ORIGINAL: highhorse
I will leave the discussion with this thought
If it takes 10 lbs of thrust -to hold in stationary hover a 10 lb model -using a simple single propeller - - the prop will need a given amount of power (hp) to do that job . not more or less
the reaction of the applied power at the prop will be equal to the force turning it..
swapping props -as long as the setup will still just hover the model -- will result in same "torque rolling effect".
Oh-My-God...this is going to drive Dick and me nuts.
Or at least me
I'm gonna try to make my point one-more-time. Then, hell or high water, I'm quitting. ( I know Dick's thinking "finally!!")
Please picture in your mind any two identical props on two identical planes of identical 10.00000000 lb weights. Two identical engines burning...you get the point.
Hover them at the same time. Same TQ roll tendencies, right? NOW THEN, glue POPCICLE STICKS to the blades on one model. Sideways. THAT model now has a very
inefficient , goofy prop. THAT one will use a lot MORE power to make the same 10 lbs of thrust due to the very
draggy and goofed up prop. The extra drag being overcome at a higher rpm to make the same 10 lbs of thrust will burn more calories or amps or watts or joules or frigging dilithium crystals for all I care.
But it will, it WILL, according to none other than Mr. Newton's 3rd law, have MORE TQ ROLL.
There, I'm done. Whew...feels good
POWERLINES, in redneck-speak (as per your request) SWAP PROPS. Experiment. Enjoy. Bet your buddies beers on the outcome.
It's all your's now Dick. I'm worn out.
Thanks for indulging me, Don.
Makes sense to me -- you changed the setup - by adding the non lifting devices - changed the results
here is a bit of history-- to check the quality of a refurbrished aircraft engine -- the standard setup has been a large "load prop"--much like you mentioned a very draggy paddle thing -
IF the rebuilt engine turned that prop at a specified rpm (at STP) - it wa OK- This is the same thing a my electric motor /thrust tests
I found that X prop required a specific amount of power input (watts) to deliver Y thrust - Had I included rpm , it would be more useful info to other applications -but all I was after was power required to hold a model in a hover - all the props I used were basically of fthe shelf, low pitched props of differing diameters
No added paddles no grossly oversized or undersized stuff - and the results were as noted.
So power absorbed, indicated a particular load ( which I read as thrust)
Experimenting is what it's all about .
My own experiments showed mye my problem was NOT the props -it was the lousy batteries (lack of available power .)
for really good 3D flying an excess of power is needed - this allows you to juggle as may be necessary
a really sharp 3D flyer can hover with a 1-1 power to thrust setup -but trying to learn with that setup is veeeery tricky 2-1 or bette really helps -