That's a bold statement ... Worlds Best. But it's even larger than that. Not just Worlds Best, but best for most all applications less than 30 Amps (limit of the tests). That means:
- duration ships that only pull 2 to 8 amps per rotor
- most all 6S and smaller ships (exception of nano-ships)
- any-size FPV racer
- any other ship in between
Why almost any size? Shouldn't a small FPV racer use a smaller and lighter ESC for response? Yes, if it does better on a net-lift response test. In other words, when you penalize the ESC for it's weight, is it still better and faster? What i continue to see is ESC manufacturers downsizing critical components of the ESC at a net loss. They weight savings is lost because of greater thrust loss and response. In other words, this heavier ESC will out accelerate, in the real world, a smaller and lighter ESC.
Why post this? To move technology forward, we need to report to industry what works and what doesn't. For some reason (i don't know why), this ESC works better than all others tested:
- for generating maximum thrust from the motor***
- for net-lift efficiency or the grams of weight it can lift (after it lifts the rotor) per watt
- for response (how fast it can generate targeted lift)
These tests were conducted on multiple days on multiple rotors of highly variant size, always being immediately compared back to another DYS 40A multicopter test to ensure that the baseline wasn't changing.
The ESC that dominated is a DYS 40A OPTO Multicopter using SimonK. The photo is included because there are two others that carry a similar or same name.
- Not the white cover DYS BLHeli 40A
- Not the one that is says "Programmable" versus "Multicopter" in the blue/purple band across the front
Have i tested all ESCs? No, but if you are convinced you know of one that would work better, let me know. I've tested most all of the following and one or more of their variants:
To do a test like this, a highly repeatable and finite test stand is needed. It took a while to develop one but what works is one that:
- measures (at a minimum) volts, amps, thrust, motor temp (shoots IR up the aft end of the motor)
- eliminates harmonics between the rotor and load sensor (this proved difficult but achievable)
- is calibrated and proves repeatable within 1.5%
- controlled by a system that can precisely repeat a rotor test (uses a Audurino Mega)
- directly feeds the data into Excel for analysis (uses DATAQ)
- uses a test script that produces repeatable results
- uses a test procedure that minimizes repeatability error (used average of multiple tests)
How much better is this ESC? On average:
- 4.4% higher net lift (after it lifts itself)
- 2.3% more net-lift efficient (usually the larger the better)
- from more than twice the response or the same response as other ESCs (usually the larger the better)
So how to make it better?
Step 1: Strip it naked. See photo below.
... remove the cover
... remove the heat plate (better to locate the ESC under prop wash to run cooler, see below)
Step 2: Right-Size the bullet connectors or wires (see above where heavy wires are replaced by 2mm bullets)
... remove the large bullet connectors or wires
... replace them with ones that are the most net-lift efficient (where heat loss = weight loss)
Step 3: Seal the ESC. Seal it with Electrical Sealant to protect from moisture and conductive dust
... tape or plug connectors and wires
... repeatedly spray each side from different angles
... a mistake i made was not sealing the bullet connectors and solder
- don't tape them off like i did
- insert a male connector into the end of bullets so sealant doesn't get inside them
Step 4: Locate ESCs under Prop Wash. See photos below. The turbulence generated by the prop does not adversely affect lift when the ESC is placed on edge to the prop wash.
... Use something non-conductive like hot glue to bond the ESCs to the motor mast or spar
... Face the FETS (the little square warehouses or Fire Emitting Transistors) to open air
... Protect the ESCs from below from ground contact (not needed here because of clearance)
back-side with hot glue
front-side with FETs completely exposed to open prop wash
Step 5: Tie up wiring. Use dental floss to secure wiring away from the prop.
***Note: The T-motor Air 40 in high-timing mode (an option) generated higher thrust, but at the sacrifice of efficiency and motor temp. Also, the T-Motor Air 40 was 2nd best and close in performance. If you are using an Air40, it probably isn't worth switching.
I don't understand like that Emin, I understand that He open the game to others to give better solutions to grow up with them, most of Us buy frame kits for our diy drones, he propose creative designed homemade frames and setups, not ussually find in forums, we don't have to copy but to take in mind ideas to become better our ship, following him I have more than double my flying time with a very different frame and setup so title is the less important for me, content is valuable; only my opinion.
Different than Darius than attack other's threads and never show his experiences , Forrest open his oun post to discuss his proyects, If you don't like simple, not read them; I don't read the hole forum, only my interest.
Emin Bu, I find your comments quite interesting. Is it the way Forrest puts over the subject or the content that you do not like? Maybe you do not think nomex, or balsa skinned with carbon should be used in the making of drones. Perhaps you consider everything should be bolted rather than bonded. Or you may not want to know, how to make a lightweight gimbal, the efficiency of ESCs, use Forest's Custom Quad CAD or Hover Vibration Check tools. Be given information on, effectiveness of dampers, how to save weight on wiring, connectors etc.
I suspect that many on this forum do find the information provided freely by Forest very interesting. Maybe some do not like the way Forest puts the subject over, and just maybe many think it's great, and like the way he responds to questions and his helpfulness.
Forum readers can make up their own mind whether information freely given is good or suspect. That is a choice we all have.
This ESC will blow Darius' mind --> http://flyduino.net/KISS-ESC-2-5S-24A-race-edition-32bit-brushless-...
No heatsink or active cooling needed when mounted between CF plates.
You can make a frame with wood too....but for what?uncontrolled flight of 60min to earn MR60 badge?.....yes,you can bond motor mounts with hot glue,but for what?lightweight gimbal,i build more than a few,but none of them can compare to lightness of some made out of magnesium(Gremsy) or carbon(infinity mr-s) or similar...efficiency of ESC,hm,did he try to upload great BLHeli software and be able to tweak settings on any ESC instead how he claim testing 30 some ESC...testing how?do we see any equipment for that in his posts?cmon man,leaving open contacts on ESC and tie them with rope?'spray them with 3M sealer which will block heat dissipation??sorry i didnt read whole post...hoover vibration check tools????i have one perfect inside Mission Planer...
Problem is he publishing informations which is not that but just his ideas and then people around here try to build something similar with catastrophic results bcs.Pixhawk do not like vibrations,miscalculations,bending frames...
He have only one goal,to stay on the top of discussions with his ideas,and bombastic headlines....at least here he have some public who will listen...why don't he build his super-mambo-jambo glued multirotor made of "world strongest affordable material"with "worlds best ESC" and demonstrate all his ideas in one place?
Sorry i must completely agree with Darius this time....also Darius is many times right about many things around here,but the way he express himself with hate in his words is not adequate,especially when he attack developers who always do the best they can...
Sorry i loose my nerves sometimes too....
I think you may have missed the point I was making.
Everyone has a choice whether to use the information given on any thread in their drone build, they can also use their commonsense to make adaptions if they need to for whatever reason. Just because a person does not like the way something is written or does not agree with the content, does not give them a right to insult the author who has freely given their time to share the information.
Emin - I will give you one last chance before you too become Darius.
If the title, "World's Best" is incorrect, then kind sir, tell me which one is better or are you only capable of negativism, which helps no one? I only ask that you name one ESC that performs better. Can you do that?
I dont care what i will become,for sure i am not kind....also i can speak only about ESC i use: one is Turnigy Plush 40A with BLHeli software and another is Hobbywing XRotor Pro 80A-HV
How Can i resist this thread. !!!
The work here in my opinion is unnecessary. For many reason but i speak from personal experience.
I use hobbywing xrotor 40 A ESC. They are always cool to the touch after 20 min of flying. They have NEVER failed me and perform and exceed my expectations. So why would i strip them and coat them ? What do i gain ? Water resistance ?? But why?? Everything else on my quad is not water resistant..Why would i make my ESC water resistant? Even if this material improves thermal dissipation which i dont think it will it has not been proven, they are cool because of the set up and application.. What do we hain from this? NADA !!
I would not compare Darius to Forrest. Forrest puts alot of time and effort which is appreciated in this forum by all members who read his posts.
Darius is wikipedia/google/internet warrior who just trolls. (Nothing positive, ZERO)
You save a little weight. If you're making a rail thin vehicle, every gram counts. Thank you for sharing your experience with this ESC though, I figured it would still perform pretty well stock.
Yes. tested those. good, but not as good as generating higher thrust and efficiency as the DYS 40A Multicopter ESC shown above. Don't toss them. We are only talking a few percent difference. Something to keep in mind with buying new ones.
Spot on! hope i haven't misled. Do Not Remove or Replace or modify happy ECSs!
this is just for reference for
- consumers (what to buy when you replace or buy new) and
- manufacturers (if you want to improve and make yours the best now you know what you have to beat).
The point of removing the heat shrink and aluminum plate is to reduce weight. The coating won't improve heat dissipation. It is only there to replace the heat shrink.
The purpose of a heat sink is to transfer heat from the FET to surrounding fluid (air). In order to best achieve that the surface area of the heat sink that is in contact with the air must be maximized.
If the heat sink is covered with heat shrink then the transfer of heat is slowed down and the heat sink and FETs reach a much higher temperature compared to when the heat sink is in direct contact with air.
An aluminum plate covered with heat shrink is rather pointless. It will not increase the heat transfer from the FETs to the air. It will however provide some thermal inertia - it will take more energy to raise the temperature of the heat sink by one degree versus a naked FET.
If the FET is covered with a thin coating it will not greatly affect the heat transfer abilities of the chip.