered a new carry case from AliExpress in which the props are stored longitudinally, rather than crossed over/under the body of the Mini. It's still not the perfect case though, as there is no space for the charger and spare batteries. But I'm hoping this will be a solution that's friendlier to the propeller blades.

I submitted the order four weeks ago but still haven't received it...
Sunnylife Protective Storage Bag Carrying Case for Mavic Mini
View attachment 102837

I have the Sunnylife drone only case, does not trap the props if loaded vertically, good quality too.

 

[FoxhallGH]

I took a few more photos to illustrate how the props become bent when stored with the arms folded and prop blades crossed.

It wasn't as obvious with the original rear props because they seemed to mesh together nicely when folded. But the newly installed fresh props won't fold together unless one side or the other is bent under/over the other side. If they're repeatedly forced to mesh together and stored for extended periods like that, then eventually the blades deform to take on the deflected shape.

Here's an image illustrating the angle at which the rear motors are canted outwards. With the blades turned outward like this, you can see how high the tips of the props rest above a flat surface. In this position the weight of the Mini is resting directly on the prop hubs, attachment screws, and motors, and the prop blades are not being bent.
View attachment 102833

You can see how far down the tips of the prop blades hang when turned inboard. If the blades from both sides are turned inboard, obviously the tips of the prop blades will cross and will not easily slide over/under each other.
View attachment 102834

If set down on the table top with the prop blades in this position, the Mini's weight is resting on the tips of the blades. The blades flex and are distorted. It's really not a good idea to store the Mini resting on a table top like this.

The Fly More case is designed with a raised section to support the belly of the Mini and a deep recess into which the props can hang freely. However, I suspect that merely forcing the rear props to mesh, crossed over/under each other, to fit into that recessed area is what eventually causes permanent distortion of the blades.
View attachment 102835

In the photo below I'm standing the Mini on its tail, allowing the props to dangle down freely along the sides of the body, rather than forcing them to cross over each other across the body.

The rear motors are canted at an angle outwards, but they are not canted forward or back. When positioned longitudinally like this, you can see that the prop blades lie flat alongside the body. In this position you could set the Mini down flat on a table top with no stress applied to the rear blades. And there is no bending stress applied to the blades because they're not meshed folded laterally across the body.
View attachment 102836

I ordered a new carry case from AliExpress in which the props are stored longitudinally, rather than crossed over/under the body of the Mini. It's still not the perfect case though, as there is no space for the charger and spare batteries. But I'm hoping this will be a solution that's friendlier to the propeller blades.

I submitted the order four weeks ago but still haven't received it...
Sunnylife Protective Storage Bag Carrying Case for Mavic Mini
View attachment 102837

Excellent work @Zbip57 and that's a really sensible theory. I hadn't realised that even if the rear props are stowed as DJI recommend, they are still under a distorting pressure! The alternate case makes sense, and using any alternate stowage that aligns the blades north-south as you have shown, must be a sensible way to go. Way back in the thread, I suggested that a 3rd party carbon fibre prop-set would be the best cure for all this. I still think that's the case - but it is just a matter of finding a good & reliable supplier ...

 

[AndreaBB]

I took a few more photos to illustrate how the props become bent when stored with the arms folded and prop blades crossed.

It wasn't as obvious with the original rear props because they seemed to mesh together nicely when folded. But the newly installed fresh props won't fold together unless one side or the other is bent under/over the other side. If they're repeatedly forced to mesh together and stored for extended periods like that, then eventually the blades deform to take on the deflected shape.

Here's an image illustrating the angle at which the rear motors are canted outwards. With the blades turned outward like this, you can see how high the tips of the props rest above a flat surface. In this position the weight of the Mini is resting directly on the prop hubs, attachment screws, and motors, and the prop blades are not being bent.
View attachment 102833

You can see how far down the tips of the prop blades hang when turned inboard. If the blades from both sides are turned inboard, obviously the tips of the prop blades will cross and will not easily slide over/under each other.
View attachment 102834

If set down on the table top with the prop blades in this position, the Mini's weight is resting on the tips of the blades. The blades flex and are distorted. It's really not a good idea to store the Mini resting on a table top like this.

The Fly More case is designed with a raised section to support the belly of the Mini and a deep recess into which the props can hang freely. However, I suspect that merely forcing the rear props to mesh, crossed over/under each other, to fit into that recessed area is what eventually causes permanent distortion of the blades.
View attachment 102835

In the photo below I'm standing the Mini on its tail, allowing the props to dangle down freely along the sides of the body, rather than forcing them to cross over each other across the body.

The rear motors are canted at an angle outwards, but they are not canted forward or back. When positioned longitudinally like this, you can see that the prop blades lie flat alongside the body. In this position you could set the Mini down flat on a table top with no stress applied to the rear blades. And there is no bending stress applied to the blades because they're not meshed folded laterally across the body.
View attachment 102836

I ordered a new carry case from AliExpress in which the props are stored longitudinally, rather than crossed over/under the body of the Mini. It's still not the perfect case though, as there is no space for the charger and spare batteries. But I'm hoping this will be a solution that's friendlier to the propeller blades.

I submitted the order four weeks ago but still haven't received it...
Sunnylife Protective Storage Bag Carrying Case for Mavic Mini
View attachment 102837

Here’s my experience with a different case:

Props: are we sure it’s just how we put it away?

So... - I’ve not been using the FMC since the 28th of April. - I have replaced all the props on the 16th of May (yes, I did crash into a bush while I was orbiting) with original parts. - It flew about 4 hours since then. - The MM has been left ”resting” every night into a shaped foam where the...

mavicpilots.com

 

[Zbip57]

I suggested that a 3rd party carbon fibre prop-set would be the best cure for all this.

Carbon fibre props would be stiffer, less flexible, than the stock DJI props. It's reasonable to think that should make them more resistant to being distorted.

But I wonder, is it even possible to fold the carbon props together for storage in the manner required to fit into the Fly More case?

My original props were always stored folded properly in the case, and as a result they nested together easily without complaint. It's only when I installed new props that I could see the difference. The new props could also be forced to nest together, but there is some obvious bending required. Would carbon props allow themselves to be similarly bent to force them to nest together when the props are folded across the body, or would they just crack?

 

[Cw4bray]

The harmonics theory is a good one, but how could you tell if it was third order or maybe fifth order frequency, or a combination of several orders? I also think a smoke chamber would help determine if there's interaction between the forward and rear blade tip vortices in high speed horizontal flight. I'm sure a fair amount of testing was done by the factory. It couldn't have all been a magic SWAG. I've tried longer blades that overlap front and back and the interaction between forward and rear didn't help like I thought it would. My next test will be a shorter wider chord blade. This should increase the solidity ratio and be quieter with slower tip speeds.

 

[JAW]

Would carbon props allow themselves to be similarly bent to force them to nest together when the props are folded across the body, or would they just crack?

My experience with Mavic carbon fiber props is while certainly not as flexible as OEM props, they do flex. Not sure about carbon fiber used for a MM as its props are so much shorter.

 

[TDZHDTV]

Be careful with 3rd party props, I bought these off AliExpress after reading good reviews. They are slightly stiffer and I didn’t suffer any body strike while aggressively flying in S mode, however they are not matched pairs and I suffered jell-O effects on video.

1.38US $ 25% OFF|8PCS Replacement Propellers for DJI Mavic Mini Drone Light Weight 4726 Props Blade Accessory Wing Fans Spare Parts|Propeller| - AliExpress

Smarter Shopping, Better Living! Aliexpress.com

www.aliexpress.com

 

[FoxhallGH]

But I wonder, is it even possible to fold the carbon props together for storage in the manner required to fit into the Fly More case?

I think you have hit the nail on the head! With the prop's being mounted at an angle on the motor, they are not going to 'mesh' to be stowed, without some distortion. CF prop's are simply going to highlight that fact even more. Hopefully 'Master Airscrew' will bring out a prop-set for the Mini soon - but meanwhile, it's starting to look like the FlyMore case should not be used!

 

[chiangmaicharlies]

I took a few more photos to illustrate how the props become bent when stored with the arms folded and prop blades crossed.

It wasn't as obvious with the original rear props because they seemed to mesh together nicely when folded. But the newly installed fresh props won't fold together unless one side or the other is bent under/over the other side. If they're repeatedly forced to mesh together and stored for extended periods like that, then eventually the blades deform to take on the deflected shape.

Here's an image illustrating the angle at which the rear motors are canted outwards. With the blades turned outward like this, you can see how high the tips of the props rest above a flat surface. In this position the weight of the Mini is resting directly on the prop hubs, attachment screws, and motors, and the prop blades are not being bent.
View attachment 102833

You can see how far down the tips of the prop blades hang when turned inboard. If the blades from both sides are turned inboard, obviously the tips of the prop blades will cross and will not easily slide over/under each other.
View attachment 102834

If set down on the table top with the prop blades in this position, the Mini's weight is resting on the tips of the blades. The blades flex and are distorted. It's really not a good idea to store the Mini resting on a table top like this.

The Fly More case is designed with a raised section to support the belly of the Mini and a deep recess into which the props can hang freely. However, I suspect that merely forcing the rear props to mesh, crossed over/under each other, to fit into that recessed area is what eventually causes permanent distortion of the blades.
View attachment 102835

In the photo below I'm standing the Mini on its tail, allowing the props to dangle down freely along the sides of the body, rather than forcing them to cross over each other across the body.

The rear motors are canted at an angle outwards, but they are not canted forward or back. When positioned longitudinally like this, you can see that the prop blades lie flat alongside the body. In this position you could set the Mini down flat on a table top with no stress applied to the rear blades. And there is no bending stress applied to the blades because they're not meshed folded laterally across the body.
View attachment 102836

I ordered a new carry case from AliExpress in which the props are stored longitudinally, rather than crossed over/under the body of the Mini. It's still not the perfect case though, as there is no space for the charger and spare batteries. But I'm hoping this will be a solution that's friendlier to the propeller blades.

I submitted the order four weeks ago but still haven't received it...
Sunnylife Protective Storage Bag Carrying Case for Mavic Mini
View attachment 102837

I wish DJI would make their best intentions clearer. You can of course arrange the front blades in a north-south config in the combo case, as in my photo. But not the rear blades. Would you advise this?



Note that for the moment I have added white markers to the blade screws to quickly identify which blades should be uppermost, according to DJI.

 

[Zbip57]

You can of course arrange the front blades in a north-south config in the combo case, as in my photo. But not the rear blades. Would you advise this?

The front blades are not nearly as critical, since they do mesh together quite easily. Storing them north-south as you've shown is possible and eliminates the potential for any bending that might be caused by meshing the blades together when crossed east-west over the body. But I'd be worried that in this position the blades are not restrained from flopping about.


There is a raised section in the Fly More case lid (red rectangle) that presses down on top off the Mini's body whenever the lid is closed. With the front blades crossed east-west they are trapped by that raised section and really can't go anywhere. Of course you always need to be careful the blades are not actually pinched between that raised section and the Mini's body. But with the blades positioned north-south they are free to swing when the case is closed and may end up wedged on top of the controller.


It's the rear blades that are more of an issue because they are forced to cross east-west. The Fly More case really needs to be modified to allow the rear propeller blades to be stored in a north-south orientation. I think that would make the biggest difference.

I have added white markers to the blade screws to quickly identify which blades should be uppermost, according to DJI.

I wouldn't be too concerned over which blades go over or under the opposite side. On the rear blades, whichever side is being forced under will bend down, while the blades forced over will bend up. Maybe we should just alternate the way they're stored. One day up, the next day down.

In any case, DJI's label is obviously wrong (as has already been pointed out by others.) Here the label shows how DJI advises the left-rear blades are supposed to be stored, with A forced under B.


Clearly that label is inaccurate, because the leading edge of A cannot fit under the trailing edge of B. (i.e. A must go over B)