This design looks interesting. If you are happy to share the files, I would be interested in testing this and comparing it to the other I have.
Here, but untested as of now
2 Likes
Started printing one, I added more celarance for the baldes as they come out wider than the CAD model by around 0.3mm. I only had modelled 0.2mm clearance, now up to 0.6mm There is a V2 file uploaded to GRABCAD
I’ll print the prop out of PETG-CF and see how stable it becomes. Otherwise it will be laminated.
2 Likes
has anyone found/tried a 3 blade fixed prop for the 6384/6374 motor? I haven’t found one yet and want to try on my tow boogie builds.
1 Like
Hey @nekitesurfing, for laminating, did you remove a 2mm layer from the overall CAD design or did you sand where necessary after? Thanks!
1 Like
I sanded it down but this was a long and quite tedious task. If I was to do it again I would have printed it slightly smaller. Particularly the props.
1 Like
Concerning the efficiency, is it a real game changer as FD claims compared to what you had before ?
Because I did one take off before it broke by cavitation with my PA12 one and I did not feel any big difference compared to my 2 blades propellerking.
I have no way of measuring the efficiency on my set up. I have only used it 3 times so far but in terms of “feel” I find there is more thrust but it isn’t a big difference. I too have the propeller king two blade folding prop which is excellent so I wouldn’t say you need to change. I just like experimenting.
1 Like
Hey people,
Did you try cf?
Cf-pet (not petg) seems stronger than cf-petg, from reviews.
I would guess that the orientation of printing the blades matters a lot. Probably horizontally should be stronger, although needs cleaning. Temperature as well higher maybe to fuse the layers.
Maybe propellers better be printed with a resin printer because resin doesn’t depend on orientation.
Here is what the test print look like for my version with small blades.
Not super conviced It seems like there will be too much drag.
Good Idea but I would reduce the diameter of the hub at least to motor diameter to avoid drag: 63mm
Could you explain what do you want to achieve with your design ? Is it necessary to use such small blades ?
Tks
Wanted to reuse existing blade designs.
It it is not possible to make it smaller because the Bolts have some interferences then.
Hub diameter is 80mm
The flite prop is uploaded and linked somewhere here on the forum, that’s an alright prop
1 Like
Works well for the 63100, might have too much pitch for the shorter outrunners.
1 Like
I tried it. I didn’t really like the appearance of the part. I didn’t notice any particular increase in strength. I heard that thermal post-processing is needed.
1 Like
Realy nice. Unfortunately I don’t have a lathe.
I did an adapter like this with a 3d printed part and a bolt. Works well (but need to be balanced like any prop)
2 Likes
Which blades are you using at this propeller?