I'm new to UAV's, but have been researching enough to see that there are a multiplicity of designs available. One item I've come across is dihedral quad/hex/octo frames, where the motors are tilted inboard slightly, thus vectoring the thrust slightly outboard, rather than straight down. It is claimed to provide a smoother and more controllable platform. On an instinctive level, it seems right. But what about from an engineering perspective... can it be verified by modeling it through equations?
You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!
@Coastwise, No, nothing new. I wrote to the authors of the report I mentioned earlier. They had not evaluated the theoretical impact on the efficiency and flight time. I am preparing to do some of my own testing, but the design work is going slow for me right now with many other demands for my attention. I am also doing this as a hexacopter.
John C Hansen said:
I know this is an old discussion thread, but I have recently found a research report from 2017 on the math involved here:
A Unified Approach to Configuration-based Dynamic Analysis of Quadcopters for Optimal Stability https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.07936
And, I have seen one commercial drone that appears to be quite stable when compared to the majority of drones. But it never made it to market. it is called the CyPhy LVL 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCHoTIsCtio
This discussion raises a question about the widespread adoption of dihedral in multirotor drones. If this design technique improves stability of a multirotor, what is holding back a widespread adoption? I really think it is the fact that the commercial designers are not as eager to try new things. And then, to verify that the theory matches the practical application, this would require a lot of testing.
So I asked in another discussion forum, and one of the respondents simplified the answer to: "It is too complicated. Just make the thing flat and let the Flight Controller stabilize the drone." Another respondent wrote: "multirotors are already stable." WOW! There sure seems to be a general misunderstanding about stability.
But the next question is: If the design configuration with dihedral is inherently more stable, does this mean that the motors work less and use less power, and will the flights last longer? I have not been able to find anything that addresses this question.
Hmmm... OK, I get the stable hovering, but I think the "bad" for maneuverability may prove a matter of taste more than a hard technical problem. At least my rudimentary understanding of the physics involved seems to point to that. From what I've read, it increases thrust efficiency for X & Y vectors, while maybe decreasing it for Z very slightly. But shouldn't tuning take care of any issues the design imposes?