Discussion Mikrokopter / UAVP / quadrocopter / quadrotor build

[Old Man Mike]

Looking at the Google Map of the flight track, the quad was actually out to 1.4 miles:

Originally Posted by sf51177

Hi Mike,

May I know what camera did you use for your video? Thanks.

Shawn

Hi Shawn,

I am using the Panasonic FX-35 camera for the HD video and a KPC-VBN190NH camera for the FPV video.

Originally Posted by jesolins

Beautiful Mike! What was your top speed flying to your destination and returning? I am very curious how you ran your Tx antenna out of your home...
Cheers,
Jim

Hi Jim,
Top speed was 20 miles per hour and most of the to/from flight was close to that speed. I'll try to start the documentation for a post later tonight. Of course I would really appreciate a post of your parameter/quad info in my other thread.

Originally Posted by antonlubo

Beautiful, as always. I have noticed you have quite a few ponds and small lakes in your area. Hope you don't have to go for a swim this winter...Tony

Thanks, Antonlube,
You can see by the map that I took an indirect path so that I would not be flying over that larger body of water. I wanted to avoid the swim this time of year.

Originally Posted by BJM-Maxx

That was a great video. I am surprised you got that far away on only ~1650 mAh energy used. you must have pretty much just taken off and flown there. I would be so much more tentative (especially not trusting my MK to behave). I think I might have hit a max altitude of maybe 400' on a day where my MK was behaving itself.

Please post a link to whatever thread you create, I am keen to know how to sit inside and have control signal go that far.

Thanks, BJM.
Aside from the indirect path, I did not waste much time getting there. The 4900 mAh Rhino battery provides around 4600 mAh of life so I used a little more than a third of my available power getting there. It certainly gets my heart rate up when I fly the longer distances.

Originally Posted by simonjardine

WOW Mike, Pushing the limits again I have tried flying from my T.V, but only managed to hover around the house, i never took the MK too far away. I was worried about my standard Futaba 7C loosing reception, although i have flown 1km away with glasses in the back field. I too like Jim and others love to see the setup.

Just Fantastic Mike and very very COOL

Thanks Simon. You are actually one of the few people that should know what I am using to provide more margin with the 7C even though this range should not be a problem with the standard unit. Thanks again for posting your parameters.


EDIT UPDATE:
I've started a detail thread of the above system here:

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1147430


OMM

[simonjardine]

EDIT UPDATE:
I've started a detail thread of the above system here:

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1147430
OMM[/quote]

Thats great Mike, thanks so much for the new thread, its just what i was hoping for, clear and precise.
I have the connector http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/pro...roducts_id=662
I wanted to use something more mobile. What about a larger 2.4 rubber duck and something like this http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Broadband-802...item45ef09dba6
Obviously this would not be as good, though it would give me more flexibility and be quite compact? Or would it?

Simon

[va3mw]

Originally Posted by Old Man Mike

Here's another FPV flight made from inside my house. This time I made it beyond 1 mile:

You can probably tell it was a bit hazy today. I also tried a lower quality posting to see if that will help people like saabguyspg to view it at a faster rate.

OMM

Good Day Mike

That might be quite a rush going that far. There is always a risk of a problem, but if we don't push the envelope, we don't improve, etc. Very nicely done.

Did you also extend the Futaba's RF signal with a feedline to the roof or are you just transmitting through the walls of the house? (never mind, just saw your other thread - I know, there I go again, Rusty reminding me that I answer my own questions). LOL

I notice in your other video (the one with the dive at the end), you have the exact same (almost) dust on the CCD that I have with mine. I had to send mine in for cleaning as I couldn't figure out a way to get it apart to clean it.

I wish I had brought my quad with me to Lake Louise Alberta. The winds have been calm enough to shot some video from about 2500M ASL. Great view of the Chateau Lake Louise across the valley (but I digress).

Mike

[Itasca]

Just as a follow up to my previous post on the new EPP 1045 props. After about 30 minutes of flying time, the props seem very similar to the original 1045s as far as flight chararistics and hover. They seem stiffer but with my Roxxy 2824-34 motors, they fly well.

I only had a few of the old style break on me so if these are stronger, I will happily use them, keep in mind that my MK is the original model so weight is low.

Parameters are set at the original "Beginner" settings.

Pete

[13brv3]

Originally Posted by Itasca

Just as a follow up to my previous post on the new EPP 1045 props. After about 30 minutes of flying time, the props seem very similar to the original 1045s as far as flight chararistics and hover. They seem stiffer but with my Roxxy 2824-34 motors, they fly well.

Hi Pete,

Did you get the new style from MPI, or some other dealer? I guess the real question is whether I'd get the new style if I ordered some from MPI now, or if I'd end up getting more of the old ones?

The EPP props are still the best in flying quality, so it would be nice if they've fixed the breakage issues, though it will be a while before we can be sure of that.

Do you have any idea if they plan to fix the 1245's as well, or do you think the new 1045 props are now the same material as the 0845 and 1245 props? Did they change the hub design to match the 0845/1245, or is it still the same as before? I've actually expected that they would eventually change the 1045 to match the newer design of the 0845/1245.

Cheers,
Rusty (piles of Delrin in the router box)

[Nicoleto]

Originally Posted by MrGlobeFlight

Hi,

Some month ago I showed you a new quadrokopter project with a new flight control. This copter was perfect stable and working very good. But not reliable if one prop would brake in the air, what happend with this powerfull quadro before. Only our parachute rescuesystem was working perfect as well but needed a minimum height for really safe the quadro. Whats next we asked us ?
So we designed an octokopter based on carbon tubes and plates to make it strong but light weight.
This seems to be perfect to have a secure, reliable and powerfull copter to get heavier cams and more equipment in the air than ever before.

Here you can see the first video of our baby

Great!! Very stable and smooth flight. What props are you using?

Nick

[Itasca]

Rusty,

I ordered them from Quadroufo and got the new style. I then called MPI to find out what the difference was and was told about the addition of fiber to the mix. Instead of gloss black they are a dark gray with almost a frosted finish. Not sure if they are the same as the 0845/1245s as I have never see them. They said that at this time, they had not decided whether they would offer both the old and the new or just switch over to the new.

They said that the original 1045s were not designed for the heavier craft and they thought that the breakage was caused by overloading the props.

I like them on my small MK and maybe I will try them on the new one that I am building on your chassis with the 2213 or 2217 motors.

The hub is still the 3mm hole with the hex recess on the motor side.

Glad if this info is useful as I haven't been able to pay back anything to all who have helped me so much getting started.

I will reorder from MPI as I can specify the new formulation and they will know what I am talking about.

Pete

[13brv3]

Originally Posted by Itasca

Rusty,

I ordered them from Quadroufo and got the new style. I then called MPI to find out what the difference was and was told about the addition of fiber to the mix. Instead of gloss black they are a dark gray with almost a frosted finish. Not sure if they are the same as the 0845/1245s as I have never see them. They said that at this time, they had not decided whether they would offer both the old and the new or just switch over to the new.


The hub is still the 3mm hole with the hex recess on the motor side.

Hi Pete,

Thanks for the extra info. I may order a few from MPI, and see what they look like. What you describe for appearance sounds like the material the 0845/1245 props are made of, though I can't verify any fiber in the material. It might be so small that it wouldn't be visible without a microscope.

As for the hubs, I'd probably rather see them go to a larger hole, and sleeve arrangement almost like the 0845/1245 props. The change I'd recommend would be to do away with that silly nut recess, and make the hole the full height of the hub. Hmmm, maybe I'll give them a call one of these days and tell them all my brilliant ideas

Rusty

[Itasca]

Rusty,

From the conversation that I had, I think that they would appreciate your feedback. They seemed to be very open to ideas.

Pete

[agressiva]

[quote=MrGlobeFlight;13650551]Hi,

Some month ago I showed you a new quadrokopter project with a new flight control. This copter was perfect stable and working very good. But not reliable if one prop would brake in the air, what happend with this powerfull quadro before. Only our parachute rescuesystem was working perfect as well but needed a minimum height for really safe the quadro. Whats next we asked us ?
So we designed an octokopter based on carbon tubes and plates to make it strong but light weight.
This seems to be perfect to have a secure, reliable and powerfull copter to get heavier cams and more equipment in the air than ever before.

Here you can see the first video of our baby

Hi MrGlobe, very smooth flight.
What the version of your flight controller ?
what carbon tube you used in this frame ?

regards.

[agressiva]

Arthur, jesonlin, OMM and Diem ..

today i make some tests with my MK4

i am very tired with wobble of my MK then i removed the MK board and put a UAVPX in the frame !

Wow ... the ... magic ... the quad flyed very stable and without any wobble or dizzy.

i puted the MK FC board back in the frame and ..... the quad fly very wobble and dizzy again.

i tested FC with lotz of different parameters .

does anyone flyed the MK with piezo giro and after flyed a MK with MEMS gyro ?

this wobble can be about the kind of gyro ?

My Mk use ENC03 and UAVPX use MLX gyros.

tomorrow i think in put the mlx gyro in mk board to make some tests.

sorry for my poor english brothers

[BJM-Maxx]

I just upgraded to a FC ME board and for this one I would like to try running some servos to stabilize a camera.

I have some spare 7805s like the FC 1.3 uses, can I use that in the second position on the ME board? Is the second regulator powering a separate 5V bus from the main board or is the second regulator just raising the capacity of the main board 5V bus?

[dmsgodeep]

Originally Posted by MorenoEnNYC1

Hi Brent,

All you need to know is here: http://forums.virtualdub.org/index.p...T&f=4&t=14396&

Scroll about 1/3 down and look for the bold blue: OPEN QUICKTIME FILES headline. It works like a charm.

AJ

Thanks for the info AJ.
I must be doing something wrong. I installed all the stuff it said I need...but I get errors when trying to open the MOV file.

Here is what I did:
Installed VirtualDubMod (all_inclusive)
Installed Quicktime Alternative
Installed AVisynth
Opened MOV file using DIRECTSHOWSOURCE

Get "Avisynth open failure"...
"Pins cannot connect due to not supporting the same transport".

I know this isn't a forum for this program and I'm not expecting you to feel like you need to troubleshoot this with me, etc.

Just going to use Virtualdub I guess.

Thanks anyway.

Brent

[diem]

Originally Posted by agressiva

i puted the MK FC board back in the frame and ..... the quad fly very wobble and dizzy again.

Do you have FC ME placed on vibration dampers or plastic spacers? It was a problem with mine mk. You can make vibration dampers by yourself, it will be much better then MK ones. You can use silicone from builders market.

[FredericG]

Originally Posted by agressiva

Arthur, jesonlin, OMM and Diem ..

today i make some tests with my MK4

i am very tired with wobble of my MK then i removed the MK board and put a UAVPX in the frame !

Wow ... the ... magic ... the quad flyed very stable and without any wobble or dizzy.

i puted the MK FC board back in the frame and ..... the quad fly very wobble and dizzy again.

i tested FC with lotz of different parameters .

does anyone flyed the MK with piezo giro and after flyed a MK with MEMS gyro ?

this wobble can be about the kind of gyro ?

My Mk use ENC03 and UAVPX use MLX gyros.

tomorrow i think in put the mlx gyro in mk board to make some tests.

sorry for my poor english brothers

What I know is that on my standard MK (standard frame, motors, props (EPP 10"), ESC) both FC 1.3 and FC ME works very well and the MK is rock-steady.

Once I put the boards on by bigger frame with TP ESC, APC 12", the MK starts wobbling and react badly to wind, also after trying to tune the parameters. Perhaps nor the FC, or the TP ESC are to blame, but I have a feeling that there is an incompatibility (at least for my setup, YMMV, so many factors that have an influence of performance). I am also looking into that problem. I do not have a lot of time lately, but I am planning to get some objective measurements, I will try to measure the oscillations. A few possible causes have been mentioned here and in the other thread of OMM of the parameters and I would like to have objective data that show what influence they have.

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...7&postcount=36
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1141571


Frederic