Quadrotor steering system concept

Immagine%20senza%20titolo.jpg?height=391&width=750Hello everybody, just wanted you to know that I just published a paper here https://sites.google.com/site/imager3d/quadrotor It is a brief description of a concept-proof steering system for Quadcopters, based on the transposition of the center of mass of the copter. I have not made tests, it is just a straight idea. Thanks to the readers! bye droners

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

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

Join diydrones


  • In terms of practicality, isn't one of the main benefits of a quadrotor the mechanical simplicity with no moving parts other than rotors?  If I had to put two or four actuators onto the quad and increase cost and complexity, I'd rather have them doing something that I can't do already like vectoring thrust or adjusting blade pitch rather than steering.
  • Not sure if it is the same issue but professional photographers and videographers tend to keep the payload as close to the plane of the rotor as possible on helicopters. Whilst there is some inherent stability in lowering the payload it also introduces greater inertial forces to be overcome in maintaining stabilised flight. So you will see many camera mounts on the front of helis, just under the rotor, rather than underslung albeit not entirely for stability reasons. There are videos of a tricopter lifting heavy loads (I think one load is a TRex450) and you can get an idea from there of how they behave - not agile!


    When you move the aircraft horizontally there will a delay whilst the payload catches up and when you stop the payload will keep going! There will also be pendulum/rotation effects.


    However, I might be talking a load of old s@#$e as your paper is not exactly clear, to me anyway, exactly what you want to achieve......but good luck all the same!

  • Why don't you attach a balloon full of helium instead?
  • Moderator
    I can always find seduction in pendular, oh no hang on that's another thing.
  • MO, center of mass is easily lowered by design, and using a low LiPo cage. So, center of mass is not calling for such a thing.


    The underlaying problematic is about the hovering thrust/vector and the displacement thrust/vector.

    Mainstream designs found features a thrust system that combine them, modulating propellers speed.

    Another design could have separate thrust vector for hovering and displacement.


    Instead of this pulley system, very sensible to acceleration, uncontrollable I think, you can have propellers dedicated to hovering, and one rotating propeller for the displacement, with one rotating arm for yaw (found in tricopter).

    Compared to your study, it is more reliable, but add unuseful complexitiy.

    (If you like complexity, you could use 4 linear actuators instead of pulley, rigid and more weight!)


    I can't find the least seducing aspect contained in your pendular/pulley design.

  • because you can't rotate about a certain axis if you're on another axis! goodbye
  • Moderator
  • Why?
  • First errata corrige: in paragraph 2, talking about the yaw rotation, "when its rotation axis is displaced perpendicularly to the yaw axis" there should be "parallel"
This reply was deleted.