RCU Forums - View Single Post - DualSky 11T testing
View Single Post
Old 06-19-2008 | 03:36 PM
  #5  
shannah
My Feedback: (5)
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,199
Received 47 Likes on 24 Posts
From: placentia, CA
Default RE: DualSky 11T testing

I think the V2's are 25C, like most of the Enerland cells. Enerland now has 30C cells and I think the 5000mah packs will be available soon. I like my new Rclipo.com PolyRC 5000's which are 25C Enerlands. I'd like to get the 30C's when they are available. $$$$. I haven't done any inflight measurements since I don't have a Spin or Eagle Tree, but I can sure feel the difference when running the 25C Enerlands.

It would be interesting to compare (consecutive flights in similar conditions) the performance of the TrueRC, FlightPower, and V2's. I think the TrueRC's are rated at 10C, Flightpower is 17C and the V2's are 25C. If the V2's are able to hold up and deliver the power then your numbers should be higher.

Your test results make me wonder whether or not 5000mah will be enough. If your peak remained at 78 amps and you consumed 3800mah then you would be fine with the 25C 5000's. If those numbers increased then you would probably want the higher discharge capacity cells and you would also get close to exceeding 4000mah (80% capacity) per flight on a regular basis. That wouldn't be good for the cells. So, you'd be back looking for 5300 or 5500mah capacity cells. I know that right now, running my Flightpower cells on the 12T with 20x15 APC, I get approx 3900mah consumption on P-09 on days with winds of +10mph and flying big fast maneuvers. That's a lot of time at WOT. The interesting thing is that I burn about the same on my 25C Enerland pack but get much better flight performance. I haven't measured peak RPM or Amperage on the ground, but I'll do that next time out.

With all that said, I'd like to have a little more "reserve power" available for short duration, but as it is I have nothing left when I need it most. What does the RPM look like on the 11T spinning a 20x15 APC? Maybe it would give me that little extra that I need.

It would be interesting to see what the motor design parameters would be and what the power consumption would be if you wanted to spin that 20.5x14 at a 5% higher RPM than what you measured. That would mean having a propulsion system capable of increasing from your measured 6740 to 7077. Then you'd have some real power at your disposal