And then it struck me. I'm an idiot. The PLANE knows where down is! In many of our UAVs we're using IR stabilization to keep the wings level, and the way that works is that a FMA "Co-Pilot" sensor measures the infrared gradient between sky and earth on both sides and front and back, and uses that to establish a vertical axis. Then it just moves the ailerons and elevator to keep the plane flying perpendicular to that axis.
All I needed to do was to let that same FMA Co-Pilot drive the camera stabilization, too. Once I'd slapped my head and realized that the solution was right in front of me, it was a simple matter of removing the gyro, attaching the camera tilt servo to the aileron output of the Co-Pilot via a Y-harness (it's still driving the ailerons with same channel) and putting on a longer arm on the tilt servo to compensate for the lower throw distance of the Co-Pilot's signals. (All the other components and build instructions are as described here)
Today we tested it, and it work brilliantly. It's SO much better than the gyro-driven model. Here's a video of it in action:
The advantages include:
- Doesn't need special calibration and doesn't drift. "Down" is alway down.
- Much cheaper. Without the gyro, the cost drops from $100 to $25 (two servos and some aluminum)
- Doesn't take up a separate channel. The camera stabilization automatically comes on when I turn on the plane stabilization.
- Saves power because the tilt servo isn't always jittering with every gyro twitch.
But what about our UAVs that use gyro-based autopilots, rather than IR, for stabilization? There's no good way to have those autopilots drive the camera assembly, too. The answer is to bolt on a cheap ($49) and simple Futaba "pilot assist" sensor and controller, which uses visible light to do what our FMA units do with IR. You can just put it on the camera mount where the gyro was and it will keep the camera pointed down. It's not quite as neat as the ones that use the same stabilization system as the entire plane, but it's equally effective.
Comments
I don't think the IR system would work well that close to the ground. You might be better with using a gyro, as in the earlier version.
Do you even have a job?? I have no idea how you can cram so much cool production in! Nice work.
Paul
Cheers
G
/icebear
G