All Posts (14049)

Sort by

Hello all,

Video Link Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dY2zeuygPI0

I just just bought a gimbal from bestluckybuy. this gimbal:

http://www.goodluckbuy.com/2-axis-gopro-2-3-brushless-camera-mount-gimbal-with-motor-and-controller-for-gopro3-aerial-photography-.html
I made a little video to compare stabilization. Video on the left side gimbal, right side gopro attached on the front of the TBS Discovery.

Next step, adaptation of the gimbal in front like a TBS Discovery Pro.

See you soon ;)

Polak

Read more…

cropped-wpid-002212.jpg

 

Hello All

Our first episode is going to be with Wayne Garris who created the TechPod this up and coming Sunday (25/08/2013) 10AM US Pacific Time.

 

You can sign into this interview anytime and by adding us (diydronestv@gmail.com)  to your circles in Google plus we can send you an invite for we are going to be streaming live via Google hangouts.

 

The interview will be on our YouTube channel for you to watch over and over.

 

Hope to see you

Christiaan

Read more…
Moderator

The Burning Man Council has announced guidelines for flying RC/UAV models at burning man, with emphasis on FPV vehicles.  The guidelines seem well thought out, and might be a good model for other organizations wishing to provide similar guidelines to participants.

http://blog.burningman.com/2013/08/news/guidelines-for-unmanned-aerial-vehicles-at-burning-man/

http://www.burningman.com/preparation/event_survival/drones.html#.UhG0_GTF2rc

(personal opinion) I expect we'll see more of this as quads get cheaper and easier to fly.  I was at the America's Cup races on Saturday and some nitwit was flying a gopro/phantom over the crowd. (end personal opinion)

The lovely video at top is from ExperimentalAirlines.

Read more…

3689543184?profile=originalThe Sky Drone FPV system is a fully digital long range and low latency video transfer system for DIY drones and remote controlled vehicles. Sky Drone FPV utilizes 3G & 4G/LTE networks and automatically adapts the video transmission frame by frame to bandwidth availability, ensuring minimal latency in data transmission. The data transfer between hardware and the groundstation app is AES-256 encrypted, so even the NSA can't hack into your video feeds. Telemetry data from a connected 3D Robotics APM board that is transmitted via MAVLink can be plotted on the live FPV video stream as a Head Up Display (HUD).

Complete with a groundstation application for iOS, Android and BlackBerry pilots receive real-time full HD FPV video straight on his or her smartphone or tablet. A unique feature of the Sky Drone FPV is the option to take 5 megapixel high quality still images during flight. The images are instantly transmitted to the app while the video keeps running.

Sky Drone FPV is currently running an Indiegogo Campaign to raise money to complete the last stages of the Sky Drone FPV development and take it into production. In exchange for your financial support, Sky Drone has some amazing offers. Early Birds who pledge just $ 349 USD receive are the first to receive the full Sky Drone FPV set. This offer is limited to just 99 sets. Head over the Sky Drone Indiegogo Campaign page to get more details as well as a demo video of the Sky Drone FPV.

For more information, please head over to our Indiegogo campaign: http://skydrone.aero/fpv-indiegogo
We invite you to share your comments and questions either on this blog/forum or via email to info@skydrone.aero.

Read more…

3689543165?profile=original

The Washington Post had a nice front page article and accompanying video on Sunday about the potential benefits of personally owned drones.

A drone of your very own: These aren’t your average remote-controlled aircraft
By Michael S. Rosenwald,

Kevin Good thought there was an 80 percent chance he could successfully deliver his brother’s wedding rings with a tiny drone.

“The other 20 percent is that it could go crashing into the bride’s mother’s face,” the Bethesda ­cinematographer somewhat jokingly told his brother.

His brother was okay with those odds, so he signed off.

A few weeks ago, sitting in the back row at the ceremony near San Francisco, Good steered the drone to the altar, delivering the payload in front of 100 or so astonished guests. His brother grabbed the rings, then watched as Good buzzed the drone off into the blue sky.

“At the end of the wedding, that was what everyone was talking about,” Good said. “It was pretty awesome.”

This is the gee-whiz side of drones, a technology typically associated with surprise air assaults on terrorists. Drones designed to do the bidding of ordinary people can be bought online for $300 or less. They are often no larger than hubcaps, with tiny propellers that buzz the devices hundreds of feet into the air. But these flying machines are much more sophisticated than your average remote-
controlled airplane: They can fly autonomously, find locations via GPS, return home with the push of button, and carry high-definition cameras to record flight.

Besides wedding stunts, personal drones have been used for all kinds of high-minded purposes — helping farmers map their crops, monitoring wildfires in remote areas, locating poachers in Africa. One local drone user is recording his son’s athletic prowess from a bird’s-eye view, potentially for recruiting videos.

But not every flier is virtuous. There are videos on YouTube of people arming drones with paintball guns. In one video — apparently a well-done hoax to promote a new video game — a man appears to fire a machine gun attached to a small drone and steer the device into an abandoned car to blow it up.

Privacy and civil rights activists worry about neighbors spying on each other and law enforcement agencies’ use of drones for surveillance or, potentially, to pepper-spray protesters.

“Drones make it possible to invade privacy without even trespassing,” said Amie Stepanovich, a surveillance expert at the Electronic Privacy Information Center. “This is a real concern.”

The Washington region is a hotbed of personal-drone deployment, possibly because of the area’s tech-wonkiness and wealth. Nearly 500 people belong to the D.C. Area Drone User Group, making it the largest such organization in the country. They have been assembling for almost a year, working on flying safety, spreading a more benevolent message about drones and incubating ideas for companies.

“What this is really about is a grand experiment in taking a technology and making it empowering instead of disempowering,” said Timothy Reuter, the group’s leader, whose day job is at the U.S. Agency for International Development. “I believe we can take this technology and start with ordinary people to create small businesses, to do art, to monitor the natural resources of the community.”

But already, several law enforcement agencies across the country, including the Queen Anne’s County Sheriff’s Office on Maryland’s Eastern Shore, have purchased the devices. Meanwhile, as many as 40 states, including Maryland, have considered legislation to limit police drone use or ban the devices. A small Colorado town is weighing an ordinance to allow hunters to shoot down drones.

In supporting a Maryland bill to limit law enforcement use of drones, an American Civil Liberties Union official testified, “In short, all the pieces appear to be lining up for the eventual introduction of routine aerial surveillance in American life, a development that would profoundly change the character of public life in the United States.”

Drone defenders, including the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, say those fears are overblown and threaten the potential economic benefits of commercial drones. The group predicts 70,000 new U.S. jobs and a nearly $14 billion economic boost.

“These concerns have had an impact on us,” said Ben Gielow, the general counsel for the unmanned-vehicle group. “There is a widespread belief that these are just military systems for persistent domestic surveillance. That’s just not the case.”

Right now, drones operate under the same rules as radio-
controlled planes. Commercial use is not legal, meaning Good could not, for instance, start a drone wedding-ring delivery service. Congress has mandated that the Federal Aviation Administration come up with rules by 2015 to integrate drones into the nation’s airspace. Hobbyists are supposed to fly the devices below 400 feet.

That has not stopped scores of devices from entering the market. There are generally three types of personal drones available.

There is the toy market, which features devices such as the Parrot AR.Drone. It sells for $300 and can be bought online, at the mall or even through the online Apple store. The drone is controlled with an iPhone and operates over WiFi, recording what happens below.

Many newbies start off with the Parrot and eventually graduate to more sophisticated devices, such as the fully autonomous drones sold for upwards of $600 by 3D Robotics, a California company run by Chris Anderson, the former editor of Wired magazine, who gave up words for drones.

Anderson said the company, founded in 2009, was generating $5 million a year in sales early on and is now growing 100 percent year over year. His drones can fly for 15 or 20 minutes, with HD cameras attached. If a big gust of wind comes along, the drone knows how to stabilize itself.

And then there are the $20,000-and-above drones, such as the Falcon UAV that police departments are purchasing. They can fly for hours at a time and coordinate with surveillance systems on the ground.

Last month, at Davis Airport in Laytonsville, more than three dozen members of the D.C. drone group gathered for a fly-in. The group included men with their grandsons progressing from remote-
controlled planes, photographers and filmmakers hoping to integrate drones into their work, and military contractors such as Ken Druce, who was zooming his drone through the air when another drone came spiraling down to the earth not far from his feet.

“You’re fine, you’re fine,” Druce told the other pilot.

“No, I wasn’t fine,” he replied.

They laughed. Another pilot offered the following observation: “Everyone crashes.” Especially amateurs. But Druce has a loftier goal — starting a company that helps farmers map their fields for fertilization.

The group of fliers is mostly male, ranging from elementary-schoolers to retirees, and the diversity of backgrounds is best exemplified by Scott Avey, the group’s self-proclaimed “drone evangelist.” The title is not entirely in jest. Avey is a pastor at a Frederick church, or, as he put it, “a guitar-playing pastor who flies drones.” He has used his drone to get aerial footage of his church’s parking lot to figure out more-efficient parking strategies.

Not long ago, he met with members of Congress to discuss the potential for commercial drone uses. Like other drone fliers, he is worried that privacy and safety issues will overshadow the commercial benefits of drones, a concern shared by a variety of groups. The National Football League and Motion Picture Association of America have reportedly both pushed the FAA to integrate commercial use into U.S. airspaces.

“We are at the same place with drones in the technology curve as computers were in 1986,” Avey said. “People would have never thought of the uses that we use computers for now.”

The D.C. group is sensitive to concerns about drones, and it has been pushing positive uses. There are hopes to partner with a local first-responder organization to help with search-and-rescue missions for missing children or Alzheimer’s patients who have wandered off. The group wants to work with disabled veterans to help them find commercial uses for the technology. This month, it hosted a guest speaker, University of Maryland professor Tom Snitch, who is helping park rangers in Africa spot poachers, with drones larger than the ones the group typically flies.

Good, the wedding-ring deliveryman, wants to use drones to make commercials and movies, but he knows the nascent personal-drone community has more work to do to make people comfortable with the technology.

“There are people outside the White House probably right now protesting drones,” he said. “But we’re trying to do really positive stuff with these things, developing uses that are cool and new and exciting. I want to live in the future that is more like ‘The Jetsons’ and less like ‘The Terminator.’ ”

Read more…
Admin

Agam Shah, IDG News Service

An open-source project aims to give a rudimentary eye to robots with the help of a camera that can detect, identify and track the movement of specific objects.

The Pixy camera sensor board, being developed by Charmed Labs and Carnegie Mellon University, can detect objects based on seven colors, and then report them back to a computer. A Kickstarter campaign was launched on Thursday to fund the $25,000 project, and the organizations are on pace to reach full funding by the end of the day.

Adding the Pixy could be viewed as giving robots basic vision, said Rich LeGrand, founder of Charmed Labs.

“Once you have vision, then you can introduce the idea of tasks,” LeGrand said. “If you want a robot to charge itself, that’s a simple example of a task. This will get you there. If you want to a robot to navigate, this will get you there.”

Follow TechHive on Tumblr today.

The camera can recognize simple items based on color, like a purple dinosaur, or a green ball. Objects are also recognized by specific color markings or codes.

3689543016?profile=original

For example, a power outlet can be recognized by the Pixy when specific color stickers are placed next to each other on the object. Interestingly, the color-coding mechanism is also used in Mumbai as a low-tech way for the “dabbawallas”—or people delivering lunch boxes—to figure out where food needs to be delivered.

The Pixy can also be “taught” what to recognize based on color codes, and algorithms for that can be programmed into the board. A software called PixyMon, which works on Macs and PCs, processes the algorithm and visual information received from the Pixy and reflects the image and objects on a screen.

Some work involved

“If you’re willing to color tags and objects that you’re interested in... this is a great sensor. It’ll find these objects, it’ll find hundreds of them, and it will give you the results back,” LeGrand said.

The robot can deliver the results back to a computer through multiple output mechanisms, giving hobbyists many ways to process information. Pixy has ARM-designed Cortex-M0 and Cortex-M4 cores, a 1280-by-800-pixel sensor, 264KB of cache and 1MB of flash storage. Robots based on the popular Arduino microcontroller can be hooked to the Pixy, LeGrand said.

CharmedLab's and Carnegie Mellon's Pixy open-source camera robotCHARMEDLABS A robot equipped with Pixy

The hardware can process images with a resolution of 640 by 480 pixels at 50 frames per second. It’s possible to track basic images in real time, and the image processing doesn’t bog down the CPU, LeGrand said.

Cameras have been a part of robotics since the 1990s, but expensive to implement, LeGrand said.

His goal with the Kickstarter project is to buy parts and make a cheap camera accessible to the wider robotics and hobbyist communities. The project will also fund the development of future versions of Pixy, and he has the backing of the respected robotics department at Carnegie Mellon.

”I thought hey, try to keep to keep the cost down, keep it robust... and people would use it for different projects,” LeGrand said.

Read more…

A whole week to fly

3689542842?profile=original

I spent last week on holiday with friends in the countryside. Naturally I took the EasyStar as I planned to use my recreation time to get it tuned, proven and dialled in.

The wind was a bit high in the day times so all my flying was done at sunset when it calmed down.

On the first evening I worked on getting roll and pitch PIDs in. After giving my friend Thom (flamboyant launch technique pictured) a crash course in PID controllers and a tour of Mission Planner I sat him down on a picnic blanket laptop in hand and took off.

I was happy with the roll performance but I was surprised how much P gain it could take without oscillating. The pitch was acting very strange, it would pitch down quickly and easily but struggled to get its nose above the horizon in Stab/FBWA. We put in some values until it started to shake and then called it a day.

Looking over the tlogs back in the cottage it was obvious the pitch wasn't tracking well at all so I reset it all and planned to set it again the next night. I think the problem was a centre of gravity issue.

After retuning the pitch I also attached the GoPro under the wing. This was stuck on with a self adhesive mount in the same way I got the video in my previous blog. Launching is challenging with all the extra weight of a GoPro2 in its plastic case (200g) and you really notice it in how much extra throttle is needed. It didn't achieve enough speed and glided straight down to the floor ripping the camera off in the process.

That was frustrating but I was still able to spend the time tuning the L1 Nav controller and recording some baseline data to plug into the TECS system. Mission Planner had the wind blowing 6-7 m/s and I wouldn't be comfortable flying in anything more. Flying a square it would whoosh downwind at 20+ m/s and crawl upwind at little over walking pace without overriding the throttle. The base leg was a nice arc but still, it did a remarkable job at hitting the waypoints I set. It managed this by flying in some very unlikely looking attitudes but its track was great.

On the final day the wind was dead calm, you couldn't really ask for a better evening to fly. I had some extra adhesive mounts delivered and gave them a good 48 hours to go hard. Looking forward to finally getting some footage we launched. Only for the plane to sink and rip off the camera.

Deeply frustrating but on reflection I would rather the camera came off 5 metres in front of me than in a field somewhere far flung.

Flying continued and I was able to put the final sink and climb rates into the TECS system. Loiter worked a treat with wonderfully satisfying round traces on the laptop, and flying a 3D circuit was even better. I set the WP radius to around 24 based on the "double your airspeed" tip from and the corners were sharp as a tack. I think I could lower the L1 period even further too.

It was so calm I even practiced some manual mode flying. This being my first ever RC plane I have jumped straight into the deep end and the ArduPilot does a great job of covering over my imperfections, but I do try and practice where I can as one day I might need to bring it in the hard way.

I configured some 20m low passes over our head to simulate the kind of flying I will be doing when gathering video, it also enabled my friend to snap some pictures of the plane in flight. I would have gone a bit lower for her but there were power lines in the field so I thought better of it.

At this point a man walked into the field and started striding towards us. He had the look of a farmer who wanted us out of his field so as he approached I asked "Is this your field?". He replied "No, I just saw a little plane flying over my house and wanted to know more".

Turns out he is a pilot himself (full size) and was fascinated by the little foam plane. He pointed out some of the cloud formations around us and helped me find some thermals! I explained the autopilot and ground station setup and offered to show him some of the capabilities. I now have a lot of confidence in the plane so it was an opportunity to try some new modes. We right-clicked the map and it put it in to guided mode and it duly obliged. I turned off the transmitter and it returned overhead (after a short delay, interestingly).

Light was fading so to finish off the last battery I sent the plane further off than I have before, with a circuit taking it out to 500m at its furthest point. Telemetry was rock solid despite me doubling the data rate this week to get more useful tlogs.

Next weekend i'm taking it out on its first real mission. I've been looking forward to videoing my girlfriends coastal holiday home for months and this weeks tests now give me the confidence to set the plane off to do its work. Hopefully with a camera attached this time!

The mission profile is (relatively) tricky due to the area of interest being slightly away from anywhere big enough to land, being perched right on the coast, and with reasonably high trees in between possibly giving me line of sight issues. I will post more on this later in the week as I would like to get peoples thoughts on the best way to proceed.

3689542942?profile=original

My tlog and final tuning params are available here for people to have a look at if interested, although the log file is pretty "messy" when viewed on drone share. 

Read more…

Blended wing design

3689543036?profile=original

This is our prototype for a 2m blended wing design. It's built with Depron and carbon spars. The KF airfoil and the angular surfaces are not the best aerodynamic solution, but it's sufficient to study the flight characteristics. We will use it to get a grip on the flight control algorithms. When everything is working, we will create smooth optimized version. Check out the big cargo bay in the center. The propeller will be in the back followed by an elevator.

Read more…

3689542810?profile=original

See blog 1 here, blog 2 here.

So this is blog number 3 of my home made Ground Control Trailer build, and home made drone build, and as the title suggests, I have re-designed quite a bit of it on the fly.

Firstly, the GCS trailer is completely finished. All insulated, and powered up. And the old 6x9 trailer that it is based on has had a spruce up with new tyres, wheels, bearings, LED lights, safety chain, etc. Inside you can see 5 permanently mounted LCD screens. Four of the screens are connected to a single PC through a 4 way graphics card, and the fifth connected to a laptop. The idea is to use one PC for most functions, including Mission Planner, web based weather radar, and video feed, and for the laptop to serve as a backup if the main PC or data link fails. 

External to the trailer there is a 4 metre steel telescopic antenna mount for an RFD900 radio. The higher the radio, the better the range after all. I'm looking forward to doing some range tests!

Now for the drone build.

I decided that the tailplane in blog 2 was too heavy and the fibreglass that I was using was too thick. So instead of pressing on and trying to fly the plane, I made the reluctant choice to rip it all off and use a thinner glass fibre. Also, the tail plane was still feeling on the heavy side, so I made up a new one with solid flat balsa wood. Much lighter, and less drag than the foam fiberglass tailplane that I scrapped.

3689542925?profile=original

Also, one of the biggest changes was a complete re-design of the fuselage. The original plan was to build the fuse out of water jet cut aluminium, bent into a box. I started the solidworks model, but I couldn't get the weight down no matter how hard I tried. So I decided to go for a fuse built with 25mm box section extruded aluminium. The walls of the box section are only 1.2mm thick, so it is light, but very very strong. So strong that after building it, I feel that I have over-done some sections, and I could have gotten away with less material.

Anyways, here it is so far with a foam surround. The top cover will be corflute material strengthened with a few aluminium stringers. The entire fuse has a flat bottom, with rounded wing cross-section, so I hope that it will add to the lift generated by the wings:

3689542963?profile=original

Unfortunately some aluminium dust got rubbed into the wings, which makes it look like a bit of an ugly duckling in the next photo. I might paint it, I might not. Never mind, I'm not terribly interested in looks. The aim is to have a long range drone capable of carrying a good amount of electronics. Just to add to the list of changes, I changed the two rods connecting the tail plane to the fuselage. The old 16mm ones seemed to be strong, but after mounting, I felt that they were too flexible, so they had to be changed to, you guessed it, 25mm box section aluminium. It just goes to show, that even with good PC design tools, sometimes a bit of trial and error never goes astray. 

3689542989?profile=original

With the added width of the new fuse, the wingspan is now 3.5 metres. That 50cc engine I had planned to use is starting to look a little small for a plane which is starting to tip 25 Kg fully loaded. So my next mod may be to add another engine. One 50cc engine in a pusher config at the back, and one 50cc engine pulling from the front. A two engine set-up would ensure good acceleration and take-off time, and would also help in reliability, as only one engine would be needed to stay airborne. 

Hopefully the next blog will have a vid of the maiden flight. It might be just a few weeks away. Can't wait!

Read more…

A $109 GoodLuckBuy Brushless Gimbal for the H3 GoPro

Here's a short clip, somewhat adulterated by YouTube, of a test of this inexpensive gimbal and controller that I bought from goodluckbuy.com. The Goodluckbuy SKU is 98952, you can look at it by entering that in their search engine. It's made to mount on a Phantom but it's not hard to work up a mount for most any copter.

Here I'm flying it on my DJI 550 Hex "The Witch." I didn't use the provided vibration mounts but rather some stiffer "lord" type mounts I had lying around. Also there are rubber grommets involved.

This gimbal comes without a shred of documentation and I haven't yet figured out how to find the appropriate software. However, it works "out of the box". The only problem is a slight off-level lean on the roll axis, which I've fixed for the moment by simply shimming one end of the GoPro. Build quality is very high. It's all aluminum so not super light.

In this video I've intentionally left bits of the airframe visible to show how hard and well the gimbal is working.

The entire 8 minute flight is as smooth as the 29 seconds seen here.

Slightly off-topic: This clip starts with the hex under manual control in "stabilize" mode, approaching a Geofence that starts at the weed line. When the hex hits the fence it goes into RTL and heads home. It overshoots home (the red landing pad) and neatly turns back to it and ends up right where it should be, at which point I take back control and the clip ends. The slow flight home is my setting, and I think the overshoot might be a result of settings I've made as well, as I'm looking for smoothness, not speed, when I'm tuning.

I'm excited by this gimbal. The YouTube video doesn't really do it justice. If anyone else is using  one of these I'd like to hear from you.

Read more…

SF Drone meet-up report

SF Drone meet up

 I just came home from the SF drone meet up. It was a blast! Here are some videos and pictures I took there. Thank you Bryan Galusha for organizing this awesome event. Please comment if you attended.

Hexacopter with paintball gun.

Hexacopter onboard video

3drobotics hexacopter flight video

.  

Custom Quadcopter and DJI Phantom flying

   

Custom Quadcopter at SF drone meet up

3689542744?profile=original 3689542789?profile=original Preparing Paintball Hexacopter3689542902?profile=original Custom Quadcopter picture #13689542860?profile=original Custom Quadcopter Picture 23689542887?profile=original 3d Robotics hexacopter

Read more…

My 97minute:06second record quadcopter flight

3689542762?profile=original

Quadcopter details:

-Custom CF frame built from 12mm tubes and 1m~3mm CF plate.

- RCTimer 17x5.5 CF Props

- Turnigy Plush 12A ESC's running BLHeli firmware

- RCTimer 5010 - 360Kv motors

- Panasonic NCR18650 13,600A battery pack

- Bareduino Arduino FC with MPU6050

- OrangeRX DSM satellite RX

- AUW 1296 grams with battery

- Frame AUW is 499 g

 

Everything is COTS (standard, off the shelf) equipment.

 

More details to be posted on the massive thread and amazing duration quadcopter's built and posted by EoD here.

RCGroups current all-time duration multicopter thread

 

- RCTimer motors had original 18awg wires replaced with 24awg bringing the total weight to 79.9g

- Props were sanded and balanced, motors balanced.

- Motor-prop screws are 3mm aluminum.

- Motor screws are 4 x per motor and nylon. All 16 screws are less than a couple grams.

- Super light frame came in at 66 grams

- Barduino Arduino board from seedstudio along with an MPU6050 breakout board was used to build a tiny Multiwiicopter flight controller.

- A Spektrum satellite RX was used for the radio link. A larger MWC board was used to tune the flight parameters first then the bareduino was installed. You have to load the firmware, edit the PID"s using the MWC software, then again reflash the board to enable Spektrum support on Arduino's with one shared serial port.

- The Plush ESC's are running BLHeli firmware, and were stripped of one voltage regulator each. Heatsinks were added.

- Most "data/esc" wires are ~36awg.

- The battery pack is the awesome Panasonic 18650 cells as posted by EoD on his duration quadcopter flights.

 

The flight:

- It started at about 11:30am. Battery pack was charged at 2A for about 7 hours. Rested for 30min, then flown.

- I installed a small battery voltage monitor so I could land before the pack got to low. 5grams, cost me a minute.

- About 30 minutes in I was at about .400mv down, I had about 4.2V of power. Looking good!

- 1 hour in. Still lots of power, however the voltage started to drop a bit faster. Every 0.01v ticked by and I could tell it didn't last as long as when the flight started.

- 1.15 minutes in. Still looking good, starting to realize maybe we won't make 120 minutes.

- 1.25 minutes in. Wow we are dropping faster and fast, I still need 11 minutes. After flying for almost 1.5hours I hoped I would not be seconds short of the record. Going for it!

- 1.30 minutes in. I can't remember where it was, 3.15 per cell I think. But I was able to quickly calculate how long a 100mv was lasting and what I had left to 2.7V (my personal cut-off point) and it I'm not sure if I will make another 6! minutes.

1.35.45 . The longest 5 minutes, 45 seconds ever.

- 1.36 minutes 2.80v per cell, some at 2.79, one at 2.75. I knew here I beat the current "hi-score" record! Pushing ahead.

- 1.37 minutes Started hitting 2.7 on some cells, decided to land. According to EoD he had a "couple" minutes at this point. Not wanting to damage my battery I landed it here.

 

 

Could this design fly longer? 100 minutes? maybe. I could remove the heatsinks on the ESC's, they didn't add any minutes and 'cost' me 5 grams of time, copper enameled wires, direct solder the battery instead of connectors, and not use the battery voltage monitor. This would save at least 20~30grams and I think you could safely fly to over 100 minutes. Maybe 101!

 

The 97 minute video!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ScZ8zDsVvk&feature=youtu.be

Some pictures inserted into the video. Any questions just ask. Sorry for the "Alien Autopsy" quality video it was hard to capture this indoors in poor lighting and it has been to windy outdoors.

contact: cptfrazz(at)gmail

 

 

 

 

Read more…
Developer

Tuning the TechPod

3689542477?profile=originalI was delighted when Mark Bolt of BoltRC rang me up recently and offered to send me a TechPod to review. I'd been looking at the TechPod as a possible search aircraft for long distance search and rescue tasks, which is an interest of mine, so I jumped at the chance to give it a try!
After spending quite some time building the TechPod I finally took it for a first flight yesterday. With a small bit of tuning it flew very nicely, but it does have some quirks that are worth noting that affect tuning it for auto flight with an APM, so I thought I'd write up a tuning guide as part of this review in the hope that it will help other TechPod owners.

Building the TechPod

First a bit of information about the build. I'm not a really experienced builder and I had heard the TechPod is a challenging build, so I was expecting some difficulties. I've only built about 10 ARF planes since getting into the hobby and the TechPod is certainly the most difficult build I've done.
Luckily there are some good online resources to help with the build. Wayne's build videos are great, although very long and as such not ideal to use as a reference when you hit a tricky part of the build. I found Mark's build log the most useful guide.
All up I spent well over 20 hours on the build (including APM install), although I suspect if I built another one then that would probably come down to under 5 hours. It isn't a build that can be rushed too much as there are a number of steps where you need to wait for epoxy to fully dry.

I made a few small changes to the recommended build:

  • I used 15 minute epoxy instead of JB-Weld, as JB-Weld wasn't available locally in Canberra. The epoxy worked well.
  • I used UHU Por for foam gluing (eg. wings), which worked nicely.
  • I only glued one half of the main pod onto the frame, and held the other half on with tightly applied 20mm fiber tape on all seams. That will allow me to more easily open up the fuselage if I want to make more internal changes (eg. changing the motor).
  • I didn't use the glass fiber when gluing the motor mount to the frame, and just used epoxy. It is plenty strong enough with the small G10 motor I'm using.
  • I used a tape hinge at the front to hold the pod hatch on, and fabric pins at the back. That reduced the metal near the compass, and is faster and easier to open the pod up. It is a tight fit, so I'm very confident it will hold well. I'm not planning on flying this plane inverted!


With a 4S 5Ah LiPo installed the total weight came to 2.0 Kg.
One of the trickier parts of the build is running the elevator servo cable up the vertical stabilizer. This is the technique I used in case it helps anyone else:

  • pushed the rudder control rod through the vertical stabilizer for the initial hole
  • expanded the hole by pushing a chopstick in from both ends, pulling it back out with pliers
  • folded over a coat-hanger and pushed it through the hole, then put the servo cable through the coat-hanger wire loop and pulled on the coat-hanger wire to bring the wire back through the channel

3689542633?profile=original3689542594?profile=original

(the TechPod doesn't like to share the couch)

Installing an APM

Once the TechPod was built I needed to install an APM, airspeed sensor, GPS, battery etc. I stared at the pod cavity for about 10 minutes before I found a decent layout. The problem is that the internals of the pod is mostly curved surfaces, which is not great for mounting an autopilot. I finally realized that one of the side surfaces of the pod is flat, and the perfect size for an APM, so with a bit of velcro I ended up with an install that looks like this:

3689542661?profile=originalThe ESC is installed on the opposite wall of the pod from the APM, leaving the mid section with enough room to put a hand in to get at the cables right at the back, also held on with velcro. The GPS/Compass combo is installed with clear view of the sky on top, on a little flat area I cut out with a hobby knife then held together with fiber tape.
For the airspeed sensor I originally thought I'd put it on a wing, but it looked like the cable tangle when putting on the wings at the field was already going to be quite bad, so I decided to instead keep it in the pod, protruding out the front of the camera dome. I used a screwdriver to bore a small hole in the foam to hold the pitot tube, which you can see in the lower right corner of the photo. The flight logs showed that this position works very well, with not much positional error in the airspeed reading.
I mounted the telemetry radio on the right wall of the pod, next to the battery, with the antenna poking out the bottom of the pod by a few millimeters, but not far enough that it will scrape on the ground on landing. Having the antenna pointing down is always a bonus, as the ground control station is usually below the aircraft.
The battery was a bit of a trouble to install at first. I like my batteries to be very secure, and I found that the single surface available for velcro on the bottom of the battery didn't hold it well enough, especially with the gap in the foam floor for the downward facing camera port. I ended up using a rubber band plus wire hook harness as extra security in addition to the velcro, with the rubber band going right through the pod base on either side of the battery.
For the flaps, I set them up with about 35 degree full deflection and controlled by a transmitter knob (using two channels, as the flap layout is unfortunately setup on the wing without the right reversal). I often setup flaps with manual control like this so I can easily see the impact of the flaps while flying. They can be moved to auto-flaps later once you know how they behave.
I setup the CoG at the recommended position below the wing spar, although I later found that may not be ideal.

Initial Parameters

I decided to takeoff for the first test flight in FBWA mode, then to switch to manual to trim the plane. For that I needed some basic conservative roll and pitch stabilisation gains.
To get these initial parameters I looked at the parameters that Wayne used for his recent 170 minute flight, plus some advice Mark provided on what he found worked well in manual and set the following parameters:

RLL2SRV_P        0.80
RLL2SRV_I        0.00
RLL2SRV_D        0.02

PTCH2SRV_P       0.60
PTCH2SRV_I       0.00
PTCH2SRV_D       0.02

I wasn't expecting these to fly the plane well, I just wanted it to get in the air for an initial tuning session.
So I could try a loiter I also set the airspeed range, which is critical for good flight under airspeed control.

ARSPD_FBW_MAX    18
ARSPD_FBW_MIN    9

Most of the rest I left at default, apart from things like the battery/voltage/current setup and of course the orientation of the APM and compass (I needed AHRS_ORIENTATION=16 and COMPASS_ORIENT=16).

First Flight

I met with three friends from the CanberraUAV team at the CMAC field for the initial test flights. Darrell also owns a TechPod (not built yet), so he was interested in seeing how it flew, plus he offered to get some photos. Chris and Jack offered to help as safety pilots while I did the tuning, which really makes life a lot easier when setting up a new plane with APM. Having two safety pilots is nice when flying a plane that can stay in the air for as long as the TechPod can, as it can get quite tiring standing there for an hour keeping an eye on a plane against the clouds!
The first flight was not a great success, lasting less than 30 seconds, although luckily there was no damage! The throw was fine, but the plane refused to climb even with full elevator. It was quite stable, but stubbornly refused to go above about 2m even with some throttle adjustment, so I just let it glide in to land in the grass. It snagged a wing when it touched down, which resulted in a couple of nicks on the wing, but nothing to worry about.
We then had a chat to try to work out why it wouldn't climb. We think the problem is probably that the horizontal stabilizer is generating a bit too much lift - the exact angle of a horizontal stabilizer is a bit tricky to get right when building a foam plane, and I think mine is presenting too high an angle of attack, causing it to lift up the tail.
I had noticed in Wayne's flight logs that his pitch tuning was pretty bad, with a lot of up elevator applied even when in level flight and the plane not achieving the demanded pitch, so I suspect this problem isn't unique to my plane.
3689542488?profile=original

The workaround is very simple though. I made 4 small changes for the next flight:

  • moved the battery about 1.5cm further back
  • went to 125% throws on the elevator
  • applied about 20 degrees of flaps on takeoff
  • took off with about 30% throttle

That worked very nicely, and the TechPod took off very easily on it's second flight, climbing steadily to 100m with graceful turns over the field.
It is an interesting plane to fly - similar in many ways to a SkyWalker 1900, but with wings that flap a bit more! It was very easy to steer around the sky in FBWA, and also very easy in manual once I had the surfaces trimmed (I found I needed quite a lot of up elevator trim). I used the TRIM_AUTO method of trimming the surfaces, which consists of:

  • set the TRIM_AUTO parameter to 1 before takeoff
  • fly in FBWA
  • flick to manual, and see how the attitude changes
  • change back to FBWA, and then adjust transmitter trims based on what it did in manual
  • change to manual again and keep looping until it flies nice and level in manual with no stick input

It is a very low stress way of trimming a new plane.
One thing that became very clear quite quickly was that the motor/battery/prop combination I'd chosen was way overpowered for this plane.  I'd installed a Turnigy G10 810kV motor with a 4S battery and a 12x6 APC prop.  That combination is mentioned by several people as recommended for a TechPod, but it really is far too much, at least with the 2.0Kg flying weight that I had. According to eCalc that gives around 500W of mechanical power, and I think a combination that aims for about 200W or perhaps even less would be a better choice. Most of the second flight I was using less than 75W of electrical power, and given that electric motors are very inefficient when operating well below their peak power I was probably only getting around 37W of mechanical power (eCalc thinks efficiency would be below 50% for this setup at the current I measured).
Luckily being overpowered didn't worry the APM, as the TECS controller just adjusts the throttle down accordingly, so it still flew fine, but it would fly for a lot longer with a better motor setup.

Tuning the roll/pitch loops

Once it was in the air the next job is to tune the roll and pitch loops. It was actually flying OK with my pre-flight guesses, but I knew that how well a plane seems to be flying is often quite deceptive, and you won't get good performance in AUTO and LOITER unless you get the roll and pitch loops properly tuned.
The way to do that is to graph the demanded versus actual pitch and roll. I popped up graphs on the GCS of NAV_CONTROLLER_OUTPUT.nav_roll and ATTITUDE.roll, which is what is needed for roll tuning. It was immediately very obvious the tuning was way off.

3689542719?profile=originalas you can see, the TechPod is not following the roll demand at all well. All the gains are far too small, which is quite common for a first flight. It is usually better to guess quite low gains when doing initial setup, as it will avoid oscillations which could make the plane unflyable (and potentially stress the airframe beyond the design limits).
Following the tuning guide, I raised the P, added some I and raised D a bit, and got the following result:

3689542677?profile=originalThat is much better. It isn't tracking roll exactly when level, but that isn't uncommon in an airframe that is so wind affected. A bit more D might eliminate that, but I left things at the above and moved on to pitch.

The roll gains I ended up with are:

RLL2SRV_P       1.50
RLL2SRV_I       0.10
RLL2SRV_D       0.06
RLL2SRV_IMAX    2500

The initial pitch tuning was as bad, or worse, than the roll.

pitch_tuning_initial.jpeg?width=600

it obviously needs a lot more gain, as it isn't tracking at all, and wasn't oscillating. Following the same procedure (more P, adjust I, add some D) gave the following:

pitch_tuning_done.jpeg?width=600now the APM is much happier. When it asks for the aircraft to change to a specified roll/pitch the TechPod quickly responds to do exactly what is asked of it.

The pitch tuning I ended up with is:

PTCH2SRV_P      1.50
PTCH2SRV_I      0.10
PTCH2SRV_D      0.04
PTCH2SRV_IMAX   2500

I actually did the above roll/pitch tuning in AUTO, which is a bit unusual. Normally you want to do the initial tuning in FBWA mode, so you don't have any navigation control loops to deal with. I did it in AUTO as I'd tried a brief loiter after takeoff and found it quite stable, so I thought that a full tuning while flying a small rectangular circuit in AUTO would work well, and indeed it did.
I'd also like to point out that if you are reading this and thinking you'll just copy these parameters for your TechPod then please be careful! The correct tuning values are very dependent on lots of factors that tend to vary between airframes of the same type. You might have slower/faster servos than me, or use different holes in the servo horns, or have a different takeoff weight. It is better to start with some low conservative gains then tune it for your airframe than to just grab someone elses gains, otherwise you risk nasty oscillations if the gains you copy are too high for your setup.
Eventually we'd like to add a "auto tuning" mode to the code so you can just change to AUTOTUNE and let it fly for a couple of minutes to tune the plane, but for now you do need to read the tuning guide and tune APM manually.

Tuning Navigation

The next step was to tune the L1 navigation controller. There is really just one parameter that needs to be tuned for L1 for most aircraft, the NAVL1_PERIOD. This defaults to 25, which is higher than most airframes need. The default is chosen for maximum stability with a wide variety of airframes, not for great waypoint tracking. Before takeoff I'd set it down to 18, as I was pretty sure that the TechPod wouldn't need 25, and indeed it worked very well. Here is the first AUTO test track:
auto1.jpg?width=600

I ended up lowering NAVL1_PERIOD a bit more (to 16) later, which helped it cope with higher airspeeds and a bit more wind, but the initial value was certainly good enough.

A quick test of loiter confirmed the settings are working well

loiter.jpg?width=600

Tuning TECS

The next step is to see if TECS is behaving itself. TECS is the new Total Energy Control System which is the speed/height controller in APM. It is very common that the TECS defaults work well, and indeed I found they worked nicely for the TechPod too.
As the TECS tuning guide suggests the main thing to tune is the turn handling, to ensure the aircraft didn't gain or lose too much altitude in turns. I found this was fine already, with a typical altitude change in turns of around 2m or so, which is hardly noticeable when flying at 100m.
The trickier part was tuning TECS for overall altitude hold in the face of gusts and updrafts. When flying at 11m/s this was the result for altitude and airspeed deviation:

tecs_initial.jpeg?width=600The airspeed control is quite good, varying by about 1m/s either side of the target, but the altitude is varying by up to 8m. The strange thing was that this altitude change didn't correspond well to turns. Paul and I looked at this together later and we think what is happening is the TechPod was getting quite strongly affected by updrafts and downdrafts. The logs show quite a few occasions where it had the motor off, and was climbing without losing airspeed. The energy has to be coming from somewhere, and the only likely explanation is a thermal. It really is a glider.
We could try to compensate for this in the tuning if exact altitude hold is critical, but as my aim was for long distance flight I wasn't worried about a few meters of altitude deviation, so I didn't spend any time on it during the flight and just moved on to looking at battery usage at different airspeeds.

Current versus Airspeed

My interest in the TechPod is for search and rescue, where the key is maximizing range, not endurance. That usually means a bit higher airspeed than the speed you would want for maximum endurance.
What I found was a bit surprising, although I will need some more flights to confirm it. I flew the TechPod in an AUTO circuit, slowly raising the target airspeed over a 20 minute period. I started off at 9m/s and raised it up to 18m/s. The following graph shows smoothed airspeed and current draw numbers from the test:
airspeed_current.jpeg?width=600The thing that surprised me is how close to linear the relationship between airspeed and current was over this range. I expected the current to rise a lot faster than the airspeed. It either means we are on the flat part of the power/airspeed curve, or perhaps we are seeing the impact of increased motor efficiency at higher current, combined with the lower drag profile at higher speeds.
As far as how the plane was in the air, it looked very comfortable at 11m/s and above. Below that it wafted about a bit, but above 11m/s it looked nice in the air. Above 18m/s it started to get too twitchy, so I think the comfort zone is 11 to 18m/s (that is 22 to 36 knots).

Maximizing endurance

After this tuning flight (which lasted a bit over 50 minutes) we flew the TechPod again, but this time letting it sit at 10m/s the whole time and just let it fly in a circuit to see what endurance it could achieve.
In total it flew for 71 minutes, with about 20% battery spare at the end (according to my LiPo charger). That is certainly good, but nothing like the 170 minutes that Wayne recorded.
The main difference is I had a much smaller battery. I used a 5Ah 4S whereas Wayne had a 10Ah 6S, which means 3 times as much battery capacity. I suspect Waynes motor was probably running much closer to its optimal operating power too - as I mentioned previously mine was running at about 50% efficiency, whereas 80% should be achievable (at least according to eCalc).
I'll do some more experiments soon with some alternative motor setups to see if I can get a bit more range from the TechPod. I wouldn't be surprised if someone (perhaps Wayne?) posts a 4 hour log soon.

Final comments

It was really fun trying out the TechPod, and I'd like to thank Mark from BoltRC for sending it to me! It is the most affordable long endurance plane that can carry enough camera payload to be useful that I know of, and I think that as long as you don't mind flying in light winds it could indeed be useful for search and rescue tasks.
There are a few ways it could be improved though. I suspect the build could be made a bit simpler. It probably won't get down to the level of building a Bixler2 (which takes around 30 minutes if you have done one before), but I think it could be brought down a lot from the level it is at now.
I also think the horizontal stabilizer might be able to be improved. Paul and I suspect it is giving too much lift, which is pushing the nose down. That will be cutting the flight time a bit. Paul also suggested that the elevator should extend all the way across the stabilizer, which would give more pitch authority, and also be aerodynamically more efficient.
I also think the pod could have a few more flat surfaces in it, and have a bit better layout for equipment.
Overall though it is a very efficient airframe, and works very nicely with APM!

techpod_final.jpg?width=600Many thanks to Darrell Burkey, Jack Pittar and Chris Gough for helping with the tests of the TechPod

Read more…

Tried just for fun to start and land with my Wingcopter in the forest :)
Here is the onboard video:

To see the whole VTOL here one picture:

3689542604?profile=original

It is the first Wingcopter of our serial production. The tilt arms are redesigned and more stable than at the earlier version. On our website there are some more pictures of the new one:

http://www.wingcopter.com/html/fotos.html

 

Regards,
Jonathan

Read more…

CAUTION ..I REALLY mean it !

3 years charging these lipo battries and no problem. 8-16-2013 my luck ran out. I was charging a 3 cell 2200 mah lipo while I worked at the computer.<br /
3 years charging these lipo battries and no problem. 8-16-2013 my luck ran out.
I was charging a 3 cell 2200 mah lipo while I worked at the computer.
It caught FIRE near me. Got it out the door just in time.
It burns HOT and long.
Could have burned the place down to the ground.
Be CAREFUL.....PLEASE !
Earl
It Caught FIRE near me. Got it out the door just in time. It burns HOT and long.
Be CAREFULL.....
Read more…

A $38,000 piece of Styrofoam

     

Read more…

Ground Station Concept

3689542526?profile=original

OK, it's not a concept. I built it, it's nearly ready to go.

However, until it works, I will call it a concept.

Fieldview 777 screen, Boscam 5.8GHz VRx with ImmersionRC circular polarised antenna. 

3S 1000mAh battery not shown, but will hang underneath. 

It's a bit heavy, but I'm sure I can hold it, especially if I sit on the ground or on a chair. Switches might be a bit hard to get to, but to switch modes shouldn't be a problem. 

I used a modded plywood FPV holder because it didn't fit the dx6i anyway. So chopped a bunch of wood off and screwed it to the back of the case.

The Tx antenna only fits sideways which shouldn't be a problem, but I intend to replace the antenna with a coax for installation of a 2.4gHz WLAN amplifier which would then be mounted on a pole (a stick, not a Polish person).

3689542465?profile=original

Read more…

Using Drones to Stop Poachers in Africa

Professor Tom Snitch recently spoke with the the DC Area Drone User Group about his trip to South Africa where he ran a pilot project using drones and predictive mapping techniques to help local rangers in their fight against poachers who are targeting elephants and rhinos. The talk has been posted in a series of YouTube videos with the first one embedded above. Some key points included:

  • 30,000 elephants were killed by poachers in Africa in 2012. 668 rhinos were killed just in South Africa in 2012. The current system of protection for these animals is not working.
  • The parks are too large for any UAV to cover the whole area. By using predictive mapping techniques based on models of poacher behavior, the team was able to determine where to deploy the UAVs to maximize the chance they will catch poachers.
  • Although some other anti-poaching projects involving drones have focused on using systems with long ranges, Dr. Snitch felt there was little point in having UAVs that could fly farther than the distance rangers can go out and respond to what they find.
  • The South African government gave Dr. Snitch's team permission to operate because the system was small enough to be considered a model aircraft under South African regulation.
  • US regulations forced Dr.Snitch to downgrade the autopilot system on his UAVs so they could be exported to Africa. He considered bringing a system from another country where the regulations are not as onerous, but the Falcon UAV team stepped forward to assist him with their system.

You can see the slides from Dr. Snitch's talk by clicking here.

The DC Area Drone User Group is part of the Drone User Group Network, an association of community organizations that seek to promote the use of civilian drone technology for the benefit of humanity. If you are interested in starting a drone user group in your area or affiliating your existing group with our network, please email us at info@dcdrone.org .

 

3689542561?profile=original

 

Read more…

Spiri kickstarter takes care of safety issues

It's great to see people taking safety into consideration with these flying lawn mowers.

Not only is there physical safety with the carbon fibre prop ribbons but the developers intend to take care of safe autonomous flight.

It has an ARM Cortex A9 running linux as well as a separate flight processor, 4GB of on-board storage and tons of sensors:

  • GPS
  • Optical flow camera
  • HD camera
  • Acoustic altimeter
  • Pressure / temp sensor
  • 3-axis accelerometer
  • 3-axis gyro
  • 3-axis magnetometer

The project hopes to accelerate the development of flying applications by making it easier for developers to focus on those applications rather than worrying about the flight.

$520 gets you one of the quads http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/914887915/spiri

Read more…