(This is based on my blog post at http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/new-project-quadcopter-first)I am thinking of a Quadcopter Project using a platform based on Arduino since I have learned some programming on it. Currently I am leaning towards the AeroQuad.In the future (if the thing take-offs) I plan on installing video gear for FPV. Followed by that I plan on programming (or if I get lazy I'll just buy a kit) some OSD. And than I should go into the UAV territory.I have many doubts about the project... here are some that maybe someone can help clarify:Based on my needs I believe this will be a VERY long (and probably expensive) project. I do want to discover the best COSTxBENEFIT solutions, of course.The "foward speed" thing (planes have better foward speed than quads, and also better battery efficiency) is a factor that will probably take me into a next step that will be to transform the Quadcopter into a mix of Quad/V-22 Osprey/Airplane (that's why I have the question about the X configuration). The idea is to benefit from the stability and VTOL of the Quadcopter and the speed and efficiency of the airplane.I have found a dude trying something like it: http://jasondorie.com/WordPress/?p=5#respondAnyone interested in taking part in a project like this? We can use DIYDrones as a platform or even begin a new community for Open Source development of this Tilt-quad-rotor platform.
You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!
I just posted some videos and pictures of something similar that I've been working on. I don't know if there's a huge benefit with my design over a regular quadcopter for now, but it sure is fun to fly. http://diydrones.com/forum/topics/iquad-tilt-rotor-quadcopter
I talked to the MaxVTOL guy a bunch while he was working on it. The biggest issue I believe he encountered was getting the CG right in each flight mode. A quad ideally has a centered CG, but a plane's CG is typically at about 1/3 the chord of the wing. Max's approach was to put the motor weight high so as they rotated forward they also pulled the CG forward. He had it working in a simulator, and was building physical shells for the body, but I don't know how far he got. The Osprey configuration will have the same issue with CG, but there you have more flexibility - the CG in hover is ideally between the two lift motors, so you could put them right at the forward flight CG if you designed carefully.
This is the biggest step towards the project I've seen: http://vimeo.com/22367120 :D
I haven't built my quadcopter yet, I plan on returning to this project this month.
It's been some time since I came here to DIyDrones, and it amazed me that they joined with AeroQuad to build quads (when I posted this there weren't multicopters at DIYDrones).
hey man I am currently on the same road you are lets get togher for a chat sometime to go over some stuff, im working righ tnow but ill give you a shout when i get home
Looks good!
In regards to your design philosophy are you shooting for simplicity with the design and trying to keep everything as simple as possible?
Without a tail, one would imagine the flying wing would fare better in slightly gusty conditions.
Regarding the flight control, surely commands to the motors could be altered at a firmware level so that the plane behaves predictably in flight?
Let me know how you go.
Just looking at existing airframes, a canard or a three surface design may be a good option to consider due to the aft plane being greater in width than the fore plane.
The video that you linked to earlier (https://www.youtube.com/user/maxvtol) was a three surface design, with the motors integrated into the wing tips; I believe this will be the best configuration in terms of conventional airframes, minimizing the "shadowed" area of the aft props.
In terms of hovering, this configuration would have a few extra challenges that could be compensated for at a firmware level, as two of the motors would have reduced moment arms.
In terms of the design were you thinking about tilting the motors independently or tilting the motors and wings as a fixed unit?
Either way if all of the tilting was undertaken at once, at the same rate the wings/motors could be physically linked allowing for a single servo to control all four motors.
Hi,
I'm heading down a similar path to you, with the intension of eventually building a tilt wing quad-copter.
Similarly to you I’m building a quad-copter as a testing platform to eventually progress to vectored thrust and while I can’t comment on the parts you bought, I have bought similar items also from HobbyCity based on info from the RC group forums.
In regards to the tandem wing model that you have linked a video to, I would be skeptical of the performance of that model with a quad motor setup.
What I’m thinking is that the difference in height between the front and rear engines would create a moment causing the airframe to rotate (assuming all four motors are mounted in the wing), which would require elevator input to compensate for (drag).
I believe the offset height is to do with avoiding the forplane's downwash and tip vortices, to therefore increase the effectiveness of the aft plane. This is something we might struggle with when designing an airframe suitable for mounting four motors.
Other things to consider are: Effects of performance when mounting a motor in the wash of another motor and the effects of the prop wash on the wings / control surfaces...
I believe the project is very possible; however it may require a bit of creative engineering!
Cheers,
Sam.
Replies
I just posted some videos and pictures of something similar that I've been working on. I don't know if there's a huge benefit with my design over a regular quadcopter for now, but it sure is fun to fly. http://diydrones.com/forum/topics/iquad-tilt-rotor-quadcopter
I talked to the MaxVTOL guy a bunch while he was working on it. The biggest issue I believe he encountered was getting the CG right in each flight mode. A quad ideally has a centered CG, but a plane's CG is typically at about 1/3 the chord of the wing. Max's approach was to put the motor weight high so as they rotated forward they also pulled the CG forward. He had it working in a simulator, and was building physical shells for the body, but I don't know how far he got. The Osprey configuration will have the same issue with CG, but there you have more flexibility - the CG in hover is ideally between the two lift motors, so you could put them right at the forward flight CG if you designed carefully.
Here's MaxVTOL's build log: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=782929
And yeah, I'm interested in this. :-)
I haven't built my quadcopter yet, I plan on returning to this project this month.
It's been some time since I came here to DIyDrones, and it amazed me that they joined with AeroQuad to build quads (when I posted this there weren't multicopters at DIYDrones).
I don't know if this is still an active project. My company is developing something along these lines. You can check it out here: www.icarusuav.com
If you would like to get involved email me at david.gitz@fastrobotics.com
In regards to your design philosophy are you shooting for simplicity with the design and trying to keep everything as simple as possible?
Without a tail, one would imagine the flying wing would fare better in slightly gusty conditions.
Regarding the flight control, surely commands to the motors could be altered at a firmware level so that the plane behaves predictably in flight?
Sam.
The three surface design is similar to the canard, however it has a horizontal tail.
The three surface design causes the NP and CG to move rearward (compared with a canard) and the tail's elevators provide pitch control.
Sam.
Just looking at existing airframes, a canard or a three surface design may be a good option to consider due to the aft plane being greater in width than the fore plane.
The video that you linked to earlier (https://www.youtube.com/user/maxvtol) was a three surface design, with the motors integrated into the wing tips; I believe this will be the best configuration in terms of conventional airframes, minimizing the "shadowed" area of the aft props.
In terms of hovering, this configuration would have a few extra challenges that could be compensated for at a firmware level, as two of the motors would have reduced moment arms.
In terms of the design were you thinking about tilting the motors independently or tilting the motors and wings as a fixed unit?
Either way if all of the tilting was undertaken at once, at the same rate the wings/motors could be physically linked allowing for a single servo to control all four motors.
Sam.
I'm heading down a similar path to you, with the intension of eventually building a tilt wing quad-copter.
Similarly to you I’m building a quad-copter as a testing platform to eventually progress to vectored thrust and while I can’t comment on the parts you bought, I have bought similar items also from HobbyCity based on info from the RC group forums.
In regards to the tandem wing model that you have linked a video to, I would be skeptical of the performance of that model with a quad motor setup.
What I’m thinking is that the difference in height between the front and rear engines would create a moment causing the airframe to rotate (assuming all four motors are mounted in the wing), which would require elevator input to compensate for (drag).
I believe the offset height is to do with avoiding the forplane's downwash and tip vortices, to therefore increase the effectiveness of the aft plane. This is something we might struggle with when designing an airframe suitable for mounting four motors.
Other things to consider are: Effects of performance when mounting a motor in the wash of another motor and the effects of the prop wash on the wings / control surfaces...
I believe the project is very possible; however it may require a bit of creative engineering!
Cheers,
Sam.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next