HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Feb 10, 2011, 05:49 PM
Registered User
San Marcos, TX
Joined Jan 2010
666 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by simonjardine View Post
Simon,
do you sell this Y6 frame and if so do you have a price?
Hakan
Quote:
Originally Posted by simonjardine View Post
No, not right now. We are waiting on the V2 from Serg, which should be here in a few days.
The Y-6 uses 1.5 amps more than a Hexakopter, with the same weight, battery etc..
So you are right the Hexa is more efficient, but only by a bees dick.

I would say that for video a Hexa is better than a Y-6, maybe with more PID tweaking the Y6 will be as good as....

Simon
What will be different about the V2 from Serg?

Thanks, Shawn
Mactadpole is offline Find More Posts by Mactadpole
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Feb 10, 2011, 06:05 PM
uavservices on MRF
saabguyspg's Avatar
Calgary Canada
Joined Jun 2006
4,905 Posts
but for windy conditions a traditional hexa sucks IMHO..... ;-)

I am getting good with the mixing, I will try a coaxial hexa that has a split tail. So two co-axial motors in the front, then two upward facing motors in the rear to add stabilization........ of course that is only if I don't find the tradiational y-6 stable enough for video.

Steve
saabguyspg is offline Find More Posts by saabguyspg
Last edited by saabguyspg; Feb 10, 2011 at 06:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2011, 07:05 PM
Don L.
Old Lyme, Connecticut
Joined Feb 2006
917 Posts
A Few Pics from Antarctica

Mostly MK hexa w/stripped down Olympus EP1 and 17mm prime lens. EPP1045 props. Gusts of 15-20 mph no problem.

Cheers,
Don
dleroi is offline Find More Posts by dleroi
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2011, 07:06 PM
Mikrokopter Australia ;-)
simonjardine's Avatar
Australia
Joined Apr 2008
1,438 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by saabguyspg View Post
but for windy conditions a traditional hexa sucks IMHO..... ;-)

I am getting good with the mixing, I will try a coaxial hexa that has a split tail. So two co-axial motors in the front, then two upward facing motors in the rear to add stabilization........ of course that is only if I don't find the tradiational y-6 stable enough for video.

Steve
I think some things we miss, or maybe somethings i miss.
PID settings vs Video footage...
The MK wants to be level all the time, this is what makes it easy to fly, when you wanna shoot nice video (especially in wind) you have to change PID settings and other settings like Dynamic stability, at default its 70, i think this seems to relate to the accelerometers, so try at 50 .
The 'I' can be decreased, so this will stop the craft wanting to level out quickly, add some P, to make the stick less touchy and a little more D, around 10 - 16 works well, this is the sponge effect. Obviously all machines are different, i even find that two exact machines can fly different, its quite amazing, it's like they have a personality (scary).
Anyway, with this in mind, any machine can be setup to be flown in windy conditions and still get good footage, typical example Old Man Mike (OMM) with his home made Quad and a pool noodle as a camera mount
Overall Summary, the larger and heavier the Platform the better it will perform in wind, but you still need to play with PID's and other settings

Simon
re the props, i would say you gonna have them in 'your' hands before the end of the month!
@ Shawn the frames from Sergey have changed slightly, the booms were made with two U channels glued together, now they are one piece.
The frame has small aluminium offsets which fit in a recess, this has changed also. The nuts and bolts in the old frame were not treated so they rusted...
Battery tray is slightly different and not as complex. I will post some pictures once i get them !
simonjardine is offline Find More Posts by simonjardine
Last edited by simonjardine; Feb 10, 2011 at 07:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2011, 07:33 PM
Registered User
tkeeg's Avatar
Trenton, NJ
Joined May 2008
789 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itasca View Post
Tom,
Would you give some info on your heavy lift quad? Motors etc.
Thanks.
Pete
Hi Pete,

Hope you're doing well. Everything that you may want to know is in this video.
MIkrokopter - Anatomy of a Heavy Lift Mikrokopter Quad (8 min 18 sec)
You may notice near the end of this video that there is a bit of bounce/shake in some of the onboard video footage. I am convinced that this is coming from some flex in my camera mount due to the fact that it is made from ¼” plywood and has a little bit of “spring“ to it. I don’t have a CNC machine nor a machine shop so I was limited in what I could use to make the mount with. I believe that the design is solid, I just need to fabricate it with rigid material. Fortunately I just found a welder in the area who has agreed to work side by side with me in his shop to weld the pieces of my mount together using those super lightweight 5/8” diameter towel bars. When it is completed & tested I’ll post the results.

Regards,
Tom
tkeeg is offline Find More Posts by tkeeg
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2011, 07:36 PM
Registered User
BJM-Maxx's Avatar
Joined Sep 2007
643 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleroi View Post
Mostly MK hexa w/stripped down Olympus EP1 and 17mm prime lens. EPP1045 props. Gusts of 15-20 mph no problem.

Cheers,
Don
Taking stills is not a problem, especially with a CCD camera. Video is much tougher in windy conditions. CMOS makes it that much harder.
BJM-Maxx is offline Find More Posts by BJM-Maxx
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2011, 09:03 PM
Registered User
Great White North
Joined Jun 2008
624 Posts
X Configuration Problem

Hi Folks,

I am a total newb to MK. I just built a quad with the FC 2.1, ESC v1.2, using a 400mm frame and the newer quad distribution board. All went well with build. I have kopter tools 1.72a, and I flashed the FC to latest firmware 0.82b

At first I didn't know about 'Alt' + settings so used the default + configuration. The Kopter flew really well. I would say it was rock solid.
I finally discovered how to get into the mixer tab and loaded the quad X config and set everything otherwise to default and tried it out. Unfortunately it was completely unstable with severe oscillations that flipped the quad. I reloaded + which worked perfectly again. I have since tried several times, also adjusting the red direction line in mixer from exactly where the FC board arrow is to heading forward (between 1 and 3) etc with no difference. I then set gyro p, I to very low value but it still had violent oscillation starting just before it leaves the ground.

I have not rotated the FC board to point "forward" between the front motors, but I understood that the red line in mixer makes rotating the board unnecessary. I also would have to get new hardward to be able to solidly mount the FC board "diagonally"

Flying in + config continues to be rock solid

I am stumped. would greatly appreciate any advice

Thanks
Al
alros_100 is offline Find More Posts by alros_100
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2011, 11:38 PM
uavservices on MRF
saabguyspg's Avatar
Calgary Canada
Joined Jun 2006
4,905 Posts
Tom my friend, I missed this post... we should catch up soon. Hope all is well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkeeg View Post
Hi Steve,
I've been away for a while & am just catching up on the forum today. I couldn't agree with you more about the Hexa in the wind. I'm sure that some will disagree with this, but as much as I loved my Hexa and as beautifully as it flew in calm conditions, it was blown about in windy conditions MUCH more than my Quad. The best way for me to describe it is that it seemed as if the large pillow of air under the Hexa (from all of the propellers going around in a circle) was caught by the wind like a balloon. For that reason I'll never go back to the Hexa again. My Heavy Lift Quad flies perfectly in calm & windy weather and is SO much easier to keep in place during windy conditions and it is strong enough to carry any camera I wish to use.
No disrespect to those of you who are having great results with your Hexa's, it just that they are not preferred by everybody.
Regards,
Tom
saabguyspg is offline Find More Posts by saabguyspg
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2011, 03:44 AM
Registered User
sarabi's Avatar
sky
Joined Nov 2009
153 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by saabguyspg View Post
do you get any lights on the FC board? Green or red?

If not then start at the power supply then follow the power to the 5.0v regulator, keep following and finally you will end up at the processor. check that you have 5.0v at the proper place on the processor, if you do then you may need to replace the processor.

firstly you need to inspect the board for burnt or broken components.

Steve
I have red FC board version 1.3 .

I checked the regulator . it is ok . and 5v properon on the processor..

I think my processor does not work?

Could you help me?

Can solder the new ATMEGA644 and then run it ?
sarabi is offline Find More Posts by sarabi
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2011, 07:05 AM
Registered User
Japan, Tokyo, Chiyoda
Joined Oct 2010
238 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by alainphoto View Post
hello,

I am building a heavy octo for a 5D type camera. I want a very stable platfrom with options (GPS, easycare, position/atitude hold, failsafe etc ...) at a reasonable cost.

I understand the 2 best platform in features and stability are UAVX and MK. I am looking more to UAVX because it is cheaper overall with non-I2C ESC and no need for isolator (so more simple)

Can you please confirm that this understanding is inline with reality ? Especially people who have tried both platforms ?

Thanks in advance !
Guys ? anyone to confirm I m going the right way or offer some valuable insights ?

Soryy to bother you with such basic questions, but controllers are evolving very fast and new ones are always around the corner, so it is hard to make an educated decision even the stable and prooven ones are not so many.

Thanks in advance !

Alain
alainphoto is offline Find More Posts by alainphoto
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2011, 07:30 AM
Tri-Quad-Hexa-Octo-copters!!
United States, TX, San Antonio
Joined Feb 2007
14,263 Posts
Hi Alain,
Both the UAVX and MK are proven commercial grade feature rich AVP platforms in the below $5K price range, with lots of high-quality videos and photos shot from each of them. Both take long study and focused attention to setup, pre and post flight inspection details to work reliably. Yes, there are many others that are trying to catch up and have been "right around the corner" for over two years...Things to consider are that of course the ARTF and RTF versions will get you in the air faster, but then you will lack knowledge of how to setup and repair it when needed...and repair will be needed Availability of repair parts for frames and flight controller board's, motors and ESC's should also be considered for your requirements. Owning and flying a multicopter is a journey that you have to stick with to be eventually armed with the knowledge that will make you a skilled and safe pilot and maintenance technician
Cheers,
Jim
Quadrocopter and Tricopter Mega Link Index

Quote:
Originally Posted by alainphoto View Post
Guys ? anyone to confirm I m going the right way or offer some valuable insights ?
Soryy to bother you with such basic questions, but controllers are evolving very fast and new ones are always around the corner, so it is hard to make an educated decision even the stable and prooven ones are not so many.
Thanks in advance !
Alain
jesolins is offline Find More Posts by jesolins
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2011, 08:04 AM
Registered User
Japan, Tokyo, Chiyoda
Joined Oct 2010
238 Posts
Thank you Jim, you convinced me - again !

When I first discovered discovered multirotor it was with with MK, and I learned a lot about it and the clones, and was about to go with them, but then found out the I2C issues and cost (isolator needed, convert to normal ESC needed for cost).
So I searched for something else and focused on UAVX since you are in the project and also helping everybody here a lot, so I thought that if with your experience you went for that project it should be good. Decisions are sometimes made on small things

The only points I am worried about with UAVX is that the user base seems quite smaller than MK (so less people to help), plus there is only one shot to get the electronics (lack of competition is always bad for cost), and a lot of the project developement seems to rely on very few key people (so stopping is always possible). But I think I will take that risk, maybe I am just thinking too much.

UAVX, here I come !
alainphoto is offline Find More Posts by alainphoto
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2011, 08:47 AM
Tri-Quad-Hexa-Octo-copters!!
United States, TX, San Antonio
Joined Feb 2007
14,263 Posts
Alain,
Well...I really was not trying to convince you between the MK and UAVX. Especially in this predominantly MK thread... I have and have flown the UAVP/UAVX for 2.5 years and 1.0 to 1.3 versions of the MK for 5 years now, and a few other project flight controller boards since 2003...you can never have too many multicopters It really comes down to a personal build skill and budget decision for any multicopter. All multicopters have different build skill requirements and their own flight performance limitations and maintenance requirements.
The UAVX flies fine as is and is mature and stable in its design with lots of flight time and continued growth updates. It has more gyro and sensor options which continue to grow than the MK and is truly open source firmware for those who like to modify Prof Egan's UAVX code for their own needs. The MK is very mature and comes out with new updated boards every couple of years and as some observe (Hi Rusty), will do better with less oscillations in 15-20kts windy situations that most would not fly in for AVP. Anything your choose to go for will be modified or updated sooner or later. It is the nature of this model to keep improving with code or hardware or both. When both flight controller boards are properly setup and flown in winds of 10kts or less, you would be challenged to notice any flight differences. BTW, most serious AVPers fly without using the GPS or altitude hold to minimize controller correction inputs that might spoil some shots and video.
Cheers,
Jim

Quote:
Originally Posted by alainphoto View Post
Thank you Jim, you convinced me - again !

When I first discovered discovered multirotor it was with with MK, and I learned a lot about it and the clones, and was about to go with them, but then found out the I2C issues and cost (isolator needed, convert to normal ESC needed for cost).
So I searched for something else and focused on UAVX since you are in the project and also helping everybody here a lot, so I thought that if with your experience you went for that project it should be good. Decisions are sometimes made on small things

The only points I am worried about with UAVX is that the user base seems quite smaller than MK (so less people to help), plus there is only one shot to get the electronics (lack of competition is always bad for cost), and a lot of the project developement seems to rely on very few key people (so stopping is always possible). But I think I will take that risk, maybe I am just thinking too much.

UAVX, here I come !
jesolins is offline Find More Posts by jesolins
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2011, 09:11 AM
uavservices on MRF
saabguyspg's Avatar
Calgary Canada
Joined Jun 2006
4,905 Posts
yes I have sucessfully replaced and re-programmed the processor on my 2.0 ME board.

I can do this for you, I can even order the part to be here, you only pay me the shipping and cost of the part....

But maybe there is someone who is closer to you that you can send it to?

I think we should take some more steps to see if this is really the problem.

You say this was after a bad crash, can you please start over, explain what happened?

Why did it crash? pilot mistake or FC failure and flip?

and explain exactly what you see now when you power up. Do you have any LED's on the FC board and do you have any on the ESC's

Also if you can post some pictures of your setup too.

Steve


Quote:
Originally Posted by sarabi View Post
I have red FC board version 1.3 .

I checked the regulator . it is ok . and 5v properon on the processor..

I think my processor does not work?

Could you help me?

Can solder the new ATMEGA644 and then run it ?
saabguyspg is offline Find More Posts by saabguyspg
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2011, 10:29 AM
Registered User
Canada, ON, Southampton
Joined Feb 2005
2,235 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by alros_100 View Post
Hi Folks,

I am a total newb to MK. I just built a quad with the FC 2.1, ESC v1.2, using a 400mm frame and the newer quad distribution board. All went well with build. I have kopter tools 1.72a, and I flashed the FC to latest firmware 0.82b

At first I didn't know about 'Alt' + settings so used the default + configuration. The Kopter flew really well. I would say it was rock solid.
I finally discovered how to get into the mixer tab and loaded the quad X config and set everything otherwise to default and tried it out. Unfortunately it was completely unstable with severe oscillations that flipped the quad. I reloaded + which worked perfectly again. I have since tried several times, also adjusting the red direction line in mixer from exactly where the FC board arrow is to heading forward (between 1 and 3) etc with no difference. I then set gyro p, I to very low value but it still had violent oscillation starting just before it leaves the ground.

I have not rotated the FC board to point "forward" between the front motors, but I understood that the red line in mixer makes rotating the board unnecessary. I also would have to get new hardward to be able to solidly mount the FC board "diagonally"

Flying in + config continues to be rock solid

I am stumped. would greatly appreciate any advice

Thanks
Al
Al, sorry about you X config flying. Did you write the new configuration to the FC? I have an MK quad in X mode, but I have the FC pointing between motors 1,3. I just finished building it and am planning on a maiden flight at indoor flying tonight. I'm going with the default settings in MKTools, gyro p-100, gyro I-120, Haup-10. I'll report back, later tonight, on my results.

Can I land, shut down motors and hook up my ribbon cable to the FC powered still? MKTools will be running on my laptop and usb hooked up already. Not sure if it's OK to plug the ribbon into the powered FC.

Brian.
Buffythesaint is offline Find More Posts by Buffythesaint
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion Mikrokopter Okto 2 build Roger_IIT Multirotor Talk 6 Feb 03, 2011 08:22 AM
Discussion Mikrokopter ME 2.0 Okto Build robin4 Multirotor Talk 16 Jan 12, 2011 02:07 PM
Discussion Mikrokopter / UAVP / quadrocopter / quadrotor build Arthur P. Multirotor Talk 16696 Nov 10, 2010 04:49 PM
Discussion X-3D Brushless Quadrocopter, general quadrocopter, x-ufo discussion PART 2 tend2it Multirotor Talk 2203 Nov 08, 2008 08:23 PM