SmartAP 3.0 Pro Autopilot is the high-level flight control system for multirotor Unmanned Aerial Vehicles with the capability of fully autonomous flight including take off, waypoints flight and landing. The hardware core is powered by STM32F4 microcontroller from STMicroelectronics, 9-axis Inertial Measurement Unit and the latest GPS/GLONASS receiver from UBlox providing outstanding flight precision. SmartAP has its own Configuration and Mission Planning software called SmartAP GCS. The system supports any type of multirotor UAV with the highest navigation and control accuracy. SmartAP Autopilot was developed using the latest electronic components available at the moment, which allowed to achieve such amazing results!

General features of the system:
- All-integrated system approach - plug and fly
- Extremely stable flight in
- stabilize (user control)
- position hold (semi-autonomous control)
- auto (fully autonomos navigation and control)
- MAVLink compatible Ground Control Station protocol
- Accurate Position hold
- Horizontal: up to 40cm
- Vertical: up to 10cm
- Manual altitude override
- Fully autonomous waypoints flight
- Autonomous take off
- Autonomous landing
- Return to Home mode
- Low battery detection and Failsafe triggering
- And many many more...

The system installed on 960-sized hexacopter:

Hardware:
- Powerful microcontroller 32 bit 168 MHz STM32F4 ARM Cortex M4
- Compact board size of 8x8 cm (3.15"x3.15"), weight 60g, 6 layers PCB design
- Power supply from main LiPO battery (3S - 8S) support, up to 36 Volts
- Power supply from BEC 5V support
- 12V, 5V, 3.3V generated onboard
- Integrated GPS receiver (UBlox NEO8, GPS/GLONASS, up to 24 sats, 10 Hz) active antenna, exnternal module is supported as well
- Integrated telemetry module (100 mW), external module is supported as well (up to 5V@1A powered)
- Up to 24 PWM I/O support (5V out, high-power), SBUS support
- USB interface for configuration / firmware update
- 6-pin JTAG port for programming / debugging
- Various communication lines (UART/USART, RS232, I2C, SPI)
- MicroSD card driven by 4-bit SDIO interface for data-logging / parameters
- Backup battery for real-time clock and GPS receiver
- Integrated main LiPo battery voltage monitoring
- 4 ADC inputs, battery voltage / current monitoring
- Electromagnetic sound audio indicator
- 4-channels bright LED support (up to 100mA/ch)

The components of the system:

SmartAP Ground Control Station and Configuration Tool
SmartAP GCS (Ground Control Station) is the software application which allows you to plan autonomous mission for your SmartAP Autopilot as well as control the UAV using intuitive high-level commands.
General features are:
- Flexible and user-friendly interface
- One-click commands for high-level control
- ARM, Take off, Loiter, Land etc.
- Status information display
- Real-time video feed and overlay
- with video capture device
- Major flight information display
- Mission planning using waypoints
- Customizable waypoints' settings
- Flight logging support
- Realtime plot of all parameters
- Integrated log analyzer
- Points of interest selection and control
- Terminal window

Ground Control Station Mainwindow

Supported Airframes
- Quadcopter Plus 4
- Quadcopter X 4
- Quadcopter W 4
- Hexacopter Plus 6
- Hexacopter X 6
- Octocopter Plus 8
- Octocopter X 8
- Tricopter I 6
- Tricopter Y 6
- Quadcopter X 8
- Hexacopter X 12

Ground Control Station demo video

User's review video:


More information and ordering at: http://sky-drones.com/

Kirill
Sky-Drones.com

Views: 5926

Comment by Kirill on January 27, 2016 at 5:45am

Darius Jack, probably some of the fly away cases are related to the specific frequencies and harmonics causing attitude / position estimator go crazy but I don't think that this is the general reason. It's more about the software reliability as the entire architecture and how tasks management done, resources control etc.

 

Comment by Kirill on January 27, 2016 at 5:49am

Andreas, it's possible only in case you have your own experienced software engineers who can add special features based on the source code. The majority of integrator companies who deliver drone solution don't have such people in house. Therefore, it's much easier for them to request original flight controller developer to add special features they need.  

Comment by Andreas Gazis on January 27, 2016 at 6:08am

Um, why? Opening up your source code doesn't mean a client needs software engineers to make it work. If, say, the company who makes my printer decided to publish the code to its driver doesn't mean I will suddenly need a PhD in computer science to make it print.

Comment by Marc Dornan on January 27, 2016 at 6:28am

Andreas when companies do not go the open source route they generally do not open up their code. Of course it is fine to ask. If he has developed all this in house why would he? It is a bit more significant than a printer driver.

Comment by Marc Dornan on January 27, 2016 at 8:47am

@Tevada. At his discounted price of $490 it is not so expensive actually. A Naza M V2 with 2.4 Telemetry is $500. And on paper at least the DJI Naza M V2 is less capable as it really only has iPad support and you cannot really use it to fly mapping grids. No disrespect to you but you have the priorities of a hobbyist, which is fine. An ebay Pixhawk (or even a better version) can be great when set up well, but it is not for everyone, and it is often manufactured to the lowest specs with dubious QC.

Kirill needs to prove this is better or at least as good for professional use. I remember well the side-by-side tests that showed Arducopter GPS hold exceeding Wookong. I think we need to see more of this. He needs to get these into the wild. Most US pro users are going to want some sort of US-based office as well, which I imagine is hard to do without a US partner/dealer, which will bring the price up, as it should, to cover the cost of support and dealer margin. Just my 2 cents.

Comment by Andreas Gazis on January 27, 2016 at 9:44am

@ Marc. Sure, I 'm not surprised about the decision, just wondering out loud why not open up the code (the reasons offered up do not seem too convincing to me) and saying that, in my case, it would be a deal breaker.

Comment by Marc Dornan on January 27, 2016 at 12:06pm

Andreas. It is a fair enough point. I do understand why people do not release source code though. No company that has created such a product and plans to sell it as a system releases source code (not necessarily because it is appropriated code). At the same time one might expect pushback on what has been a community for open source projects.


MR60
Comment by Hugues on January 27, 2016 at 12:38pm

Hi Kirill,

This is really impressive. Actually I believe we need more intiatives like yours, especially in the short/mid-term future: Did you know 3DR will stop selling parts to evolve toward more integrated "closed" systems, like Solo => see this thread (http://diydrones.com/forum/topics/3dr-telemetry-no-longer-supported...) . This community has to start to look out for serious alternatives (not HK or chinese rubbish) that can be as good (or better) as Pixhawk's FC and accessories.

Do not let you be discouraged nor turned down by these remarks abnout your source code; They insinuate that you are dishonest without any reason.

Comment by Andreas Gazis on January 27, 2016 at 12:45pm

3DR? They are enthusiastically embracing and contributing to an open source bunch of projects and are not doing too bad. Also Arduino (the foundation of APM)? Raspberry Pi? Erle?

Just saying that, when you are small and starting up, it can often make sense to reach out to people rather than clam up from before the word go (would, APM have ended up with, say, Tridge (not to say anything of other incredibly valuable contributors from all over the world), if they had started off by clamming up? Would they even exist today?). Of course, not my company, not my choice but I am honestly often perplexed by peoples' attitudes and have yet to hear of a really compelling argument.

Comment by Kirill on January 27, 2016 at 2:16pm

Andreas, using this analogy about the driver for printer I can say that the autopilot is opened in a similar way - it has pretty well described and documented MAVLink protocol. But I guess you will agree with me that you will not get the code responsible for how to drive the carriage and pour ink since it's something that makes one printer manufacturer different from another in some way (quality of the print, speed etc) and if it's all opened - there is no competition and all printers are similar and at the same price - they just work exactly the same. The same thing is about the flight controllers. Why should I share the ideas which make the system fly better than others?

Comment

You need to be a member of DIY Drones to add comments!

Join DIY Drones

© 2019   Created by Chris Anderson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service