new speeder
03-30-2023, 11:02 AM
#651
Senior Member
No one ever cared what you did you are the one that takes it father and lies to say you do it because it is better not because you have a slinky az inverter. Then you lie so you really cannot have a technical conversation with you that's worthwhile anyway but no one gives a sht what you wind stop lying to the forums is the point. You are the jackass with the threads labeled Align and Lehner 41 when you know you efficiency is less! You askd questions in ya dumb az forum and get answers you dont like. Onse that do not support your theory.
Keep my name and motors and threads out of ya mouth and i wouldn't be a problem for you. The problem for us is u hate the attention I get so you cant very well leave me alone.
I care less what you do but no one will hold you up as a guru to me. I laugh at it and that's sincere. Ive never been confused my choice has alway been clugh even when christian made me aware of your existence. Your fan base is and how they base their choices a far more interesting study actually.
Regards,
Hubert
Keep my name and motors and threads out of ya mouth and i wouldn't be a problem for you. The problem for us is u hate the attention I get so you cant very well leave me alone.
I care less what you do but no one will hold you up as a guru to me. I laugh at it and that's sincere. Ive never been confused my choice has alway been clugh even when christian made me aware of your existence. Your fan base is and how they base their choices a far more interesting study actually.
Regards,
Hubert
Last edited by Clugh; 03-30-2023 at 11:31 AM.
03-30-2023, 07:17 PM
#652
Senior Member
Maybe the jack ass didnt read this a tiotally seperate post and testing two motor not in the same size range LOL
As announced, here is the efficiency comparison test with the 4140/13, many thanks to Ralph for the test specimens.
Because the 4140 was built according to the latest findings and with great effort for partial load optimization by sheet metal inference and segmented magnets, I have always been interested in what this brings in practice, only how to measure without a test bench?
For this I have considered the following simple method, take a comparison motor of similar weight and specific speed and measure the required input power at partial load and full load on a prop with identical speed, so you get 4 different input powers for always the same output power.
Preliminary consideration and measuring environment:
As a comparison engine an old HK4540 was selected, at first this seems unfair but the decisive criterion is the weight, the user is usually not interested in what dimensions are working there.
The 4540 weighs 3.9% more but a 4535 would be 7% too light, so you get the closest and why should lightweight construction be punished, especially since the 4540 has the 10mm solid steel shaft required in this size class.
In addition, it is not a hobbyist motor, but anyone can even buy it with a 4+4x1.7YY winding at WOH, but only a 4+4x1.6YY was deliberately selected so that the 4540 suffers from copper deficiency similar to the 4140 and it is a fair comparison.
Both motors do not achieve the necessary 15-20% copper content, which has proven to be a prerequisite for high efficiency.
The controller is a YGE Opto135 without housing, which allows 12s with 190A and above all outputs the PWM, which is recorded with an S32, was set to 18° fixed timing and the basic setting of 32kHz PWM frequency was left as it was.
Since the current shunt is located in the YGE between electrolytic capacitors and power amplifier, the current values are not always accurate, so a Unilog2 was also used, which of course also measures the controller losses.
For the partial load, 86% PWM was chosen, a value that is often found in the helicopter halfway through the flight in the upper speed.
For this purpose, the gas curve was changed so that only so much gas is output at 12s that a maximum of 86% PWM is achieved, while the 100% PWM measurement took place at 10s.
An APC 14x8.5E was selected as prop because the pitch-diameter ratio is below 65% and thus no stalls threaten, which would affect the power consumption unevenly.
Unfortunately, there are still ripples due to room air vortices, so you should not take the measured values in the valley or mountain, but measurement errors of 0.5% are possible.
Evaluation :
The measured values can be found in the note, as you can see the specific speed is similar.
In the 100% PWM measurement, the 4140 has only an n/n0 ratio of 74.2% at this operating point and thus a poor speed stiffness, something that is not so welcome with helicopter pilots.
Word should have gotten around by now, that according to Schenk's motor rule, the efficiency at an operating point cannot be better than the n/n0 ratio at this point.
So the cheapest value was Eta with 74%, resulting in a wave power of 4827W, which then results in an Eta of 78.7% for the 4540.
For the partial load at 86% PWM, the 4140 requires an additional power of 4% and the 4540 of 4.9%, resulting in a partial load Eta of 71% for the 4140 and 75% for the 4540.
So you can see that the 4140 can no longer catch up with the worse full load Eta by the lower partial load more power, is actually logical because a good full load Eta is the foundation for a good partial load Eta.
But also in absolute terms, the effort for partial load optimization seems to me to be disproportionate to the benefit of only 0.9% lower partial load more power.
Also, according to the data sheet, an Eta of 91% at 10kW and 35000U so 67V and 150A is completely out of thin air, as you call something like that is up to you.
It should also be mentioned that the copper filling degree of the 4540 can be increased by up to 50%, resulting in an increase in speed stiffness and efficiency of 4-5%, otherwise I would not bother to accommodate as much copper as possible in my motors, in high-load applications there are over 90% copper losses.
Unfortunately, the 4140 does not have this tuning potential due to its design, and it is precisely he who desperately needs it.
Conclusion:
It is disappointing that there is no tangible benefit with this effort, especially since THE expert described this engine as the non plus ultra, maybe you should go back to measuring than just simulating and calculating high.
Unfortunately, I have to say that if this is what further development looks like, then I'd rather stick to the status quo, which is a pity for Lehner.
VG Thomas Schmidt
As announced, here is the efficiency comparison test with the 4140/13, many thanks to Ralph for the test specimens.
Because the 4140 was built according to the latest findings and with great effort for partial load optimization by sheet metal inference and segmented magnets, I have always been interested in what this brings in practice, only how to measure without a test bench?
For this I have considered the following simple method, take a comparison motor of similar weight and specific speed and measure the required input power at partial load and full load on a prop with identical speed, so you get 4 different input powers for always the same output power.
Preliminary consideration and measuring environment:
As a comparison engine an old HK4540 was selected, at first this seems unfair but the decisive criterion is the weight, the user is usually not interested in what dimensions are working there.
The 4540 weighs 3.9% more but a 4535 would be 7% too light, so you get the closest and why should lightweight construction be punished, especially since the 4540 has the 10mm solid steel shaft required in this size class.
In addition, it is not a hobbyist motor, but anyone can even buy it with a 4+4x1.7YY winding at WOH, but only a 4+4x1.6YY was deliberately selected so that the 4540 suffers from copper deficiency similar to the 4140 and it is a fair comparison.
Both motors do not achieve the necessary 15-20% copper content, which has proven to be a prerequisite for high efficiency.
The controller is a YGE Opto135 without housing, which allows 12s with 190A and above all outputs the PWM, which is recorded with an S32, was set to 18° fixed timing and the basic setting of 32kHz PWM frequency was left as it was.
Since the current shunt is located in the YGE between electrolytic capacitors and power amplifier, the current values are not always accurate, so a Unilog2 was also used, which of course also measures the controller losses.
For the partial load, 86% PWM was chosen, a value that is often found in the helicopter halfway through the flight in the upper speed.
For this purpose, the gas curve was changed so that only so much gas is output at 12s that a maximum of 86% PWM is achieved, while the 100% PWM measurement took place at 10s.
An APC 14x8.5E was selected as prop because the pitch-diameter ratio is below 65% and thus no stalls threaten, which would affect the power consumption unevenly.
Unfortunately, there are still ripples due to room air vortices, so you should not take the measured values in the valley or mountain, but measurement errors of 0.5% are possible.
Evaluation :
The measured values can be found in the note, as you can see the specific speed is similar.
In the 100% PWM measurement, the 4140 has only an n/n0 ratio of 74.2% at this operating point and thus a poor speed stiffness, something that is not so welcome with helicopter pilots.
Word should have gotten around by now, that according to Schenk's motor rule, the efficiency at an operating point cannot be better than the n/n0 ratio at this point.
So the cheapest value was Eta with 74%, resulting in a wave power of 4827W, which then results in an Eta of 78.7% for the 4540.
For the partial load at 86% PWM, the 4140 requires an additional power of 4% and the 4540 of 4.9%, resulting in a partial load Eta of 71% for the 4140 and 75% for the 4540.
So you can see that the 4140 can no longer catch up with the worse full load Eta by the lower partial load more power, is actually logical because a good full load Eta is the foundation for a good partial load Eta.
But also in absolute terms, the effort for partial load optimization seems to me to be disproportionate to the benefit of only 0.9% lower partial load more power.
Also, according to the data sheet, an Eta of 91% at 10kW and 35000U so 67V and 150A is completely out of thin air, as you call something like that is up to you.
It should also be mentioned that the copper filling degree of the 4540 can be increased by up to 50%, resulting in an increase in speed stiffness and efficiency of 4-5%, otherwise I would not bother to accommodate as much copper as possible in my motors, in high-load applications there are over 90% copper losses.
Unfortunately, the 4140 does not have this tuning potential due to its design, and it is precisely he who desperately needs it.
Conclusion:
It is disappointing that there is no tangible benefit with this effort, especially since THE expert described this engine as the non plus ultra, maybe you should go back to measuring than just simulating and calculating high.
Unfortunately, I have to say that if this is what further development looks like, then I'd rather stick to the status quo, which is a pity for Lehner.
VG Thomas Schmidt
03-30-2023, 07:23 PM
#654
Senior Member
This is what the clown said
Has worked, does what he should. Just because two try with all their might to use a machine incorrectly to do justice to its applicationSince you obviously adjust the world as you need it, here are the two comparison values at partial load with 86% PWM:
To turn the same prop with 14500U, your part-load optimized miracle engine needs 6787W, but the scrap iron only 6432W.
So and now explain what this is for a wrong use, you may not operate the gem with a propeller or is it too much or too little power for the expert or Voltage, how would you have to load the supermotor so that it suddenly plays out all the advantages???
Audiosmith
User
Christian Lucas wrote:Has worked, does what he should. Just because two try with all their might to use a machine incorrectly to do justice to its applicationSince you obviously adjust the world as you need it, here are the two comparison values at partial load with 86% PWM:
To turn the same prop with 14500U, your part-load optimized miracle engine needs 6787W, but the scrap iron only 6432W.
So and now explain what this is for a wrong use, you may not operate the gem with a propeller or is it too much or too little power for the expert or Voltage, how would you have to load the supermotor so that it suddenly plays out all the advantages???
03-30-2023, 07:30 PM
#655
Senior Member
Since the "Maschinenbauer FH" (StGb §132a) does not like to help his obviously confused poc-brother:
Here (that's a link!) is the comparison including candidates and all data.
What the man has been fabulating about "2S" for several days can probably - as so often - not be revealed to anyone.
Because he is so on pictures, I photographed the two again.
Finally, I quote Gerd again, so that CL does not think he can grow grass over the matter:Gerd Giese wrote:
@Christian, we (!) now expect a concrete answer from the measurement differences of #414!
Exactly "so" I would have done it (only with brake motor at constant load) - as a reminder:
(mathematically this is an efficiency difference of almost 5.5% - not insignificant in my opinion!)
To turn the same prop with 14500U, the Lehner needs 6787W, the scrap iron 6432W.
... Please explain ...
Another lie a 4140/13 under load is 436 Kv @ 12 s its 20 grand...86% is 16,7....
Here (that's a link!) is the comparison including candidates and all data.
What the man has been fabulating about "2S" for several days can probably - as so often - not be revealed to anyone.
Because he is so on pictures, I photographed the two again.
Finally, I quote Gerd again, so that CL does not think he can grow grass over the matter:Gerd Giese wrote:
@Christian, we (!) now expect a concrete answer from the measurement differences of #414!
Exactly "so" I would have done it (only with brake motor at constant load) - as a reminder:
(mathematically this is an efficiency difference of almost 5.5% - not insignificant in my opinion!)
To turn the same prop with 14500U, the Lehner needs 6787W, the scrap iron 6432W.
... Please explain ...
Another lie a 4140/13 under load is 436 Kv @ 12 s its 20 grand...86% is 16,7....
Last edited by Clugh; 03-30-2023 at 07:32 PM.
03-30-2023, 07:38 PM
#656
Senior Member
So were waiting for the voltage at 2s because the comparison was the 4225 against his 4125 1984 kv that's the resistance you matched. You are a clown that really thinks people have no recollection. If this was the case the response wouldn't take 4 days
U are such a liar it's pathetic!
the 4140/13 is 436 kv loaded so how now is it 14000 rpm at 86% of 12 s lipo..
You a whole fool! 436 LOADED! x 48 volts = 20,928 rpm
86% is 17.998 Ralph.
SO are you and Thomas done lying yet!
Thats number 4!
You a such a liar!
Please continue.....
Thanks
Hubert
Its no surprise the Führer keeps going with the POC comments he cannot help what he is.. It does not change the fact that he and Thomas are liars with zero integrity and no degrees. All u have to do is check what and idiot that cant tell a good lie says.
U are such a liar it's pathetic!
the 4140/13 is 436 kv loaded so how now is it 14000 rpm at 86% of 12 s lipo..
You a whole fool! 436 LOADED! x 48 volts = 20,928 rpm
86% is 17.998 Ralph.
SO are you and Thomas done lying yet!
Thats number 4!
You a such a liar!
Please continue.....
Thanks
Hubert
Its no surprise the Führer keeps going with the POC comments he cannot help what he is.. It does not change the fact that he and Thomas are liars with zero integrity and no degrees. All u have to do is check what and idiot that cant tell a good lie says.
Last edited by Clugh; 03-30-2023 at 08:15 PM.
03-30-2023, 07:51 PM
#657
Senior Member
Damn Christian
I certainly though the German forums had more value than this, Its down right embarrassing. There level of dishonesty cannot be matched. Ud have to be a fool to not see through it. Thomas is still missing thats how you know.
The 4225 is and overpriced marginal efficiency paper weight!
Powercroco
Iron losses 280.9 watts
Copper losses.3 watts
Esc 7.2 watt
The battery loses 2.4 watts
His power density is 50.18 Km²/g
His Kt is 4.81 mNm/amp
Km .1552 Nm/sqrt watts
Maxon eq 1.92 Max Eta 93%
Powercroco is in last place.....
And youl never get the voltage to the fake test!
I certainly though the German forums had more value than this, Its down right embarrassing. There level of dishonesty cannot be matched. Ud have to be a fool to not see through it. Thomas is still missing thats how you know.
The 4225 is and overpriced marginal efficiency paper weight!
Powercroco
Iron losses 280.9 watts
Copper losses.3 watts
Esc 7.2 watt
The battery loses 2.4 watts
His power density is 50.18 Km²/g
His Kt is 4.81 mNm/amp
Km .1552 Nm/sqrt watts
Maxon eq 1.92 Max Eta 93%
Powercroco is in last place.....
And youl never get the voltage to the fake test!
Last edited by Clugh; 03-30-2023 at 08:00 PM.
03-30-2023, 08:04 PM
#658
Senior Member
Why do feel the need to lie. Is it that important to maintain a guru facade? You're no expert or Guru. You don't hold a single piece of paper in the field.
The kv you just tried to lie on is still wrong fool!
The kv you just tried to lie on is still wrong fool!
Last edited by Clugh; 03-30-2023 at 08:11 PM.
03-30-2023, 08:17 PM
#659
Senior Member
Since the "Maschinenbauer FH" (StGb §132a) does not like to help his obviously confused poc-brother:
Here (that's a link!) is the comparison including candidates and all data.
What the man has been fabulating about "2S" for several days can probably - as so often - not be revealed to anyone.
The 4140/13 is 436 kv loaded so how now is it 14000 rpm at 86% of 12 s lipo..????
No the truth wont be revealed! because thats 17998 rpm at around 41 volts there is no way you come close at 20000 rpm!
You got big ac loss at idle speed.
You are a fraud and cant tell a good lie. U resort to lying....thats funny!!!
Here (that's a link!) is the comparison including candidates and all data.
What the man has been fabulating about "2S" for several days can probably - as so often - not be revealed to anyone.
The 4140/13 is 436 kv loaded so how now is it 14000 rpm at 86% of 12 s lipo..????
No the truth wont be revealed! because thats 17998 rpm at around 41 volts there is no way you come close at 20000 rpm!
You got big ac loss at idle speed.
You are a fraud and cant tell a good lie. U resort to lying....thats funny!!!
Last edited by Clugh; 03-30-2023 at 08:24 PM.
03-30-2023, 08:30 PM
#660
Senior Member
Which lie you like the best Christian?? Where did yiu find these two. They are incredible. Ive never had technical debate with out right liars bro.
WOO!!
WOO!!
03-30-2023, 08:34 PM
#661
Senior Member
if you remember the wide window he ploted he was interested to see what happened way out there. i think the clown matched you against a gear box direct drive. Trust me he tried to slow it down by voltage. They are so slow i can see them light years away!
03-31-2023, 05:03 AM
#662
Senior Member
"In addition, I have just cut off the HK 4225 (1984/V; I0 = 18A at 15.65V, calculated eta max 93.5%) comparison engine for the Lehner 4125-5 (1805/V; I0 = 16A at 15V eta max according to the calculated "data sheet"93.3%)because as expected nobody could use it."
~powercroco~
See how the man lies. It was the 4125 vs the 4225 and you know from maxons math he is only at 93 whild the Lehner is 94 He is not at 93.5
~powercroco~
See how the man lies. It was the 4125 vs the 4225 and you know from maxons math he is only at 93 whild the Lehner is 94 He is not at 93.5
Last edited by Clugh; 03-31-2023 at 05:11 AM.
03-31-2023, 05:07 AM
#664
Senior Member
u can do the math yourselves Ralph is a liar!
you see 93.47 mathematically him being higher is impossible he has a terrible ac/dc los ratio with the same Rm. His AC is 10 times that of his dc Rounded to the whole decimal the scorpion is 93 the lehners ar 94 thats math.
you see 93.47 mathematically him being higher is impossible he has a terrible ac/dc los ratio with the same Rm. His AC is 10 times that of his dc Rounded to the whole decimal the scorpion is 93 the lehners ar 94 thats math.
Last edited by Clugh; 03-31-2023 at 05:10 AM.
03-31-2023, 05:12 AM
#665
Senior Member
The other issue is the POC Align is 96%
Powercroco
Iron losses 280.9 watts
Copper losses.3 watts
Esc 7.2 watt
The battery loses 2.4 watts
His power density is 50.18 Km²/g
His Kt is 4.81 mNm/amp
Km .1552 Nm/sqrt watts
Maxon eq 1.92 Max Eta 93%
Clugh
Now Black Karma "POC" Edition
Total losses 74.6 !
Copper .1 watts
Iron 73.6 watts
Esc .8 watts
Battery .1 watt
Kt= 11.55m Nm/amp
Km = .1639 Nm/Sqrt watts
Power Density 59.88[Km²/g]
Maxon Eq 1.92 Max Eta 96%
His POC friend has no issue sinking Powercroco the clear fascist to his proper place. Dead last! Not only in ETA I crush the black n gold fascist in every category while he throws the POC moniker around at will.
He is a true embarrassment to the EU! How anyone purchases that I'll never know and it isnt even that good.
He is far from politically correct throwing that around and a real joke. Look at the numbers. Not even close!
Powercroco
Iron losses 280.9 watts
Copper losses.3 watts
Esc 7.2 watt
The battery loses 2.4 watts
His power density is 50.18 Km²/g
His Kt is 4.81 mNm/amp
Km .1552 Nm/sqrt watts
Maxon eq 1.92 Max Eta 93%
Clugh
Now Black Karma "POC" Edition
Total losses 74.6 !
Copper .1 watts
Iron 73.6 watts
Esc .8 watts
Battery .1 watt
Kt= 11.55m Nm/amp
Km = .1639 Nm/Sqrt watts
Power Density 59.88[Km²/g]
Maxon Eq 1.92 Max Eta 96%
His POC friend has no issue sinking Powercroco the clear fascist to his proper place. Dead last! Not only in ETA I crush the black n gold fascist in every category while he throws the POC moniker around at will.
He is a true embarrassment to the EU! How anyone purchases that I'll never know and it isnt even that good.
He is far from politically correct throwing that around and a real joke. Look at the numbers. Not even close!
Last edited by Clugh; 03-31-2023 at 05:29 AM.
03-31-2023, 05:25 AM
#666
Senior Member
The 4140/13 is 436 kv loaded so how now is it 14000 rpm at 86% of 12 s lipo..????
No the truth wont be revealed! because thats 17998 rpm at around 41
u are a 93.5 liar buddy
Thats a fact u see the chart says ala CL
U see his motor at 15 volts is 30000 half of that is 15000 and that would be 7.5 volts!!!!
No the truth wont be revealed! because thats 17998 rpm at around 41
u are a 93.5 liar buddy
Thats a fact u see the chart says ala CL
U see his motor at 15 volts is 30000 half of that is 15000 and that would be 7.5 volts!!!!
Last edited by Clugh; 03-31-2023 at 05:34 AM.
03-31-2023, 05:36 AM
#667
Senior Member
SO WHAT WAS THE VOLTAGE AT 6.4kw on 7 volts like like I "FABULATED" some time ago.. U cannot lie your way out. I got you again! the 4140/13 Kv does not fit your lie....
the 4225 was named "Scrap iron" by Christian not the 45!!!
See ur caught a million different ways bro....keep working on your lying its still not that good....
the 4225 was named "Scrap iron" by Christian not the 45!!!
See ur caught a million different ways bro....keep working on your lying its still not that good....
Last edited by Clugh; 03-31-2023 at 05:41 AM.
03-31-2023, 05:59 AM
#669
Senior Member
And the best for last, the Mr. writes that the motors the size of the Lehner 4125/5 draw only 3 amps no-load current on average. His super hand-wound 4225/6 easily takes 2 amps more than the Lehner, the Okon 4225/6 takes 18 amps, but has an almost 4000 rpm higher idle speed that should actually be corrected with a higher number of windings, so with even more copper that cannot be accommodated in the stator as well as the Ri would be even higher. This is the fake news of the gentleman.
Happy Amps Christian
Happy Amps Christian
03-31-2023, 06:08 AM
#671
Senior Member
It aslo doesnt change the rip off!!!
Special Edition - Scorpion Power System (scorpionsystem.com)
Look at who and what you are paying for. Lies and people of color jokes.
The lowest efficiency and lowest moral character and integrity in class....look what he's posting. Thats funny to him. But is just an additional reason to not but a scorpion as long as they associate with him.
I boycott the brand from this point so I'm setting up a give away page. You can have it for free just pay the shipping.
Danker may want the scorpion parts.
I wont patronize that. Sorry. I dont really lose anything who wants it for free just speak up?
Special Edition - Scorpion Power System (scorpionsystem.com)
Look at who and what you are paying for. Lies and people of color jokes.
The lowest efficiency and lowest moral character and integrity in class....look what he's posting. Thats funny to him. But is just an additional reason to not but a scorpion as long as they associate with him.
I boycott the brand from this point so I'm setting up a give away page. You can have it for free just pay the shipping.
Danker may want the scorpion parts.
I wont patronize that. Sorry. I dont really lose anything who wants it for free just speak up?
Last edited by Clugh; 03-31-2023 at 06:14 AM.
03-31-2023, 11:13 AM
#673
Senior Member
Im done here Christian. The models are coming in and certainly my choices in motors and winds wont change, You wont get any answers to the lies so for me the PC saga is dead and stinking. I'm working with the engineers at Zubax and the higher performance boaters.
Suckers will be suckers itz not my job to police the vendors lies or abhorrent conduct.
Michael is on his own with the okie doke!
Monitor the increase in speeds..
My time will be spent building and running the models hard.
TTYL
Hubert
Suckers will be suckers itz not my job to police the vendors lies or abhorrent conduct.
Michael is on his own with the okie doke!
Monitor the increase in speeds..
My time will be spent building and running the models hard.
TTYL
Hubert
Last edited by Clugh; 03-31-2023 at 01:51 PM.
04-01-2023, 12:58 PM
#675
Senior Member
And them Michael Y-D hybrid 12N10P is not a Single layer anyway..so they do not know what they are talking about. Ralph doesnt have to change his wind but why shouldnt you if you want to fly faster?
