HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Oct 05, 2012, 07:32 PM
What Do You Drive?
Pancari's Avatar
United States, PA, Folsom
Joined Jan 2012
704 Posts
I just want everyone to know that I'm moving out of my PA home, moving in with Shafter, keeping his quad, turning his living room into my office, throwing him out of his own apartment.

I can do this because I know the metric system.

Nice job dude.
Pancari is offline Find More Posts by Pancari
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Oct 05, 2012, 07:37 PM
Former IAF pilot. Retired
kosem's Avatar
France, IdF, Paris
Joined Apr 2012
780 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by toffa View Post
Never had anything like it! I've nicknamed mine 'Chuck Norris', that's how hard it is!
Haha! Cool name!
Mine was hooked on a tree for 3 stormy and rainy weeks, without canopy.
Total cost for the maintenance : a new lipo :-)
kosem is offline Find More Posts by kosem
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 06, 2012, 03:12 AM
Registered User
Poland, Śląskie, Bielsko-Biala
Joined Jan 2012
634 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandigan View Post
Conclusion: I've slightly worn out my v929 motors running them at Full throttle for several minutes when doing the inverted prop test skidding around the floor and they just don't have the same power as before.
As somebody mentioned (it was probably dave1993):

- These motors are very unhappy when stalled or half-stalled
- Draw crazy amounts of current
- Get hot and burnout very quick (i believe 10sec stalled is enough to fry them up)

So watch out guys !!

Pancari: No prob maan, but when you realise how high are costs of living in Europe compared to USA you would be really astonished ...

For ex. italians, they now pay 2,50$ for every LITER of fuel !!!

And it's not because of metric system
shafter is offline Find More Posts by shafter
Last edited by shafter; Oct 06, 2012 at 03:18 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 06, 2012, 04:42 AM
Registered User
Poland, Śląskie, Bielsko-Biala
Joined Jan 2012
634 Posts
Here you guys have my settings file from 808 #16.

- Fluorescent white balance -
- warmer colours
- saturation +1

fimware upgrade needed to v0.41 BETA to get this settings

My SYSCFG.TXT (sorry no GUI - Mac user here)

Quote:
Date time=[2011/01/01-00:00:06];date time setting,format yyyy/mm/dd hh:mm:ss,
...
Exposure Value=[2];Exposure compensation,0:-2EV,1:-1EV,2:0EV,3:+1EV,4:+2EV
White Balance=[4];Set White Balance,0:Auto,1aylight,2:Cloudy,3:Tungsten,4:Fl uorescent,
Contrast=[2];Set Contrast,0:-2,1:-1,2:Normal,3:+1,4:+2,
Color Effect=[6];Set Color Effect,0:Standard,1:Mono,2:Sepia,3:Cooler,4:Cool,5 :Warm,6:Warmer,
Saturation=[3];Set Image Staturation,0:-2,1:-1,2:Normal,3:+1,4:+2,
{MicroDVR mov 2012/09/11 v0.41}
shafter is offline Find More Posts by shafter
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 06, 2012, 05:18 AM
Registered User
Joined Jun 2012
2,806 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by shafter View Post
- These motors are very unhappy when stalled or half-stalled
- Draw crazy amounts of current
- Get hot and burnout very quick (i believe 10sec stalled is enough to fry them up)
By 'stalled', I assume you mean prevented from rotating while putting lots of current through them? Don't think any motor likes that. I can imagine that would get them hot: airflow would cool them a bit as well as the expected heat generated by the current through the coil. Half-stalled? Lots of friction, I'm guessing?

Anyway, these weren't prevented from spinning; when upside down the quad was resting on an inverted canopy. I've just worn them out thrashing the daylights out of them.

I do have spare motors, but as they still work OK, I'll fly them until one fails, then swap the lot, as no point having a mixture.
Brandigan is offline Find More Posts by Brandigan
Reply With Quote  (Disabled)
Old Oct 06, 2012, 08:36 AM
Registered User
Joined Oct 2010
17 Posts
Can anyone recommend a reliable vendor that carries the real #16 camera with the lens used in the video above? Thanks.
alex50 is offline Find More Posts by alex50
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 06, 2012, 08:58 AM
Registered User
Joined Jun 2012
2,806 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by alex50 View Post
Can anyone recommend a reliable vendor that carries the real #16 camera with the lens used in the video above? Thanks.
See page 1 of Tom Frank's 808 #16 thread here: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1556994
Brandigan is offline Find More Posts by Brandigan
Reply With Quote  (Disabled)
Old Oct 06, 2012, 09:35 AM
Registered User
South Africa, GP, Johannesburg
Joined Dec 2011
1,783 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandigan View Post
Confused. If I can 'fly' it upside down (I'll do a short video later of it skidding around the floor) there is room to invert the props on their shafts without hitting any wires. They're all in the arms as normal. It would also definitely restore the lift to original values - assuming you've got the props spinning the right way.
ok so I have tried once again to get the motors inverted...
note this is not inverting the props but just inverting the motors, so as to get the props below the quad.

The reason i was conducting this exercise was in the hope of actually trying to get two quads (or at least two sets of motors tied back to back)... for more stable flight and thrust, if they rotate counter each other...

I was hoping that i could get one set of props rotating in the opposite direction of the other set (that is attached) - but this will not be possible (at least for this prop). To get lift with the motors inverted, the CW and CCW is swapped so that the rotors rotate in the same direction as when the motors are upright (default) position..

I dont hold much hope in the experiment if the props "pairs" all rotate in the same direction ie CW and CCW respectively but you never know...

Dave, when you had two motors running from one motor port on the the board.. .where they drawing the maximum current (for each motor) or was the current being divied up between the motors? Hwere these the v929 motors or smaller ones?

If there is sufficient current running for both motors to run at max, then maybe just attaching the motors without 2nd board, frame etc may give additional thrust and stability...but again they are rotating in the same direction

these are all the postulations right now, until i experiment further..

At the moment in this configuration the v929 flies almost the same as with the props and motors right side up...i get approx same flight times as well, and similar thrust

inverted motors (1 min 8 sec)
ArchillesElbow is offline Find More Posts by ArchillesElbow
Last edited by ArchillesElbow; Oct 06, 2012 at 11:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 06, 2012, 11:44 AM
Registered User
Joined Jun 2012
2,806 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchillesElbow View Post
ok so I have tried once again to get the motors inverted...
note this is not inverting the props but just inverting the motors, so as to get the props below the quad.
....
At the moment in this configuration the v929 flies almost the same as with the props and motors right side up...i get approx same flight times as well, and similar thrust

http://youtu.be/P1w9KQ8PF5M
Great work. Worth burning my motors out to see that working.

I also got the U816 version of this working too, with the reverse spinning props, after I accepted the challenge in this post :
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave1993 View Post
ahhh... i see where a lot of the confusion (and there is a lot not just on this point) with you and nerys. i did make a mistake. it was ridiculous for me to say reversing the motor dont change thrust. i meant PROP not motor. but i will say reversing the motor OR the prop on one of these quads will not allow it to fly. and there was no mistype in all my subsequent replies.
Now I guess we get to argue about the meaning of the phrase 'these quads'.

You can find the post and video of it flying in the Micro Quads thread here
Brandigan is offline Find More Posts by Brandigan
Reply With Quote  (Disabled)
Old Oct 06, 2012, 11:47 AM
Registered User
Joined Jan 2012
1,594 Posts
Maybe I'm ignorant, but what's the real meaning of testing this?
Just to see it's posssible?
mystman is online now Find More Posts by mystman
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 06, 2012, 11:49 AM
Registered User
South Africa, GP, Johannesburg
Joined Dec 2011
1,783 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mystman View Post
Maybe I'm ignorant, but what's the real meaning of testing this?
Just to see it's posssible?
"The reason i was conducting this exercise was in the hope of actually trying to get two quads (or at least two sets of motors tied back to back)... for more stable flight and thrust, if they rotate counter each other..."
ArchillesElbow is offline Find More Posts by ArchillesElbow
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 06, 2012, 11:53 AM
Registered User
Joined Jan 2012
1,594 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchillesElbow View Post
"The reason i was conducting this exercise was in the hope of actually trying to get two quads (or at least two sets of motors tied back to back)... for more stable flight and thrust, if they rotate counter each other..."
Development and tests for real 3d flights like with a 6CH CP helicopter?
mystman is online now Find More Posts by mystman
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 06, 2012, 12:02 PM
Registered User
Joined Jun 2012
2,806 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mystman View Post
Development and tests for real 3d flights like with a 6CH CP helicopter?
Two quads can in theory double the payload if working together 100% efficiently.

Of course these wont be, as the lower one's props would be spinning the same way as the top one's and they can't get the same 'bite' on the air as the top set. But even if the lower quad is only ...<pluck >... 50% efficient, that's still an increased payload (150%) , or a longer flight time for the same payload (50% longer).
Brandigan is offline Find More Posts by Brandigan
Reply With Quote  (Disabled)
Old Oct 06, 2012, 12:05 PM
Registered User
South Africa, GP, Johannesburg
Joined Dec 2011
1,783 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mystman View Post
Development and tests for real 3d flights like with a 6CH CP helicopter?
Nope..
I want a more stable platform for fpv...
I was hoping to have an 8 motors on a X config - two on each arm in back to back.. Counter rotating.. However it seems with this shape of prop... I can only generate lift if both the props are in the same direction...
Soo I am not sure how effective it will be... More tests needed..
ArchillesElbow is offline Find More Posts by ArchillesElbow
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 06, 2012, 12:10 PM
Registered User
South Africa, GP, Johannesburg
Joined Dec 2011
1,783 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandigan View Post
Two quads can in theory double the payload if working together 100% efficiently.

Of course these wont be, as the lower one's props would be spinning the same way as the top one's and they can't get the same 'bite' on the air as the top set. But even if the lower quad is only ...<pluck >... 50% efficient, that's still an increased payload (150%) , or a longer flight time for the same payload (50% longer).
Well that depends..
Remember the extra props etc would need to carry their own weight as well..(and the board, frame etc if that's needed - depending on whether there is enough current one board and frame may run all 8 motors at max)
Also the battery drain would be more... How much more and what c rating would be needed for the "punch" also has to be calculated,,,
ArchillesElbow is offline Find More Posts by ArchillesElbow
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion WLToys WL-2019 Mini car wallaguest1 Micro Cars 53 Nov 09, 2014 09:05 AM
Discussion Rebranded NineEagles Solo Pro V2? (WLtoys V911) gettinglucky Coaxial Helicopters 1 Dec 26, 2011 02:06 AM
Discussion Keil Kraft ladybird tips anyone? tim hooper Vintage & Old-Timer Designs 101 Aug 27, 2009 04:02 PM
Discussion Ladybird Special imp.bob Vintage & Old-Timer Designs 4 Feb 03, 2008 11:08 PM
ladybird beetle/gws easybug nebuchadnezzar Foamies (Kits) 1 Aug 14, 2004 09:48 AM