How I OPTIMISED the 5" FPV Motor with SCIENCE: AOS Supernova 2207

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 22 дек 2024

Комментарии •

  • @JonE5FPV
    @JonE5FPV Год назад +35

    Interesting progress. After testing maybe 100 motors over the years of all sizes in the field, and in competition, started to come to conclusion that for a modern pilot with modern gear (post 2020ish) it almost doesnt matter. None of us can take full advantage of the speed/power on a track other than maybe a dozen people at the top.
    Still welcome progress if it helps move us all forward.

    • @elmohawk2391
      @elmohawk2391 Год назад +1

      Best comment! Thank you!

    • @_burd
      @_burd Год назад +1

      It is good to be able to technically land on the 'solution' to the source of so much variance in motors available though, at least so the industry can then focus in on what actually are good configs using actual result data and move on to innovating elsewhere.

    • @user_z01
      @user_z01 Год назад +2

      I agree @JonE5FPV in fact I think a majority of fpv pilots out there would fly better if they had less power in their builds. The top % can take advantage of almost all advantages, but everybody else - nah.

    • @jollyrogergaming9842
      @jollyrogergaming9842 Год назад +1

      Same with motorcycles lol...

    • @robertsmith2956
      @robertsmith2956 Год назад

      @@jollyrogergaming9842 yep, honda put a throttle sensor on the bike, and discovered the rider only used full throttle for about 2 seconds. so downsized the engine, and weight, and made a bike that went faster since it ran full throttle much more often.

  • @scottmilano2940
    @scottmilano2940 Год назад +82

    Don’t call it 2207 if it’s not 2207…. FPV Cycle just gives the motor a name, which isn’t great, but is better than mislabling.
    Otherwise this looks really interesting.
    Edit: I really appreciate what you are doing in FPV, and testing everything instead of just being a hype man. Just add “class” to the name, especially on the pre-order pages, and I think you’re fine.

    • @dooddrones6521
      @dooddrones6521 Год назад +18

      I like Chris Rosser, but was kind of hoping the top comment would be the motor measurements

    • @Vousie
      @Vousie Год назад +11

      100% Pretty misleading to put it in the title, even though he does say it here (not everyone who buys this motor will have watched this video).
      Also kinda ridiculous that he wants people to keep the actual size "secret". It's not like there's gonna be this "magical" set of dimensions that are somehow better than any others. It's also plainly, physically measurable, so it's likely not gonna be long before someone does publish it.

    • @scottmilano2940
      @scottmilano2940 Год назад +2

      ​@@dooddrones6521 It’s 34g, and the FPVCycle 25mm imperial is 35g, where the Five33 2207 is 28g. It’s not a crazy difference but certainly for the weight it seems like it should be bigger than 2207. The steal doesn’t help the weight, but appears to add power.

    • @cinemoriahFPV
      @cinemoriahFPV Год назад +3

      What part of 2207 class do you not understand?

    • @scottmilano2940
      @scottmilano2940 Год назад +2

      @@cinemoriahFPV Title is “AOS Supernova 2207” not “AOS Supernova 2207 CLASS”. I think I’d be ok if “class” was added to the name. Though Five33’s 2207 is 28g where this is 34g. But ok it’s maybe it’s more durable. Even the pre-order page just says “2207” not “2207 class”

  • @Flexo3D
    @Flexo3D Год назад +29

    I don’t know about this not sharing actual stator specs. I mean, if it’s a 2208 of course it will outperform a 2207. But calling it a 2207 would be a bit disingenuous. So is it a 2207 or no?

    • @PalmliX
      @PalmliX Год назад +4

      Ultimately stator proportions are kind of a meaningless metric. It's not stator proportions that make drones fly, its power vs weight. If it weighs the same as other 2207 motors then it's reasonable to compare them. He doesn't want the stator specs released because he'd like this motor to actually be on the market for 5 seconds before getting cloned, which will happen anyway, he's just trying to slow that down a bit.

    • @Kai-P
      @Kai-P Год назад +3

      Since it has the weight of 2207 with a much thicker flux ring, I assume the stator is actually smaller. I also assume if he released a 2106 motor or something like that, all the talk would be about the size, how it's super heavy for the size etc, instead of focusing on the results compared to 2207 motors.
      All just a guess ofc.

    • @Bruno-cb5gk
      @Bruno-cb5gk Год назад

      @@Kai-P Yeah, I think the goal is to move the talk away from the size as what makes it unique.

    • @jovaraszigmantas
      @jovaraszigmantas Год назад +2

      Definitely agree, it is like calling an 18650 battery although it is not 18x65mm size. Yes perhaps the motor size means nothing but then do not give size at all. To be honest publishing the dimensions now would not make too much of a difference given that those who want to find out, will find out.

    • @Bruno-cb5gk
      @Bruno-cb5gk Год назад

      @@jovaraszigmantas an 18650 being a different size would make it incompatible with many applications. An FPV motor only needs to have the right mounting pattern to be compatible. The 2207 name is used because that's what people search for. Can't sell a product no one will find.

  • @sandersassen
    @sandersassen Год назад +16

    Well done Chris, good to see there's still some room left for improvement on brushless motors despite their design having seen many revisions over the past 20 years.

  • @leonardocastaneda904
    @leonardocastaneda904 Год назад +31

    Please extend the range of motors in this series! Imagine a "Hypernova - sometimes called a collapsar" motor, made for 7-8" drones like long range or cinelifters! Man, that would be sick! Or a "NOVA: A white dwarf star" motor for 3" or sub250gr drones! Man I´m exited!

    • @onemanmob6756
      @onemanmob6756 Год назад +3

      I would love to see a whole line-up of motors utilising the principles of the Supernova. A 15 or 1404 around 3600kV for 3.5" 4s, 1204, 7500kV for 3" 2s and 5000kV for 3s and 2006 2900kV for 4", 4s and a 6s equivalent as well.

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад +26

      I'll do my best! 😁 I want to do a 2808 and 1404 class motor as well

    • @Kiromos
      @Kiromos Год назад +4

      Something for the rc plane hobby would be amazing. 2212 size or even bigger like a 2820 or 3820 would be a huge gift to the modeling world.

    • @Blethrow
      @Blethrow Год назад +1

      ​@ChrisRosser if you're taking requests, a 2808 1k would meet my 7" 8S LR needs 😊

    • @onemanmob6756
      @onemanmob6756 Год назад +1

      @@ChrisRosser great! I guess the best showcase for a new product is to stack it up against some tough competition - both 2207 and 1404 (don't know much about larger quads/motors, so no comment/opinion about the 2808) have pretty tough line-ups!
      Regarding what you said in the interview with JB about optimising your 2206 for maximum performance while maintaining the weight - asking ppl what they want is not always the best way, ppl often don't know what is they really need - the less experience the more likely they will ask for more power (look at cars), but with more power they will struggle to both tune and fly - this is why the 'smooth' motors have had their following.
      I personally think optimising for minimising the weight, while keeping 'average' performance would be a more interesting direction - the power you are used to, but reduced weight and faster response - this is IMHO what freestyle needs, optimising for performance has more merit at racing.

  • @remotecontrolaholic
    @remotecontrolaholic Год назад +10

    Chris, this is something truly exciting to me. I studied Aerospace Engineering and one thing that really stuck with me was a lecturer's advice that one way to really be valuable as an engineer is when you can not only find a good solution, but use numerical and/or analytical processes to find what you believe to be the best achievable solution for the design requirements and available technology.
    Now I wonder if you could apply this model and process to optimize for a smaller motor class, such as for Sub-250g builds?

  • @BriaNFPS
    @BriaNFPS Год назад +41

    "If you measure the product dimensions, don't publish it" WUUUUUT

    • @yotwist_
      @yotwist_ Год назад +19

      Why even ask that, now I want to buy one just to publish the measurements

    • @MTB_FPV
      @MTB_FPV Год назад +3

      Just click a link, and it has a diagram with measurements on?

    • @TheVeganarchism
      @TheVeganarchism Год назад +4

      It’s a genius marketing ploy!

    • @sgcdialler
      @sgcdialler Год назад

      Stupid fuckin' decision tbh

    • @nateteator3901
      @nateteator3901 Год назад +3

      Haha, You don't get to know

  • @dekutree64
    @dekutree64 Год назад +5

    4:35 Surprising you're able to get higher acceleration while adding a significant amount of semi-dead weight at the outer radius where it has maximum inertia. Most of the motors I checked had very little field leakage measurable by linear hall sensors on the outside of the rotor, so I figured the flux ring thickness was already into diminishing returns in terms of magnetic performance.

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад +2

      The total inertia of magnets and flux ring is only very slightly more than a typical motor but the extra torque is 33% more so that dominates.

  • @hrmny_
    @hrmny_ Год назад +9

    would kinda prefer the y-axis on those graphs to start at 0
    very impressive motor though, any chance you'll do one for tiny whoops next?

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад +4

      Fair enough, that's Excel "auto scale" for you 🤣 I'm sure this approach could be applied for tiny whoops.

  • @hotkatgotama
    @hotkatgotama Год назад +2

    Please make a version for 7" props and the AOS UL7

  • @PIDtoolbox
    @PIDtoolbox Год назад +12

    Oooh, looks like an interesting motor! Is there interest in something similar in the cinelifter size? With that kind of thrust might also be interesting in the larger cinewhoop class carrying a Komodo

  • @mcronfpv8736
    @mcronfpv8736 Год назад +29

    Chris Rosser is a good designer, but he's an even better marketer.... Why call it 2207 while it's obviously not a 2207 ? I first read 2207 in the title and ask to myself "strange, 2207.5 performs better for 5inch"... then I see the first shot of the motor and i'm like "wtf it looks like a 2208 or 22.5 08".
    Just call it AOS S5 (for 5 inch motor) or something so it's not confusing...

    • @QueDoubleU
      @QueDoubleU Год назад

      2109

    • @bkfpv
      @bkfpv Год назад

      How can this be confusing? The best performing 2207 class motor you can get.

  • @mrthingdudeman
    @mrthingdudeman Год назад +11

    I don't understand why you would not publish the motor dimensions. _Literally_, every motor is listed by their stator volume, but then you start comparing it against motors that are listed by their stator volume. Yet, yours isn't, so it isn't a valid comparison.
    I get that you are trying to sell your stuff, but it feels like you are hiding something. You are using numbers to prove your point, which is good, but again, why obfuscate the most basic of motor information.
    FPVcycle does the samething.. They list a 25mm motor, what is that? What does that mean? Can we compare these motors?
    Keep your secret sauce, but if you are trying to take the mantle of motor tester and educate us all on what makes a good motor, then at least help everyone get there.

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад +4

      I think of it like this: there are performance numbers and design numbers. I'll happily publish all the performance numbers, power, weight etc. Everyone has a right to know the performance numbers to make a good choice. Design numbers have no bearing for the pilot (except as a substitute for performance data) but make it easy to copy the product so they are kept secret.

  • @SmackaMuta
    @SmackaMuta Год назад +6

    Please make a 1604 for 3.5" props!

  • @Quick-Flash
    @Quick-Flash Год назад +9

    Given that its not 2207 I don't like the naming. And calling it 2207 class to me doesn't mean a whole lot as 2306 and even 2406 motors are largely lumped into a similar class as 2207. It'd be better if they were just advertised as a 5inch high power motor. Then you would also be able to make better comparisons with 2306 and other 5inch motors to really see where it lies in terms of performance. Not saying there is nothing special about this motor, just that the naming is poor and there is definitely more room for better comparison testing.

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад

      I agree 💯 with you. Unfortunately, one person cannot decide how motors are named and sold in the hobby. Pilots are searching for 2207 motors for 5" quads so this motor has to be called a 2207 to show it's for the same purpose. I wish this weren't the case!

    • @harrylenon9594
      @harrylenon9594 Год назад +8

      ​@@ChrisRosserthats bullshit. Before 2207s, people were running 2206, 2305s, 2205s. Make a good product, and label it truthfully and people will use it if it's good, no matter the size. But the arbitrary value for the size is dumb

    • @Anziilife
      @Anziilife Год назад +2

      Or do like T-Motor and name it something else. Like the F40 Pro V - 2306.8

    • @rcdieselrc
      @rcdieselrc Год назад +1

      ​@@harrylenon9594 I just looked through many drone motors for a fixed wing application. Size wasn't even a consideration. Motors without published technical data weren't considered. It was easy to find something for the application based on weight, Kv, and resistance, mainly. The same way I've done it since NiCd was the only battery available.

    • @Quick-Flash
      @Quick-Flash Год назад +1

      @@ChrisRosser I disagree the tmotor f60/f40 sold very well. Same as the fpv cycle emerald motors. None of those motors listed their size.

  • @nendhang
    @nendhang Год назад +2

    hi Chris, could you do a video on the simulation software ?

  • @dfgaJK
    @dfgaJK Год назад +3

    Please clarify how you calculated the "-4.3%" weight of the Wasp Major?

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад

      Weight of the motor with 5" wires compared to average weight of all 2207 motors tested with 5" wires

    • @dfgaJK
      @dfgaJK Год назад

      @@ChrisRosser please clarify the calculation, I can't get 4.3% with the values read from the graph.

  • @gpegasusm
    @gpegasusm Год назад +7

    Do you think the key design principles can be applied to other motor sizes, like for 2.5" or 3" props, and get similar performance deltas? Or would that require a new sweep of tests, data acquisition, and FEA optimization for that specific prop size?

    • @nikotttin
      @nikotttin Год назад +1

      We totally need better micro motors! All the way down to 070x please ;)

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад +1

      I think the model should be good across different sizes (I'd need to check this) so it should be possible to optimise motors for any size.

    • @nikotttin
      @nikotttin Год назад

      @@ChrisRosser That would be amazing... :)

  • @jok250
    @jok250 Год назад +2

    Hi Chris, any plans to produce a ~2500kV version for 4S?

  • @icp-trek
    @icp-trek Год назад +1

    Hello Chris, you showed a 10" frame during your intervju with JB. When will it be available?

  • @robe2295
    @robe2295 Год назад +1

    Very curious and going to be testing this vs my current MCK motor on my racers. Is this correct?
    Motor 1 MCK (Higher KV 2100, Lower Thrust): Assuming the KV is the actual KV It's going to give you higher top-end speeds because it can spin faster (higher RPM). However, its lower thrust means it might not have the rapid acceleration you'd get from a higher-thrust motor. In a straightaway, this is where higher KV shines. For freestyle pilots who focus on sharp, fast moves and less on lifting power, this motor would be more appealing.
    Motor 2 - AOS (Lower KV 1980kv, Higher Thrust) compared to motor 1: This motor is your powerhouse. It won't hit the top speeds that first motor will, but it'll get to its top speed quicker due to its higher thrust. This makes it ideal for tracks with lots of tight turns where rapid acceleration and deceleration are key. For freestyle pilots, the extra thrust means more lifting power, which can be useful for complex maneuvers or carrying additional gear like high-quality cameras.
    Handling/Speed Differences:
    Racer: If the race track has long, straight sections, Motor 1 will give you that high top speed. But if the track is tight with many turns, AOS would probably serve you better because it'll get you back to top speed faster after each turn.
    Freestyle Pilot: For those focused on agility and quick flips, Motor 1 higher RPM offers an edge. AOS would be better for those looking to carry extra equipment or perform more complex, torque-demanding maneuvers thanks to its higher thrust.
    Would be helpful to understand it in context of actual flight as well as opposed to just a bench test which is much appreciated, I'd like to learn more about so what. I'm only addressing kv and thrust but would be nice to understand how all the factors play together in flight performance.

  • @josiahmos5880
    @josiahmos5880 Год назад +35

    That's amazing! Would love a smaller motor as well.. Perhaps something like a 1405 or 1604. :)

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад +27

      I'll see what I can do!

    • @icebalm
      @icebalm Год назад +18

      Echoing this, something for 3.5" sub250.

    • @EagleFPV43
      @EagleFPV43 Год назад +3

      ​@@ChrisRosser1504 would be a cool size for 3.5 inch drones

    • @AfafPrinceOSH
      @AfafPrinceOSH Год назад

      ​@@ChrisRosserI still didn't get how it got that design increased it's all round specs?

    • @RCRitterFPV
      @RCRitterFPV Год назад +3

      Yes Please. For the AOS 3.5 with an o3...
      maybe a 4" biprop... @@ChrisRosser

  • @bengundermann3295
    @bengundermann3295 Год назад +1

    Have you looked into using a halbach array on the bell? I'd be curious if the directionality of the magnetic field would be worth the additional complexity.

    • @lievenvv
      @lievenvv Год назад

      Great suggestion 👍👍

  • @pixonification
    @pixonification Год назад +11

    Great work! Already exited to have them.
    3.5inch quads are getting more popular now, would be cool to see the best motors for them too.

    • @xnoux1
      @xnoux1 Год назад

      Go check recursion labs
      T-motor 1404 for super light 3.5 inch

    • @pixonification
      @pixonification Год назад

      @@xnoux1yeah, but key word was "the best". Im happy with xing 1504s.

    • @xnoux1
      @xnoux1 Год назад

      @@pixonification he did the same kind of testing than Chris but for 1404 motors. Finding "the best" for 3.5 inch.
      Anyway, if you’re happy, I’m happy.

  • @flowrfpv
    @flowrfpv Год назад +2

    Oh, so you basically made the perfect motor size for V1S prop if I understand. Did you consider that there are many newer and better propellers, that don't have to perform this well with AOS motor ?

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад +1

      It's not propeller specific. More torque with better efficiency improves performance across all props.

    • @flowrfpv
      @flowrfpv Год назад

      From my experience, if you need more thrust, you'll go with larger or more aggressive props, it's not essential to have the most powerful motor. The efficiency with such props might not be as good on AOS motors, since they are higher KV. Claiming that one motor is superior to others is quite controversial claim imo@@ChrisRosser

  • @dfgaJK
    @dfgaJK Год назад +5

    Please do a comparison against a motor with the same dimension (with, height) stator.

  • @leenanipun1269
    @leenanipun1269 Год назад +2

    Nice, what tool from MIT did you use to simulate the motors?

  • @miroheymann5882
    @miroheymann5882 Год назад +12

    I like the Motor and its stats but i hate the scaled Graphs

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад

      Ah that'll be Excel's "auto scale" at work!

  • @lethalpaw7330
    @lethalpaw7330 Год назад +2

    Dear Chris, first of all: huge fan, your tuning guide made my quad fly like its strapped to rails!
    I have a quick question about the optimisation of prop efficiency. It is common knowledge that an airfoil generates lift by having a higher airflow on the top than on the bottom. When building RC Wings you sometimes hear a Foil generates even more lift when its surface is rougher on the top than on the bottom since the airflow gets slowed down even further. Is this also true for FPV Props and is there a chance you could test that with your thruststand.
    I thought of using the same prop twice in a row first in its original state and after working on it with sanding paper. Preferably with a prop of size and weight where the material loss doesn’t significantly affect the weight.
    Although I don’t think the effects will make difference like day and night, but for tiny whoops where every gram of lift matters it could be a new aspect when it comes to Propeller efficiency.

  • @frankyfrench5279
    @frankyfrench5279 Год назад +3

    Hi Chris could you please plotand show the efficiency curves over the full RPM range for the 3 motors. I have found efficiency to be far from linear and very different curves between motors. Also the minimum startup RPM current can be very different between motors. I fly only full throttle very sporadically just for power loops punch outs, so i select my motor to be most efficient at 30-40% of RPM and less effiency at full throttle has minimum effect for me. (i am not a racer) For long rangers and for (small

  • @SagivLevi-oc3rn
    @SagivLevi-oc3rn Год назад +1

    @ChrisRosser what esc are you using for you tests?, will a 45A esc be able to push 60A to the motors?

  • @geehe
    @geehe Год назад +32

    Is that the end of AOS Labs? how will you be able to provide unbiased reviews while selling your own product? Because you were not affiliated, you were able to dig deep into the technical details of each motors previously tested; But already you are refusing to talk about the size of your new motor. You should be fair and analyze all motors the same way.

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад +13

      I'm going to keep testing motors. I felt it was important to use what I've learned to create the best possible motor. I didn't think it was necessary to publish the exact dimensions of the motor as it only aids copying and no other manufacturers publish detailed design information.

    • @GeKoFPV
      @GeKoFPV Год назад +24

      Rcinpower wasp major are 22.6x6.5, its written on the bell. also according to you, the secret sauce is your magentic flux model. this presumably includes things such as air gaps, magnet strength, etc which nobody would ask you to publish. Stator size however, is common to be published.@@ChrisRosser

    • @jacobscoville2044
      @jacobscoville2044 Год назад +7

      @@ChrisRosseryeah, because competitors don’t have calipers.

    • @djbis
      @djbis 11 месяцев назад +4

      I have to agree... If this is essentially your own product, manufacturers won't have any incentive to have you review their motor. And you could be biased towards the manufacturer that produces your motor...
      Asking your audience to not share info that competitors will easily discover on their own was also a move that left me scratching my head... 🤷🏻

    • @bryanteger
      @bryanteger Месяц назад

      No, he doesn't dude. It's his motor. Its proprietary engineering that went into it. He doesn't have to give out anything like that to anybody.

  • @kylecampbell586
    @kylecampbell586 Год назад +1

    Have you considered turning the struts that hold the drums in too propeller shape for cooling if left in the shape they are now they hold the potential for deflection of the air that would potentially cool the coils?

  • @BuddsSkyCam
    @BuddsSkyCam Год назад +3

    Would love to see how efficient of a motor you could build if you wanted it to produce the same average TQ and thrust in comparison to an average 2306. Not everyone needs the power but if a line of motor was designed to be the most efficient motors, it would be something I would love for my live TV gigs. I'm filming for NBC & Peacock again this year for the professional supercross and motocross events. Always looking to gain every minute and second I can to stay in the air longer.

  • @Catiadr
    @Catiadr Год назад +2

    I'm interested in the design and analysis tools that you used and your reasons for that choice.

  • @Dedmuus
    @Dedmuus Год назад +3

    Need an aos 7" motor 👀

  • @dzulw
    @dzulw Год назад +2

    Hello Chris. I can't wait to fly these new Supernovas. However, I am one of those weirdos who still flies 4s and will there be such a version as well?

    • @dzulw
      @dzulw Год назад

      P.S. there should be a logo on the engines. your logo since there are your designs.

  • @rocoltro
    @rocoltro Год назад +2

    Congrats! Great work!
    What about a 4S version, higher KV?

  • @mastergspot7699
    @mastergspot7699 Год назад +1

    Im gonna need to sample test your motors so wheres the sign up or approval process.

  • @williamschram
    @williamschram Год назад +1

    Is there a 10” motor in the works?

  • @alvarez7777777
    @alvarez7777777 Год назад +1

    Oh Man, I love the intro :-) what you described is an excellent engineering design exploration exercise with prototyping and manufacturing… would love to know more about the FEM you have written to test the virtual models. Great stuff!

  • @ringofthebrave
    @ringofthebrave 3 месяца назад

    Offtopic: I need to replace a Mitor on a wing rc model. It is a Horizon RC Aero-Scout. The Motor on the model is lsbelled 2306-2250kv and runs on 3S. 4S will be supported by the controller bit it limits the current to 32A. With the provided propeller it draws 26A. With 4S the controller goes to max current at 32A. All data from the embedded telemetry of the model.
    As the low quality original motor fell apart after some very exciting 4S flights I am looking for a replacement.
    Would the lower kv rating of the AOS Supernova reduce the power-output on 3s significantly?
    As I just have to buy 1 instead of 4 motors the price doesn't play a big role. I took a look at the GTS v4 MCK as well. Looks very cool and has slightly higher kv.
    May be somebody already tried to use a performance drone motor on that Aero-Scout model.

  • @pr4wn5tar
    @pr4wn5tar Год назад

    Can you provide a comparison of the electrical power consumption during the thrust, efficiency and torque tests? Also, how do you calculate mechanical power?

  • @eugeneforshter
    @eugeneforshter Год назад +1

    Do you plan to make bigger motors? For 7”? 10”?

  • @sylaswojciechowski6895
    @sylaswojciechowski6895 Год назад +1

    Very cool. Thanks for all your work!

  • @yuranium
    @yuranium Год назад +2

    Amazing work. Thanks for pushing innovation forward in this hobby.
    Though I do think developing some type of standardized durability and reliability test benchmark will be highly valuable.

  • @GiovanniEsposito5
    @GiovanniEsposito5 Год назад +1

    Can you pulish the efficiency curve at 6s wit some of the props you tested? From the data on the webshops it seems that at max thrust the efficiency is really bad. It doesn't give it justice, given that max thrust is considerably more than the rivals.

  • @masterlegend4996
    @masterlegend4996 Год назад

    If you're the one, who did it, Hats off! Please Make Brilliant breakthroughs like this! The world is waiting for people like you, but it just ignores many of them!

  • @goldbornmusic2025
    @goldbornmusic2025 Год назад +1

    Excerlent knoweldge well done Chris i realy hope this works out well for you.

  • @brownster4865
    @brownster4865 Год назад +1

    7” Quad? - This initial motor is for 5” optimization. Would the technology apply or possibly even have greater impact on a motor designed for a 7” setup?

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад +1

      I would expect to be able to achieve a similar performance uplift for 7"

  • @pappuinfo6721
    @pappuinfo6721 Год назад +2

    Great job, true gem, lucky to have you in this field unlike others who uses only predictions to demonstrate the results of certain motors and props on how well they performs in real life. Against all odds keeping going forward with your honesty and hard work as it pays itself in time, better than you expect. Doesn't need anything more than you have, will attract new people coming to this field to your work. Always love from us.

  • @tiwidub8809
    @tiwidub8809 Год назад

    Excellence is here as usual, Chris. Thank you. I just ordered your motorz ! ❤

  • @vladimirskrivanek6290
    @vladimirskrivanek6290 Год назад +1

    Hi Chris. Can you write down in the comment the link for the MIT FEM app? I couldnt google it... Im in my last year of mechatronics study and we have a course on electric motors and drives. I would like to play with it and have a chat about it with my teacher. Thanks a lot. Im also impresed by your approach to these things. Like I learning about it in school but you are the first person im seeing it to use on drones :D Keep it up!

  • @florianricker1633
    @florianricker1633 Год назад

    This is a great motor for Freesyle, are motors for the 7' longrange also in developement

  • @kyojurorengoku7451
    @kyojurorengoku7451 Год назад

    where does Velox V3 2207 1950 KV motor stand in perespective to AOS SUPERNOVA 2207 1950 KV . i reall want to know where velox stands . thank you

  • @TavoFourSeven
    @TavoFourSeven Год назад

    Either way can you do the same for ultralight 5" size-weight and 7"+ size-weight? Like a 2004 or 2808.

  • @maryjane136
    @maryjane136 Год назад

    My motors were delivered. Which ESC do you guys recommend for highspeed? For example: Hobbywing XRotor 60A, Lumenier Elite 60A or something else? Looking 30x30 for Five33 Switchback HD.

  • @leonjiang2882
    @leonjiang2882 Год назад

    The design process is super interesting! I assume the same process can be used to optimize anything? What software did you use for the FEA?

  • @McShakyFPV
    @McShakyFPV Год назад

    Will bells be available for purchase?

  • @frasersteen
    @frasersteen Год назад +1

    What would be really useful for fixed wing pilots is knowing what the max reasonable amps it can run would be. Eg could I run this with a 55x65 prop on a race wing, will it handle a 6x4 etc

  • @captaindronieversefpv
    @captaindronieversefpv 3 месяца назад

    hi Chris , i want to ask your prediction about this motor's TopSpeed with X Standart Frame Analog Quad. How much km/h it will go ?

  • @marcfruchtman9473
    @marcfruchtman9473 Год назад

    This is very exciting. Would you be willing to go thru the process you went thru to file the patent? How were you able to justify paying for the patent process given the costs of filing?

  • @SurajKumar-vb1yu
    @SurajKumar-vb1yu Год назад +1

    please compare between pmsm vs fpv motors ...compare their torque and efficiency

  • @jmc_fpv
    @jmc_fpv Год назад +1

    Amazing Chris! 👏 very beautiful job!!

  • @sprky777
    @sprky777 Год назад

    Could the motor be wound with silver wire to reduce heat loss?

  • @sytyuk
    @sytyuk 8 месяцев назад

    Hi Chris, I have bought motors 2207 1980kv and I have noticed that motors are heating and pretty hot after flying, is it fine?

  • @patrickdahow5323
    @patrickdahow5323 Год назад

    Can we buy them in neutral colors like black, gray or white in the future?

  • @Shins_FPV
    @Shins_FPV Год назад

    Hmmm I just got ones, they arrived yesterday. it is sad not to see any review by FPV community about those motors, I don't understand it. I will check them by myself... ;) any advice if they need different pid tuning, or I can just swap my wasp majors for them, and my quad will be good to go?

    • @Shins_FPV
      @Shins_FPV Год назад

      I hope for answer… rly. ;)

  • @liurootFPV
    @liurootFPV Год назад +4

    Chris, I really liked the innovations, flux ring, high temp enamel, and the shaved mount areas... but not sharing the stator size is not a good idea, because people will think this is much larger than a 2207... which might explains some of the improvement...
    Did you have shave the mount weight to compensate a larger stator?
    Nevertheless I expect that they are amazing still... great engineering work as always, and great work on model based design...

    • @Bruno-cb5gk
      @Bruno-cb5gk Год назад +2

      It's clearly a smaller stator if it has so much more steel while being almost average weight.

    • @rcdieselrc
      @rcdieselrc Год назад +1

      The size doesn't matter. Only mass.

    • @andrewbt87
      @andrewbt87 Год назад +1

      @@rcdieselrc durability also matters and the bell and magnets are thinner

  • @fkamaral
    @fkamaral Год назад

    Chris, a little help, I got those motor installed on my Drone today, but the PID form them that comes by default on betaflight 4.3 just sucks for it, it works with a 3S battery, it sound like one or two bearings are hitting it other with a 4S battery and it sounds like all bearings are going crazy with a 6S battery… do you have any baselines of PID where I can start? My ESC is a BLhelli, not a. lHelli32…

    • @fkamaral
      @fkamaral Год назад

      Also to add to that, with a 6S the motors and the battery get extremely hot, and a 6S 1100Mah is depleted in about 40 seconds

  • @TechnicallyTom
    @TechnicallyTom Год назад +2

    I really enjoy watching your videos and learning about your process for improving designs but can’t help but think how well this would pair wit how Bob Roogie designs motors. How you select a motor could be used to find a few motor designs that could then be tested. I have yet to see any real world reviews or tests of your motor. When you say that your motor is a certain percentage more efficient, it kind of sounds like I should be able to fly that percentage of time longer if I’m just cruising around but we both know that is not how it really works. Would be nice to see a variety of motor sizes, especially motors sized for sub 250.

  • @scoptimizations
    @scoptimizations Год назад

    Good advertisement video. You sold it to me. 🤣
    really exited about it. Grettings from germany!

  • @Piotrek_ryb
    @Piotrek_ryb Год назад

    Do you think its good for 5-7 in long range drone?

  • @AtradiesInc
    @AtradiesInc Год назад

    Maybe do a betaflight pid tune. I have low throttle oscillation and sounds like motor is out of time. But in high to mid throttling it does great

  • @MountaineerFPV
    @MountaineerFPV Год назад +1

    Well done Chris! Thank you for the innovation 👍👍👊

    • @ChrisRiley3D-Everything
      @ChrisRiley3D-Everything Год назад

      I would love to have a set but not for 130 dollars if you include tax & shipping. Especially if i don't know what the true size is. But they look nice. So Bo how many did you pre order? hahahaha i know you love that power! and will want a few to try. You be sure to let me know if this hype is real.

  • @cinemoriahFPV
    @cinemoriahFPV Год назад +1

    Please make a 30xx size stator for 7-8 inch cinelifters 😄

  • @JD-FPV
    @JD-FPV Год назад +1

    is there more of a comparison of the motor efficiency vs others in the same category closer to the max mechanical output? 35% isn't bad for an efficient cruiser, but I'm more interested in seeing, max power vs max current draw. Not much point having a (undefined) motor size which makes 20% more power for 20% more current even if the weight is the same as 2207. At that point, the innovation is really just that its a lightweight, bigger motor. Not trying to sound negative, it looks fantastic and those are some awesome numbers.
    I just don't need more power out of my racer if its going to murder my batteries more.
    Alternatively, as another thought, could we see the power consumed at comparable thrust output to other top competitors. I realise that would be a whole extra slew of intensive testing to tune each test to find the equivalent output.
    Another consideration which I would like to see, along with the high temp enamel, I've seen a lot of magnet adhesives failing either from the mechanical or thermal stresses lately across a couple of manufacturers. It would be nice if you were able to lead the way in pushing advances in that for durability.

    • @jtjames79
      @jtjames79 Год назад

      Always wondered why nobody has tried active cooling.
      A CO2 cartridge, and some tubing that goes to the motors.
      Shouldn't be too hard to find a place to squeeze in some turbines to assist spinning the props.
      Basically CO2 cartridge splits into four goes through hoses, or maybe 3D printed quad arms with houses built in. That pressurized air pushes a little turbine, to get the kinetic out of it, and rapidly expanding liquid CO2 cools the motor.
      Like turning a can of air upside down and using it to spin a computer fan.
      Similar concept as nitrous for cars, if you prefer car analogies.

    • @JD-FPV
      @JD-FPV Год назад

      @@jtjames79 a while back there was a brand selling motors designed to be pre-cooled, and with a serviceable oiled bearing. It looked a bit 'snake oil' at the time

  • @nateteator3901
    @nateteator3901 Год назад +2

    Wow, the rcinpower spec on pyrodrone says it draws over 60 amps with a 51466 prop?! That's going to test a lot of ESCs.

    • @cinemoriahFPV
      @cinemoriahFPV Год назад +4

      Good luck finding a lipo that can deliver 240 amps continuously.

    • @nateteator3901
      @nateteator3901 Год назад +2

      @hersheyfpv3501 I'm not sure if all 4 motors will be held at 100% for any length of time. But still, these are 7-inch power requirements. I don't race, so what do I know, but I would like to hear a racers viewpoint.

    • @thewhitedillard
      @thewhitedillard Год назад

      @@cinemoriahFPV Bingo 🎯

  • @ariafpv
    @ariafpv Год назад

    I'm a little sceptical about those numbers but if it proves to be right, would it be possible to be scaled up with equal results?

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад

      Yes it should be possible to apply ths approach to get the best performance at any size.

  • @ZSMracing
    @ZSMracing 9 месяцев назад

    Thank you for for making these motors run so great

  • @lambo_drives
    @lambo_drives Год назад

    there is SOOO much talk about this motor. hope it has the durability edge too - sounds amazing

  • @terminsane
    @terminsane Год назад

    Is there a way to put another set of magnets on the inside, in the hollowed out core?

  • @PavelShadrenkin
    @PavelShadrenkin Год назад +1

    Good job! You really demonstrated your amazing engineering skills and enthusiasm by perfecting the quad engine, which, according to almost everyone, was already as efficient as possible

  • @QueDoubleU
    @QueDoubleU Год назад

    Hi! I really like my rcinpower bison 1800kv motors. They're great. Can you create a motor with the same torque and efficiency, but reduce its weight?

  • @MindRiderFPV
    @MindRiderFPV Год назад

    Will you do 2208s too? Love the power

  • @Ricpow80AkaNagamooto
    @Ricpow80AkaNagamooto Год назад

    The spec says good up to 5s only! But the kv seems to be more suited to 6s... why are they only rated to 5s? Is 6s not recommended on these?

  • @sotirisstrouthias
    @sotirisstrouthias Год назад

    What about the tuning ? If i change to this motors for my aos 5" what should i do with the tuning?

  • @2Meerkats
    @2Meerkats Год назад

    My question - with such a leap, what is the smallest motor (less moment arm inertia) you could make for " sub 250g

  • @Dontshowmyname123
    @Dontshowmyname123 3 месяца назад

    How bad would it be to run zeee 4s 120c lipos on these motors? I currently have 4 new 1500mah and 2 1300mah and planning on buying only 2 6s 1300mah 120c bats and want to rin tue 4s bats until i can buy enough 6s bats. Or should just wait

  • @alexandreptito8485
    @alexandreptito8485 Год назад

    hi chris, i just recieved these motors and after taking measures, i was wondering is there a particular reason that you call these motors 2207 when they are larger close to a 23?

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад

      They weigh the same as a 2207 and are designed for the same purpose, the name is to make sure they end up in the right place on store listings.

  • @JustSomeGuy1979
    @JustSomeGuy1979 Год назад

    @ChrisRosser Thank you for your diligence and contribution.I just ordered a set today.I was wondering if and really hoping you could recommend some BLHeli32 ramp up,timing and pwm settings.

  • @isaiahfreerksen334
    @isaiahfreerksen334 Год назад

    Hello Chris,
    Your great/hard work has paid off. Congrats!!!
    I was curious what simulations software you used to design this new motor. I am starting on my journey to learning electric motor design, focusing at the moment on the axial flux motor type. I will be using it in a micro-mobility vehicles. I find your way of thinking about the design process very forward looking and am interested in learning a little more about it. Well thank you for your time!
    Isaiah

  • @InspGadgt
    @InspGadgt Год назад

    Do you plan to make optimized motors in other sizes and/or for other sized props? Given this is the optimal kv to efficiency for this size motor and a 5" prop...if you are targeting a different kv would you then change the size of the motor? Many 3d printed RC airplanes use drone motors. In this way we can move the battery more forward to better balance the plane on the CG. So I'm always interested in more efficient motors given how much planes fly at full throttle when flying combat models.

  • @skysailorfpv
    @skysailorfpv Год назад

    I am definitely buying a set to put on my AOS 5 v2 can't wait., thank you for all of your work.

  • @thetom1309
    @thetom1309 Год назад +1

    This is amazing! I had this one question for some time, seems like a good moment to ask : did you try to repeat same motor tests to make sure results are the same ... say a month later ? Of course there may be a drift due to ambient temperature or ambient magnetic field or something like capacitors degradation over time. But do you see same pattern between different motors if you redo motor bench tests again ?

    • @ChrisRosser
      @ChrisRosser  Год назад +1

      I tested multiple samples and have retested motors over time. In general the results vary by up to 1% over time.

  • @Galileocrafter
    @Galileocrafter Год назад

    11:00 Did you measure this with the same ESC? In my experience, when making those measurements it’s crucial to have the same ESC, else you are just measuring the differences of the ESCs.

  • @ElementalGeneral
    @ElementalGeneral Год назад

    Why the secrecy around the dimensions?

  • @jakeeames725
    @jakeeames725 Год назад

    We are so lucky to have this man in our community. Thank you again sir! Def buying a set or 12

  • @fluffsflyin1025
    @fluffsflyin1025 Год назад

    Seems like a great motor, but I have one question. Did you fly it before you have done all your tests? And what was your feeling? I hope you have flown it before bench testing it, because bench testing and flying it after would bias your feelings

  • @PeterM-PeterM
    @PeterM-PeterM Год назад

    Amazing! Do you have plans for the sub 250g quads? I use 1306 , with a 1.5mm shaft on 3s or 4s to keep weight to a minimum. Any plans for something in that category?

    • @Bruno-cb5gk
      @Bruno-cb5gk Год назад

      1306 seems like it would be underpowered and overheat easily. So far the best motors I've seen for sub 250g are RCINPOWER 1804s.

    • @uhu4677
      @uhu4677 Год назад

      @@Bruno-cb5gk Totally depends on what he means with sub 250g.
      150g is also sub 250g.

    • @Bruno-cb5gk
      @Bruno-cb5gk Год назад

      @@uhu4677 1404 is better for that. 1306 is just too tall.