Search results

FYI - the OpenPilot CC3D also uses the MPU-6000, as will the Revolution I believe. I'm pretty sure the alternative FSR is not implemented on the CC3D - not sure about Revo but for that one there's another (better) plan in the pipeline:)

Bagging? This is a forum - a public place for the open disclosure and discussion of thoughts, ideas, issues, grievances and gripes. As such - one of the key tools (historically) in the exercise of democracy. The modern internet variety of a forum vastly increases the power of consumers to voice...

... or until the first prop strike, whichever occurs first ;)

Basically - any change in sound or feel should be investigated and corrected.

Exactly I was just pointing that out for an earlier poster who was wondering why the setup procedure was different. But it is interesting to realise how this system works. The board has complete control over the servo: it calculates the required target position (mixing in the operator's stick...

Pretty much anything can be run off an inverter if the inverter is big enough. Google "event photography printers" and "wedding photography printers" - those guys use on-site kit regularly.

The PH system is different from normal stabilisation (like when you connect a servo directly to the FC output) - the RSGS mimics a potentiometer - so it is feeding an analogue voltage to the servo as if it was the feedback pot. So the usual considerations of setting mid points, end points, etc...

Sure - but, as has been proven elsewhere, most camera image stabilisation systems (particularly the in-lens type) cannot deal with "high" frequency vibration. So it is necessary when contemplating using the camera's own stabilisation as the "inner axes" to ensure that "high" frequency vibration...

The Olympus OM-D has a five-axis sensor shift stabilisation system - roll, pitch and yaw rotation plus horizontal and vertical shift. Not sure how well it would work in this application. The camera does 1080/30P. I get what you mean in terms of manual stick movements by the camera op, but I...

Wow! I'm staggered that a Castle engineer would give that advice! Sure, the FETs may be rated to that temperature but the processor (and several other components) won't be - guaranteed! Not sure what they use, but assuming it's an ATmega, here's the manufacturer's specs...

Circlips and shim washers from here: http://www.calebcomp.co.uk/ (the shim washers are VERY important for allowing the correct amount of end-play. Bearings from here: http://www.smbbearings.com/ It's worth buying a good quantity of circlips and shim washers - "best practice" would be to change...

The best off-the-shelf "direct drive" actuator I can find is this one: http://www.hds.co.jp/HDS_hp_english/english/products/rotary/ac_fha_mini/index.html - 24V pancake servo motor with harmonic drive. The FHA-8C model with 100:1 gearing has a max torque of about 49kg.cm - certainly should be...

Thanks, Denny. Revisiting the Shotover site, I found this image of their new 3D version. For the first time I can actually see the axis scheme in one of these 5/6 axis devices - the outer 3 axes (looking remarkably like PH's new gimbals ;)) and the camera(s) mounted within the inner 3-axis...

I've understood from Denny's past posts that "5-axis stabilisation" refers to a gimbal-within-a-gimbal arrangement, whereby the outer (3-axis) gimbal corrects major errors and the inner (2-axis) gimbal cleans up any tiny remaining errors. I was happy with that until tonight when I read this...

The "rule of thumb" for gauging temperature is: if you can't put your thumb on it without pain, it's over 55-60ºC. This temperature can be regarded as a "safe maximum" - you could go to 75-80ºC with most components without actually killing them but you'll most likely be shortening their life...

Forgot to mention - twisted wires - lots of twisting - twist - twist - twist - then twist again! :D (P.S. Use hot glue to stop 'em untwisting!)

Four ESCs for $30 - even scarier! IME the smart way to do it is the "old-fashioned way" - a wooden board - draw out the fuselage/arm layout on it - hammer nails at every corner and start/end point - build and bind the "wiring harness" as a complete component - install on the craft. :)

IMO, more disadvantages than advantages. The props would overlap only partially, so lots of disturbed-airflow-issues and the weight of eight arms when four would have done the job. The oft-quoted "efficiency loss" of coaxial arrangements is offset by lower weight (4 less arms and mounts) and...

I knew I'd missed out something for your earlier post ;) I can't agree on these 4-in-1 and 8-in-1 thingees. They turn multiple low(ish) cost parts into a single, high-cost part (and, potentially, a single point of failure that could bring the craft down). Assuming they use discrete processors...

Denny, you mean "Axsys Technologies", which is General Dynamics, which is Cineflex. Do you have a link to (or the numbers of) the patents you're referring to?