3-Blade MAS prop test results (log analysis & video)

[Pedals2Paddles]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I got my 3-blade Master Airscrew props to test today. I pulled the dataflash logs for both the two and three blade props to compare a few points.

• Battery current and throttle output at hover increases by ~20%. Two blade hover is 20 amps at 37% throttle output. 3 blade hover is 24 amps and 37% throttle output.
• Motor PWM output only increased by 5-6%. This isn't exactly linear with RPM, but it shows that the 3-blade props do not need to spin faster, but require a lot more power to spin them. This should be expected since you have 3 blades worth of plastic to fling around.
• Battery life therefore will be reduced by 1-2 minutes, or almost a 20% reduction again.
• Vibration is reduced by about 20%, which is great. That said, the vibration (on mine anyway) is already very minimal to begin with, so it's not making any functional difference. But it at least shows these props aren't pieces of junk.
• The sound is not necessarily quieter. It's just different. It is much higher pitch wheeeeeee instead of a low pitched whoooooooo. Those are technical terms.
• It does seem to be more nimble and snappier. This is expected since you have more propeller area biting into the air.
• Power consumption change persisted in all other phases of flight (cruise, climb, descent, etc). No phase of flight performed better or used less battery power.
• They do look cool.

Given the above, my personal opinion is "not worth it". The 20% increase in battery drain for a very small and unnecessary increase in pitch/roll responsiveness just doesn't make logical sense. If your use was acrobatic type flight, these might be useful, but beyond that I wouldn't bother.

 

[Ralph E. Johnson]

Thanks Pedals. Nice to have a more scientific explanation.

 

[Flyinglawnmower]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I got my 3-blade Master Airscrew props to test today. I pulled the dataflash logs for both the two and three blade props to compare a few points.

• Battery current and throttle output at hover increases by ~20%. Two blade hover is 20 amps at 37% throttle output. 3 blade hover is 24 amps and 37% throttle output.
• Motor PWM output only increased by 5-6%. This isn't exactly linear with RPM, but it shows that the 3-blade props do not need to spin faster, but require a lot more power to spin them. This should be expected since you have 3 blades worth of plastic to fling around.
• Battery life therefore will be reduced by 1-2 minutes, or almost a 20% reduction again.
• Vibration is reduced by about 20%, which is great. That said, the vibration (on mine anyway) is already very minimal to begin with, so it's not making any functional difference. But it at least shows these props aren't pieces of junk.
• The sound is not necessarily quieter. It's just different. It is much higher pitch wheeeeeee instead of a low pitched whoooooooo. Those are technical terms.
• It does seem to be more nimble and snappier. This is expected since you have more propeller area biting into the air.
• Power consumption change persisted in all other phases of flight (cruise, climb, descent, etc). No phase of flight performed better or used less battery power.
• They do look cool.

Given the above, my personal opinion is "not worth it". The 20% increase in battery drain for a very small and unnecessary increase in pitch/roll responsiveness just doesn't make logical sense. If your use was acrobatic type flight, these might be useful, but beyond that I wouldn't bother.



View attachment 9277


View attachment 9278

Thanks Pedals. You just helped me decide to NOT buy a set. As ever, thank you for yours extremely valuable input.

 

[Wetstone]

Great analysis P2P! Would the reduction in vibration possibly increase the longevity of the motors or other components?

 

[Robpower]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I got my 3-blade Master Airscrew props to test today. I pulled the dataflash logs for both the two and three blade props to compare a few points.

• Battery current and throttle output at hover increases by ~20%. Two blade hover is 20 amps at 37% throttle output. 3 blade hover is 24 amps and 37% throttle output.
• Motor PWM output only increased by 5-6%. This isn't exactly linear with RPM, but it shows that the 3-blade props do not need to spin faster, but require a lot more power to spin them. This should be expected since you have 3 blades worth of plastic to fling around.
• Battery life therefore will be reduced by 1-2 minutes, or almost a 20% reduction again.
• Vibration is reduced by about 20%, which is great. That said, the vibration (on mine anyway) is already very minimal to begin with, so it's not making any functional difference. But it at least shows these props aren't pieces of junk.
• The sound is not necessarily quieter. It's just different. It is much higher pitch wheeeeeee instead of a low pitched whoooooooo. Those are technical terms.
• It does seem to be more nimble and snappier. This is expected since you have more propeller area biting into the air.
• Power consumption change persisted in all other phases of flight (cruise, climb, descent, etc). No phase of flight performed better or used less battery power.
• They do look cool.

Given the above, my personal opinion is "not worth it". The 20% increase in battery drain for a very small and unnecessary increase in pitch/roll responsiveness just doesn't make logical sense. If your use was acrobatic type flight, these might be useful, but beyond that I wouldn't bother.



View attachment 9277


View attachment 9278

Thank you for the indepth report, appreciate you taking the time and sharing your findings. I wondered if there was any advantage, I will stick with my standard mas props.

 

[DJMc]

Thanks for.this Matt - as ever, a comprehensive and we'll evidenced assement to help people decide.

Unless the lure of the cool factor becomes too much, I think I'll be "whoooooooo' ing around the sky for now!

Cheers once again!

 

[DJMc]

OK, just decided despite import tax etc. I should order a set....you know, ehm....just for those gusty days whem you really want to keep vibrations down...nothing to do with the coolness....not at all.

 

[Hezarfen]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I got my 3-blade Master Airscrew props to test today. I pulled the dataflash logs for both the two and three blade props to compare a few points.

• Battery current and throttle output at hover increases by ~20%. Two blade hover is 20 amps at 37% throttle output. 3 blade hover is 24 amps and 37% throttle output.
• Motor PWM output only increased by 5-6%. This isn't exactly linear with RPM, but it shows that the 3-blade props do not need to spin faster, but require a lot more power to spin them. This should be expected since you have 3 blades worth of plastic to fling around.
• Battery life therefore will be reduced by 1-2 minutes, or almost a 20% reduction again.
• Vibration is reduced by about 20%, which is great. That said, the vibration (on mine anyway) is already very minimal to begin with, so it's not making any functional difference. But it at least shows these props aren't pieces of junk.
• The sound is not necessarily quieter. It's just different. It is much higher pitch wheeeeeee instead of a low pitched whoooooooo. Those are technical terms.
• It does seem to be more nimble and snappier. This is expected since you have more propeller area biting into the air.
• Power consumption change persisted in all other phases of flight (cruise, climb, descent, etc). No phase of flight performed better or used less battery power.
• They do look cool.

Given the above, my personal opinion is "not worth it". The 20% increase in battery drain for a very small and unnecessary increase in pitch/roll responsiveness just doesn't make logical sense. If your use was acrobatic type flight, these might be useful, but beyond that I wouldn't bother.



View attachment 9277


View attachment 9278

Important and helpful test. Thanks..
Information you give shows that in theory the Solo Motors may be hotter.
Have you got an analysis of motor temperatures?

 

[Pedals2Paddles]

Great analysis P2P! Would the reduction in vibration possibly increase the longevity of the motors or other components?

Nah. The level of vibration to begin with using standard 2-blad MAS props is already very very low. So the reduction in vibration seems significant, it's like reducing nothing down to slightly less than nothing. For reference, the vibration starts causing problems when the values reach 50-60 or higher. We're talking about vibrations in the 3-4 range.

 

[EZL]

Thanks Pedals, I suspected the results were like some of the tests that fellas tried on the other quads. Can a fella use a larger set of
MAS 2-blade props? Balancing a set of these MAS 3-blade props would be interesting! Has anyone checked the factory balance on
the MAS 2-blade props and it doesn't hurt to experiment!

 

[Saijin_Naib]

We can go to 11" propellers just fine, and some members have (APC 1145). Personally, I'd like to see 11" with shallower pitch, maybe 1130/1135 so the load on the motors doesn't go up as much.

Triblades are not too horrible to balance.

In my experience, the MAS 1045 V2s for the Solo are pretty well balanced.

 

[Pedals2Paddles]

I wonder if the 3-blade may provide some advantage at high altitudes where air density impacts performance. There is clearly more blade surface in the 3-blade configuration. For the same reason it hurts performance at normal altitudes, it could help when flying above 8,000ft.

 

[skyhax]

• The sound is not necessarily quieter. It's just different. It is much higher pitch wheeeeeee instead of a low pitched whoooooooo. Those are technical terms.

I don't agree with that statement. There might be an underlying or background high pitch added, but mine are over all quieter. Three blades should hover with lower RPM's so the motor noise almost has to be lower.
For me these are not more punchy. I believe that is because of the smaller diameter directing more air on the Solo body. Larger props might direct more air outside the body area.
These are fun but anyone more serious would probably want larger tri-blades and just replace the motors more often.

 

[Vegasrobbi]

I've been flying 11" APC's for years, they work great at altitude and smooth Solo out. Haven't had a motor issue yet.

I purchased the MAS 3 bladed props thinking they would have more blade area like the 11" props and work better at altitude, I fly between 6-8k feet. I'll test soon.

 

[Deleted member 3203]

Thanks Pedals. They do look cool. Battery life is my challenge. So, I’m not going to add to my challenge and decrease it further. Thanks for test and analysis!

 

[Jameson]

Yep, you forgot one important thing - RPMs are much lower. Thats the main reason for the beautiful sound.
Wheeee, Whooo, Whaaa, whatever we call it, it is just quieter and less irritating. Could be a personal subjective opinion but when my neighbors don't hear it, thats a good sign.

Only downside I have found so far - difficult to carry

 

[Pedals2Paddles]

I didn't forget anything. Your personal opinion on noise is just that.

 

[Jameson]

Sorry, no bad feelings here. Obviously you have your own opinion as well

 

[Solo Keith]

I've been flying 11" APC's for years, they work great at altitude and smooth Solo out. Haven't had a motor issue yet.

I purchased the MAS 3 bladed props thinking they would have more blade area like the 11" props and work better at altitude, I fly between 6-8k feet. I'll test soon.

Same here w/the 11" APC. And still using the 800kv T Motor from 2016.
Looking forward to your MAS 3 blade test results

 

[Pedals2Paddles]

Sorry, no bad feelings here. Obviously you have your own opinion as well

Log data and graphs showing actual measured performance data is not an opinion. They are facts backed up by data. Perhaps you could do that too?