Blogs

FPV X-4 Quad Frame

Posted by Christiaan van Vollenstee on April 26, 2013 at 4:00am

Here is an interesting quad frame that Hobbyking is selling. I can see this really working.

Nice enclosures for the motors

A lot of space inside to mount a controller and PDB

and what is awesome is the camera mounting area.

The only problem I see with this is, that it is fiberglass and that when you crash (and you will) there is no replacement parts, so this is for a intermediate flyer.

25, apm, copter, quad, x-4

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones

Comments

Mike T April 26, 2013 at 6:52pm

i had a look at this. no spare parts on HK, it looks like it would break very easy
Quadrocopter April 26, 2013 at 2:04pm

One day Hobby King will make a frame that has been designed by someone that knows Multi-Rotors.

Physics and aerodynamics would be a start. Nightmare of a thing...
Gary McCray April 26, 2013 at 12:04pm

Hi Morli,

Yes that frame looks like it is designed to go horizontally

But the way quad copters go horizontally is to tilt in the direction of motion and then supply thrust straight down in relation to their frame, so even when they are going forward they are acting just like they are hovering.

All thrust is pretty much straight down in relation to the body of the copter at all times and its angle relative to the ground determines it's motion across the ground.

Now if the props tilted, then it would be a different story.
Gary McCray April 26, 2013 at 11:55am

It really is a beautiful airframe, but the flat arms are a not insignificant problem.

I looked at it and the first thing I noticed was the large flat plate area of the arms relative to the prop wash.

If the props were under the arms it wouldn't be a big deal, but on top those arms are going to cause at least a ten to 15 percent loss in efficiency (from back wash and turbulence in addition to flat plate area).

As well as increasing noise and vibration.

I am afraid they made it to look pretty and be easy to mold rather than for optimum performance.

I will be very interested to see others experiences with this, it may not be as bad as I think and I like the camera dome design if it can be made to work properly.

You'd certainly have the coolest looking quad out there.
Admin

Morli April 26, 2013 at 11:00am

Looks like a flying lizard with its head chopped off :)

Most if not all aircraft are meant to travel horizontally more than vertical distance in air, if so how do you recon having current shape of arms will pose more drag!! and having vertical arms will post less drag?!! If you are going to hover all day long( in this case the arms may have more drag which I fail to see as it has little more corss section area than regular CF tubes)
Ramon Natal April 26, 2013 at 10:34am

Beautifull design!
Euan Ramsay April 26, 2013 at 7:18am

I'd be willing to volunteer to be the test rat, but just blown all my cash on a flying/training vehicle from quadframe :-(
John Moore April 26, 2013 at 6:31am

The should have made it water sealed.
criro1999 April 26, 2013 at 6:30am

Notice what exactly? vibration level or shorter flying time (because of more drag)?
Sean Skirvin April 26, 2013 at 6:29am

While a agree with everyone about the aerodynamic losses, I think there are two other points to consider. One is that shaping the arms this way could in theory make it less affected by wind. The second is glassing in a mold with the "optimal" shape for the arms would be very difficult due to the narrowness and depth that the arms would have. I also think looks played a factor in this design.