FBL blades

[dunkonu23]

I've tried Radix, Edge, and Mavrikk FBL blades.

My order of preference is: Edge, Mavrikk G5 Pro WC, then Radix (I haven't tried the V2's, yet).

I like Edge blades because they don't introduce any bad tendencies and have just enough of everything for my flying style--pop, stability and tracking. Mavrikk G5 Pro WC blades are a super, extremely close second. They have everything the Edge blades have but are more aggressive, they have more pop. I have a set of 620's on my Furion 6 and it's insane how fast that helicopter is I flew Edge blades on it once and the difference in pop was apparent. Mavrikk won the pop war hands down. Radix blades... again, I haven't tried the V2 blades, but they didn't flip right, they kicked the tail in flips, but they track perfectly and are extremely stable in FFF. Because Radix FBL blades are mostly black, they're hard for me to see. All of the above blades I've tried in 623, 620, 553, 550, 430, 425, and 325.sizes.

Scott

[helidude71]

Well, I had to know so I ordered a set of Align 425D 3G FBL blades. (HD420ET)
When they arrived I compared them with my normal FB 425D blades.

I took an old flybar and hang the FB and FBL blades by the root.
They hang exactly the same! (Not parallel but like scissor.)
After this I laid them down back to back on the flybar and rolled them back and forth.
The FB blade tipped over at the exact same moment the FBL does!
Last thing I did is put them on a scale.
The FB blade weight the same as the FBL blade.

WTF am I missing here!
It looks to me the 425D 3G blades are just ordinary FB blades with 3G printed on them.

[extrapilot]

It certainly could be the same blade with a different branding… But there are other possibilities. One is a more forward CG vs center of pressure. That is not the same as how they hang from the bolt; the blade profile may be slightly different, or the bolt hole may be in a slightly different place. Similarly, the mass distribution may be different- such that (for example) it has less mass in the mid-section, and more in the tip and root. Or, the blade’s layup may be different (i.e. modified compliance in bend or twist, or different dampening, etc). The chord width may be slightly different, which would change the Lock number, etc.

Id bet more towards same blade, different logo…

[helidude71]

Originally Posted by extrapilot

... Id bet more towards same blade, different logo…

Haha, you have good points but that is my feeling as well.
I send them back.

[banditpowdercoat]

Is there really such a thing as specific FBL and FB blades???

I think they should be catagorized with a +- 0-5 scale on Span and Chord CG. Something like if the CG was perfectly in center of the blade Span and CHord, would be a 0/0 But leading Chord, and outer on span positive, say +3/+2 and behind center on Chord inboard of Span center negatives -1/-2 Then there could be a quantifying number for each blade and we could then associate a specific ballance, or CG with flight charaacteristics, both FB and FBL. because face it, I and alot of you have run both style blades on both style helis. Will a FB self distruct of be uncontrollable with FBL blades? No Most in fact say it handle better, more stable. Why? I think because of the CG!

Hello, blade manufacturers are YOU LISTENING!! Make it easy for us to differentiate blades. it's not that hard to create a numbering scale and all follow it, since most blades are made in like 2 factories anyways

Another thing I thought about was the lack of provisions for flaping on the tail blades. Now I wonder if that has some attributes to some having bad vibes that mess with Gyros and FBL units? Cant check that on bench, but would show up in FFF, with the rotor wash AND Fwd speed. Wonder the difference between say, KBDD and Edge CF tails in FFF?

[extrapilot]

Bandit

Unlikely to happen:

• This is not just about CG. Even if it were, what if the CG varies by station?
• Aside from the obvious parameters like dimensions and NACA profile, there are a slew of parameters that define the behavior of a blade (i.e. its inherent damping/resonance, its twist under load, its mass distribution).
• With a different Lock number, different blades will phase differently, which itself has implications on performance if not corrected.
• I would bet the manufacturers do not have any capability to measure most of these parameters

People seem to think they can just swap between a bunch of blade types and asses them in some objective way, without tuning the machine to leverage the blades. If you were evaluating tires on a racing car, you would need to adjust the suspension, brake bias, aero, etc- perhaps even have the driver adjust his corner entries etc, to get the most out of each tire type BEFORE you could evaluate the net performance.

[dunkonu23]

Originally Posted by extrapilot

Bandit

People seem to think they can just swap between a bunch of blade types and asses them in some objective way, without tuning the machine to leverage the blades. If you were evaluating tires on a racing car, you would need to adjust the suspension, brake bias, aero, etc- perhaps even have the driver adjust his corner entries etc, to get the most out of each tire type BEFORE you could evaluate the net performance.

True, but not everyone has a helicopter or FBL head that will allow mechanical adjustment. Electronics can allow for adjustment as we've discussed, but not all have those parameters available (uBeast 3.0 for example) at this time. So, like me, one is destined to test blades until a proper set is found. Different equipment yields different results. For example, the blades I had a tail issue with on my 450 pro performed flawlessly on a friends 450pro with the only difference being the FBL head--his is adjustable, mine is not. To use your analogy, some cars just make better use of their tires than others. That's very apparent in Formula 1 where all the cars are manufactured by individual teams.

Scott

[extrapilot]

Phasing is just one aspect of the equation. Bandit was suggesting a shoe-size stamped on the blade, where the assumption is that this will define blade similitude. It wont. Not only will phase change between blade types, but many aero characteristics will as well, all of which have significant impact on real and perceived performance.

No, my analogy is about tuning a machine to maximize the performance of the total system, for each combination of components in evaluation. F1 is the epitome of this process.

[banditpowdercoat]

Well something other than calling them FB and FBL blades has to happen. The main point I was trying to get through is gthere is no such thing as FB and FBL blades. They are all BLADES!! Some will track different, some will flex more, some will lead some will lag... You get the picture. but I have run both FB and FBL blades on both FB and FBL machines. If a FBL blade is FBL, then theoretically, it should NOT work on a FB!

Maybe it's just the nomenclature I have a problem with, ya thats it.... I need coffee, sorry for the rant

[dunkonu23]

Originally Posted by extrapilot

Phasing is just one aspect of the equation. Bandit was suggesting a shoe-size stamped on the blade, where the assumption is that this will define blade similitude. It wont. Not only will phase change between blade types, but many aero characteristics will as well, all of which have significant impact on real and perceived performance.

No, my analogy is about tuning a machine to maximize the performance of the total system, for each combination of components in evaluation. F1 is the epitome of this process.

There's nothing wrong at all with a standard as alluded to by Bandit. The issue is not the stamp, rather it's the ability of manufacturers to come to agreement on a standard and adhere to it. Without a standards agreement, the stamp is useless.

I just extended your analogy to the ultimate where one will see that there are more variables to a system than can be believed, starting with the driver--in our world, pilot. In the end there is only so much one can do and that was my point.

Scott

[nexgen]

meh, I just use woodies

[dunkonu23]

LOL, Rob!

Scott

[extrapilot]

Originally Posted by banditpowdercoat

Well something other than calling them FB and FBL blades has to happen. The main point I was trying to get through is gthere is no such thing as FB and FBL blades. They are all BLADES!! Some will track different, some will flex more, some will lead some will lag... You get the picture. but I have run both FB and FBL blades on both FB and FBL machines. If a FBL blade is FBL, then theoretically, it should NOT work on a FB!

Maybe it's just the nomenclature I have a problem with, ya thats it.... I need coffee, sorry for the rant

Conceptually, you have to realize that blades are not blades in the sense you imply. Yes, you could put kitchen knives on your machine and it might fly. Many have installed mains backwards and found that the machine did fly…

Per the design criteria FBL manufacturers have suggested, FBL blades will always work on an FB machine- just at some cost in performance (blades are too stable). The reverse is not necessarily true.

[sutty]

I can testify to being able to fly with the blades on backwards, well at least one of them. As a relative beginner, I got up into quite a nice stable hover, then realised it sounded terrible, and I looked at the tracking, which was awful, close to an inch out and I quickly landed. When it spooled down I was astounded to see that I had put one blade on backwards. I spotted it immediately, yet I had fitted it and taken it up like that. Go figure. Thought I'd just confirm that little odd fact.

I have tried all sorts of blades on my 450, and although I think it flies best with Edge FBL, I also think it is fine with bog standard Align blades. As to if the 3G ones are different, I can't say. Now I just get them because they are cheap, and I think I am meant to fly with FBL blades, since it has a MB on it. It seems to fly really well whatever it has on it, so maybe it isn't that important. Maybe I'm not good enough to tell, probably not. Perhaps my servos are benefitting from less load with the 3G ones, and will last longer. Not sure at all.

I did used to think that my 450, pre FBL, flew best with Radix blades, but even then I was never sure. I always thought it sounded better, and the tracking was always easy to set perfectly. I once had a set of Align blades that were impossible to track. Half a turn either way and they just swapped position by 1/4 inch. I thought it was my head, tried all sorts, then in frustration I threw on another set of blades, and it was perfect. Put them back on and the same thing. So god knows exactly what was wrong with them, but they mustn't have been matched very well.

Interesting thread. Cheers guys.

Sutty

[scott s]

Originally Posted by marcosp

And the difference is not noted only in 3D, it is most noted in fast forward flight, where a FB blade becomes unstable a FBL blade tracks like a freight train, specially in windy conditions.

EXACTLY! and plus 20.

[tacomaster]

Originally Posted by scott s

EXACTLY! and plus 20.

i went 80mph with my protos fbl and did several full speed loops all orientations and havent had a problem with my edge FLYBAR'D blades keeping the heli tracked. flies perfect.

think it depends on setup.

[scott s]

430 0r 470 blades??

[dunkonu23]

Were they SAB blades, Tacomaster? Just wondering.

Scott

[tacomaster]

Originally Posted by dunkonu23

Were they SAB blades, Tacomaster? Just wondering.

Scott

nope, edge 423 fb blades.

[dunkonu23]

Edge blades, so I've noticed in my limited sample have been the best in cross purposing. Mavrikk blades are a close, close second.

Scott