Toroidal propellers - thrust and noise analysis. So, is it worth using them?

The thrust analyses were done using 6S batteries. All the noise analyses were done using 4S batteries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STRIKING FPV models:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
00:00 – Introduction
00:23 –The propellers under analysis
01:33 –The measurement system
02:24 –Thrust analysis and results
03:39 – Noise analysis
03:48 – Classical 3-blade propeller
04:15 – Bi-Loop Toroidal propeller
04:53 – Tri-Blade Toroidal propeller
05:21 – Noise analysis results
06:19 – Conclusions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
╔═╦╗╔╦╗╔═╦═╦╦╦╦╗╔═╗
╠╗║╚╝║║╠╗║╚╣║║║║║═╣ I Really Appreciate Your Support!
╚═╩══╩═╩═╩═╩╝╚╩═╩═╝

[surgefilmsbroome]

This is a good analysis but the printed props were rough and you're comparing a very well designed and manufactured prop in comparison. It could help to print a comparative regular 5in prop for your comparative testing?

[DrFrantic]

Thanks for sharing bro, HQ released today a picture witch closed prop

[mNag]

I'd be curious about the max RPM these propellers could reach being built of the same materials before critical breakdown.

[Tigonya]

Exactly the point proved to people who think that toroidal shape is best for propellers. It is bulky, less surface area to create thrust and noisier. Also, it is more massive and has to use more energy to even lift itself

[JekleFPV]

So, the takeaway is that 3D printed toroidals don’t perform as well as injection modeled classic props.
On this basis you can’t tell if it’s due to toroidal or due to 3D printed.
I’d still expect to see toroidals outperform classics with all else being equal, meaning made with the same production process. But hey, I heard both gemfan and HQprop are producing IM toroidals! It may take a while to optimize them for our purposes, but I expect those to outperform classic props right off the bat

[Quickred]

I have the same conclusion, all printed designs of toroidal propellers are lower in thrust for the same ampere and louder for the same thrust. Maybe it is the wrong design or 3D printing is not optimal for props or toroidal does not work for rc props. Hope we get soon samples and results from the industrial molded toroidal HqProps. Thanks for your video

[forrestallison]

Seriously if you're testing propellers you need to be smoothing them. You need need to be smoothing them or it is a worthless test.

Print them in PVA or whatever and dip them in alcohol, done

[alanfbrookes]

If the other designs were more efficient, and/or produced more thrust than the classic design, by now they would be in use on full-sized aircraft.

[DinGuSco]

Should of used a 3d printed "normal" propeller and compared noise vs thrust generated.

[grahamdyer]

This torroidal prop design is a very poor design. How do you measure the pitch along the leading and trailing torroidal blades? It looks like the pitch at the tip is very steep (~7") and at the root the pitch is shallow (~3"), completely the opposite of a normal propellor which reduces the pitch the further away from the root as the blade speed is fastest at the tip. So this design is pretty pointless as it is aerodynamically irregular, no wonder it performed poorly, I would expect nothing less.

[NoID_FPV]

I dont know why these content creators are not 3d printing regularly designed props to even the playing field.

[emilhesenli]

the surface of the printed models is terrible for a propeller, they are not processed, a small hair, a protrusion on the surface is a serious resistance and noise, the test was not fair!