The Evil Doctor's Next Project

[Dr. Jet]

...... Please forgive me if I bugged u.


Regards
Hubert

No, not at all. I like a spirited discussion and there's always room for an old geezer like me to learn something new. When the secret project in the paint shop (powered by the same 1107/1.5Y/H) is done, I'll post a thread on it.

If I were competing on a serious level against other equally inspired to win opponents, I would ABSOLUTELY be in favor of data-logging to squeeze every last drop of performance out of a particular project. But since I just fun-run the minis, all they have to do is look good, be fast enough to impress the local fishermen, and most important of all: Not burst into flames. While far from perfect, optimal, and 100% accurate, FE Calc is close enough and tells me all I really need to know.

[eXoNerated]

.....

[Dr. Jet]

Even a fun runner should want better efficiency and if Markus's calculator suggest detonging the prop so it can unload I dont see it as taking the fun factor away.........

Regards
Hubert

Whatever makes you think I don't strive for better efficiency? That's like saying if you don't support a particular position 100%, then you are against it. It's not an either/or endeavor. Consider it more like both/and arrangement.

I don't think I have a single prop that I actually use that I haven't cit the tongues off. This is an X427 on my 1/16 scale, straight-shaft '58 Short Circuit (Neu 1110/1Y power).

[eXoNerated]

....

[Dr. Jet]

Well how do you strive for it if you dont know the mecahnical out versus in?

I do it the way they did in the old days: I use the dual optical sensors God gave me.

.........Glad to see the tongue cut but how much faster did the boat run and what was the amperage draw as compared to the previous run with an unmodified prop for instance?.......

I have no idea, nor do I care to know. I never ran it with the unmodified prop. When I did run it, it ran as intended and didn't let the smoke out of my speed control. I intentionally under-powered this boat with a smaller than typical motor as I was only trying to achieve a scale appearance when running and wanted a lighter weight power system. I don't put a lot of detail work into a boat that will be racing deck-to-deck with other boats. This boat had a lot of detail work.

The goal of that boat was NOT ABOUT SPEED........ I could care less if I could make it go 2mph faster by doing something different. It was about STYLE!

NOTE: While I have run this boat, there are still a few items to finish it off. It needs the exhaust stacks fabricated and installed, the driver to be painted and installed, and the engine cowl hold-down system needs to be finished.

It's way down in the building queue.

[eXoNerated]

...

[Dr. Jet]

This is where I get the idea you dont care about efficiency.

Just because I don't measure everything to the last milliamp, milllivolt, and milliamp and spend countless hours over a spreadsheet analyzing data to seven significant figures doesn't mean I don't care about efficiency. That is a logical fallacy.

U keep posting about speed and that you dont care to know but I asked you how are you striving for efficiency as you said you were. If u dont know power out vs power in I asked how. Knowing about amperage b4 and after a prop mod is very useful. Im trying to point out that your method wont tell you this so theres no real way to take a better shot at efficiency or know you're actually more efficient. If you dont care about it okay but I get mixed messages from your post. It doesn't sound like you feel comfortable fully engaging me on this topic which is quite alright but this is my spirit in technical discussions. If you are striving for efficiency then you have to care u cannot separate the 2.

Regards
Hubert

So you are saying all the early pioneers in FE like Jay Turner, Brian Buaas, Ed Hughey, and others were completely wrong or had no clue as to what they were doing because they didn't have the ability to log data while running. And you also believe that only since the appearance of data loggers were builders able to make improvements in designs/setups.

I don't think that's the way it happened....

[eXoNerated]

No I havent said a thing about Jay Turner. Did you read that somewhere? But he and every other highly competitive FE sailor is going to use a log the moment they were made readily available. Even the IC guys swear by them and this includes the HOF members. I havent made any statement about what they did back in the day or really care but technology brings improvement so why would I relish in the antiquated inaccuracies of then or an eye test now. I can assure you he doesnt strive for efficiency that way. But I promise it is fine if that your choice. No harm no foul. Were getting away from the technical discussion and into name dropping on active members so Id rather leave it alone. I dont need this to talk about how to find efficiency it only starts trouble. I dont really understand the point as its clear you cannot strive for efficiency that way.


Regards
Hubert

[Dr. Jet]

No I havent said a thing about Jay Turner. Did you read that somewhere?

Data loggers weren't available to him when he started in FE so according to your line of thinking, he had no clue because he had no data.

But he and every other highly competitive FE sailor is going to use a log the moment they were made readily available.

Obviously. BECAUSE they were highly competitive.

so why would I relish in the antiquated inaccuracies of then or an eye test now.

I do because it's "good enough" for my purposes.

Were getting away from the technical discussion and into name dropping on active members so Id rather leave it alone.

I only brought up the names of some of the early pioneers in the FE endeavor to make a point because of the HUGE contribution they have made to FE, and they did it the hard way (no loggers).

The technical discussion makes my head hurt. I'd rather run some boats around in a circle and shoot the breeze with other drivers.

dont really understand the point as its clear you cannot strive for efficiency that way.

I think you are confusing MAXIMUM efficiency with IMPROVED efficiency. That's why I brought up the old timers. They looked for efficiency with the tools they had, and they did it without loggers. I don't NEED maximum efficiency, and I don't NEED to win the lotto. That doesn't mean I would turn either of them down if someone offered it to me.

[eXoNerated]

....

[NativePaul]

Dr. Jet,
I think I may have told you this elsewhere, but I am not sure, so sorry if I am repeating myself but if not it could be useful info to you. Did you know that if you add the saltwater snorkel, and a flood chamber down the left side you can make this hull self-righting?


Hubert,
Datalogging isn't a miracle cure for burned ESCs, or for achieving top level performance, sure it can give you useful information, but so can your eyes. I consider my eyes much more important than datalogging.

I have an Eagletree v3 datalogger and probably haven't used it in over a decade, I don't think it has ever been in any of the boats I currently run, and definitely not in any of the boats I currently race.

I also have an RCM GPS datalogger for my SAWs boats and I do think it is useful there to see where I am picking up or losing acceleration but haven't put it in any of my race boats or fun boats and don't intend to.

Neither loggers have any place in a boat this size. Even on hulls that can easily fit them in (which isn't all by any means) you're still adding 10-15% to the RTR weight of the boat so cant expect accurate data.

For Mini boats like these, the only real option for datalogging is an ESC with it built in, for a while when the Castle Ice series was out it they seemed like a reasonable value proposition without any drawbacks and nearly all my boats got these, and I still run an Ice 50 in my Mini Hydro race boat. They turned out to not be too reliable for me though, and all the others have burned out, all on setups that were logged to draw peaks of under their rated amp draw and averages under half their rated amp draws. The cheaper Chinese ESCs I replaced them with have proved more reliable despite not having datalogging, and are lighter than the Edge series that replaced the Ice series.

Experience has built up a knowledge that you may equate to a version of FE Calc in my head, I know what prop mods or setup changes are going to increase or decrease amp draw, and can easily confirm this by running a race duration and seeing what I put back into my batteries afterwards. Running datalogging in the past has certainly increased that knowledge, but I knew my average amp draws and their realationship to changes long before dataloggers came out, the biggest thing dataloggers have done for me is let me see the relationship between peak amp draws and averages for my boats and driving style, but now that I have seen that it is consistently around double there is much less need for it.

I do think datalogging is useful, especially for the newbie that hasn't built up a knowledge base yet, but Dr Jet is not a newbie, he has been designing building and running Mini FE boats for years, and is likely one of the most knowledgable people in the USofA on the subject. I would trust his guesstimate on the subject better than I trust your calculation.

I know plenty of people that compete at the highest level and have never used a datalogger.

I don't know any of the SAW racers mentioned other than limited interaction via the forums, so won't comment about them personally, but I know enough SAW racers to know that SAWs racing is a risky game, that SAWs racers in general have burned plenty of ESCs in the past, and although they burn less as time passes, they will still burn more in the future. I would be interested in hearing from them if they are indeed slowing down the rate of their burn ups, and if so what they think the bigger cause for that is, their ever increasing experience and knowledge, or datalogging.

You say that you think Dr Jet will be pulling over 1 mechanical HP and will need to be pulling that sort of power to move the boat. That makes me think that you have never run a boat of this size, and know nothing about the subject. These will get up and plain on about 100w, I have seen them successfully on 200w, and I wouldn't want to put even .5 hp through one without hull mods which would alter the desirable scale appearance.

You ask how Dr Jet can strive for efficiency without knowing electrical in and mechanical out, but you have no way of knowing at mechanical out either. you are using a calculated efficiency to further calculate a torque which is a flawed premise in itself, but even if accurate it only gives you mechanical in, you have no way of knowing what your mechanical out is. Nor do I, which is why I value looking at the boat and seeing how it performs and acts is important.

Even if you could calculate the electromechanical efficiency, it doesn't allow you to calculate how efficient the boat is at doing what you want it to. For example you can add a turn fin which slows the boat down, lowers RPM and increases amp draw, it has less electromechanical efficiency, but now it goes around corners so the boat's efficiency at running an oval is vastly increased.

I've never seen a Tyco that would impress anyone.

[eXoNerated]

Paul if you like to run without logging you may.No one does this. But you can if you chose. Your eyes cannot tell you a thing about rpm or even what speed you are at. Data logging is also alot more useful than keeping something from burning up properly used. u have to understand physic first and most people have proven that they cannot even read the graphs correctly or understand how an electric motor really works. Datalogging is single handily the most useful tool in an fe box other than the charger GOTTA HAVE THAT! I gotta leave this where it stands let you all run without logging. Oh boy! no time for this debate this truly silly and just for arguments sake. I ve been impressed my many tycos as a kid. Who hasnt owned one. Ive never been impressed by fires in rc boats Paul. You got this carry on.


BS!
mechanical out is the rpm and the amperage draw which correlates directly to the torque constant of his motor that derived by dividin 1 by the KV so that not correct what you say from a physics standpoint. You minimize error by factoring in the motors winding factor. and then again by factoring the motors efficiency which is the square root of stall current divided by idle current I tried to show you u dont have to listen and go with the calculator in your head but it def has many more errors. And it cannot do all these things on the fly. Impossible! What makes it so bad is Neu post the torque contants of all his engine so people that are capable can use it in this way Torgue will correlate directly with the amperage. Ur mind wont compete with it relatively small margin of error as compared.

Do you know how to determine the winding factor of your motor Paul? If you and the Dr do not this is your chance to learn what Im trying to teach.

Regards
Hubert

[eXoNerated]

Can you do this in your head?


Kw = (sin (1 / 2nσ) ) / (zsin (nσ / 2z)) xcos (1 / 2nε)

(chording angle) "ε" = 180 * -ys
(coil span) "ys" = 180 * / (qx Nph)
(phase spread) "σ "= (ysq)
" q "= Ns / (NphxNm)
(dual layer coef.)" Z "= Ns / gcd (Ns, NmxNph)
(single layer coef. ) "z" = Nc / gcd (Nc, NmxNph)
"n"

Ns = number of slots Nn = number of
poles Nc = number of coils Distribution factor "Kmn" = (sin (1 / 2nσ)) / (zsin (nσ / 2z)) Coil span factor "Ken" = cos (1 / 2nε) (Winding Factor) "Kw" = Kmn x

Do you want the knowledge or not? Im trying to help you. This idea that you are speaking with some newbie in fe boats or electronics has alot of flaws. It should become obvious at some point that Im very much in my element when speaking on this. The increase in amp draw at the addition of a fin is merly the new torque required to move the additional drag. That's your boat in its entirety what ever caused it and that why the logging is useful. Would you know the amp draw went up with its fin addition with an eye test on the water or whats in your head? No you have to have real input. Numbers. Temp, rpm, amp draw, something.....

Regards
Hubert

[Dr. Jet]

Hubert,

You obviously don't get it. This thread is about MICRO and MINI boats. There is no alphabet soup regulatory association here in the US that establishes any rules for racing MINIs and MICROs, and as such there is no organized racing. With no organized racing, why is it necessary to take something fun and turn it into a tedious exacting science? For what? One more MPH or an extra 15 seconds of run time when you're the only boat on the water? It's like analyzing and categorizing all the moves and motions in the sex act. You take the fun out of it and make it into work. I don't care about the specific moves, I care about the entire act. If I could finish it faster by moving a little to the left, I DON'T CARE! The important thing is: DID I ENJOY THE ACT?

Let's take my MHZ Geckos for example: They are currently way overpowered with a 3000 Kv cheap outrunner on 2S. I seldom get one complete lap with them without SOMETHING funny happening. They would be completely useless for racing because they are beyond the power limit for that hull, but..... I keep them that way because it is hilarious when they fly through the air, then do submarine impressions, followed by flips and rolls and a "Space Shuttle" launch. There's a whole lot of "Hey watch this!" when I take the Geckos to the lake. I do it for FUN; I don't care if I could get an extra 30 seconds of run time if I cut the prop down my 1mm. That's not my goal!!

Native Paul gave me a ration because I built an H&M Redbird. He said they were outdated and no longer competitive. Duh!! Competition was not my goal. Whimsical looks were (and a Redbird does look "different"). It will eventually get painted with an "Angry Bird" theme and will be a boat I can let the young kids drive without fearing a problem. It's not always about competition.

About data loggers: There is often too little room to fit one in a micro, they add weight, they cost money. Money that would be better spent on beer.

Then, please consider this: Let's suppose I do buy a logger, find room to fit one in, and log all the data. What would I do with all the data? Propeller choices are extremely limited for the little boats, so there may only be two or three available options for a given hull/motor setup. That's where I use my optical superpowers: I look at all 3 setups and see which works best. It is also when I correlate what I see to the predictions FE Calc provides, and why I've come to the conclusion that the prediction program is close enough for my needs. No, I'm not going to buy a slightly different motor to eek out that extra 1 MPH, because that's not in my list of overall goals. One of my goals with the little boats is keeping costs down. I'm making an exacting science out of building CHEAP but fast (enough) boats. Remember, our motto is "Fast, Cheap, and Out of Control!"




P.S. I'm sure plenty of our FE pioneers burned-up their fair share of ESCs "Back in the days". They probably burned up some of those servo-actuated variable resistor types as well.

[Dr. Jet]

Now enough of these irritating arguments about data logging and striving for technical perfection. I want to get back to the topic of this thread, which happens to be "My Next Project". Any further talk of data logging, mathematical theory, or gymnastic calculations, and I'll ignore you and have this thread closed for hijacking it.

Verstanden?