Carbon Fiber "H" Style Quad Build

F

fengshuidrone

Guest
This thread was originally posted in the Group Build thread but I moved it here since I was not going to participate in the group build now that I already built it.
Sorry, I saw you guys all leaning towards non home made frames so I deleted my post. If you want to see it here is the links to the (quick) build. Build:
Build:
Build:
Short indoor test flight:
I ended up putting some closed cell foam landing gear on it.
I was thinking about doing the FPV thing finally with this one.
I can see mounting the cam out there on the front of it.
Total cost of build so far < $200.00 (the FPV is not yet figured in to the final cost)
While I'm talking about FPV, I have a 2 axis servo driven gimbal that I am thinking about turning into a one axis roll horizon eliminated and just the pitch horizon working. This would also have the effect of reducing the weight of the gimbal by 2/3. Is it a good idea to "see the roll" but not the pitch? It seems logical to me but I have never tried to fly FPV. I have seen FPV quads with the cam mounted at an angle to compensate for forward pitch during forward flight. This would sort of be an extension of that with the cam shooting level when pitched forward or not. Am I barking up the wrong tree?
 

F

fengshuidrone

Guest
Here is a photo of the gimbal I'm going to cannibalize:
DSCN0007_zpsz5guqjuz.jpg~original

Here is what I'm going to use off of it:
DSCN0009_zpsl0wxu1a7.jpg~original

Here it is temporarily held on the front of the quad with hot glue for the photo :
DSCN0012_zpsxg4ncxky.jpg~original

Is this a good idea? Or should I keep the roll function as well? My Multiwii Pro 2 has a pitch roll servo gimbal output and I can use both or either. As you can see, it is much lighter this way and would involve less redistribution of weight in the final configuration. I plan on going with one of those super light weight FPV cams. I figure the weight of the TX for the FPV could probably offset some of the added cam and gimbal weight up front. Any useful feedback is welcome. If I'm getting ahead of things here I am sorry. I've been building this on my own and I figured what the hey.
 

F

fengshuidrone

Guest
I can barely fly acro, much less do any FPV racing. :p I'm just building this to fly around and get used toFPV.:D
Now where did I see that build your own headgear video???:rolleyes: I decided to just go ahead and use a single axis. Also I decided to go ahead and add some more weight to the front of the quado_O and use my shock ball anti jello doo dads for a maybe slightly better view, I hope.;)
DSCN0015_zpszotprvwc.jpg~original

DSCN0014_zpsmwywyfpn.jpg~original

I use stainless 4-40 cap screws with stainless nylon insert ESNA nuts and stainless washers to keep the anti jello balls on the gimbals during, shall we say, less than perfect landings. They actually sell ball holders that do what my bolts do. My extra front end weight hasn't caused any problems yet. I had to adjust the trims a little but it still flies OK. (I know, wait until I hang the cam on there too.....:D)
All I have left to do is get a cam, TX and headgear and mine will be done. I may report back on progress actually flying some FPV. That's my build, sorry I was doing exactly what this thread was about already. I now leave you all to the rest of this thread for now. Carry ON!!!!
 

Motopreserve

Motopreserve

Drone Enthusiast
I'm not sure it's the best idea to try to fly FPV with a camera articulating on the gimbal. You need to be aware of the attitude of the craft to be able to properly control what's happening. I believe there are even some gimbals that have an "FPV" mode that stop movement for this use.
 

F

fengshuidrone

Guest
Hmmmm. OK. I'm still going to try using my pitch axis and not roll. If it proves a bad idea or hard to fly that way I can always just land and turn off cam stabilization. I might even be able to do that without landing. Naaaa, I'll land.
I can't imagine looking up at the sky any time I'm not going forward (with cam compensated for forward tilt,) and looking at the ground (if I don't do that) while I am going forward. Seems like I could judge altitude by sight and the amount of turn can still be judged because I don't have the cam stabilized in the roll axis. I'll report here on my findings. You know, even if it sucks for FPV I can still enable it for AP so I want it on there and I'm not building a racer so the little extra weight is no concern. Do you fly FPV?
 

Motopreserve

Motopreserve

Drone Enthusiast
I have flown FPV, and while I understand your point about judging altitude/attitude, it was not easy on the camera I had, and I often worry I'm plummeting toward the ground :)

I'm sure you'll figure out what works best. Just keep it a safe distance up and you should be fine to recover if things get weird.
 

F

fengshuidrone

Guest
Motopreserve said:
I have flown FPV, and while I understand your point about judging altitude/attitude, it was not easy on the camera I had, and I often worry I'm plummeting toward the ground :)

I'm sure you'll figure out what works best. Just keep it a safe distance up and you should be fine to recover if things get weird.
Click to expand...
The cam I'm going to use has a 140 degree viewing angle so I will be able to fisheye around pretty well. :p I really got the idea from products like this http://www.ebay.com/itm/FPV-Single-...807499?hash=item1ea8034d0b:g:EJEAAOSw4UtWRqaT
and this which also has a pan as well as a tilt.http://www.fpvmodel.com/pt-pan-tilt...ion-camera-mount-w-2-servos-for-fpv_g371.html I have also seen a small three axis one that is supposed to be used with something called "Head Tracker" (some sort of advanced FPV) which I believe emulates the look and shoot technology used in fighter jets. Then I found this guy who has what I'm going to do
Looks to me like he could fix the rate on that gimbal some and increase the tilt some. I would be happy to get the views hes getting though (minus some of his jello.) I can change all of that if I need to as well making it more or less responsive if needed..
If they can get used to that stuff, I can probably get used to a level horizon when moving forward.:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

F

fengshuidrone

Guest
This is the FPV equipment I ended up buying.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/351212336494
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00GWFUTSK?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=od_aui_detailpages00
https://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/uh_viewItem.asp?idProduct=86404
http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/uh_viewItem.asp?idProduct=58544
I have heard some good things about the HK Quanum's full screen views and some people like them better than regular goggles. I plan on integrating the receiver and the antenna into the headset. The HK build video suggests a baseball style cap bill glued or attached in some way to the top of the headset to work as a top strap which seems like an excellent idea to me. I'm going to sew two pockets on the back of the cap for my batteries. I might look like an alien when wearing it though. I will just explain to others that it has a certain Feng Shui.
 
Last edited:

Motopreserve

Motopreserve

Drone Enthusiast
Headtracking is the ability for the camera to follow the movement of your....head :). There is a sensor on he goggles and the camera allows you to look around up in the air. Neat idea - but again, I want the camera to show me exactly where the craft is pointing, and at which angle so I know how to correct.

Of the camera is leveled by a gimbal (or moved by my head) then I have less of a ear picture of what the craft is doing. Personal preference though.
 

F

fengshuidrone

Guest
Motopreserve said:
Headtracking is the ability for the camera to follow the movement of your....head :). There is a sensor on he goggles and the camera allows you to look around up in the air. Neat idea - but again, I want the camera to show me exactly where the craft is pointing, and at which angle so I know how to correct.

Of the camera is leveled by a gimbal (or moved by my head) then I have less of a ear picture of what the craft is doing. Personal preference though.
Click to expand...
I think someone has engineered it to the point that the quad goes where you look. That was my understanding of the system I was referring to. It's too out there for me.:eek: The pilot still needs to throttle. Here is a link to the device http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/...1000_Advanced_Head_Movement_Tracker_Gyro.html
At least that is what this first paragraph of the ad says.
"X-GYRO 1000 is a two axis head tracking system, based on G sensor technology, designed for tracking complicated three-dimensional motion like head movement and so on, it can also be used on the areas of controlling drones and robots, transferring three-dimensional motion signals from hands, head of human to corresponding movement system on RC model, drone or robot."
 
Last edited:

Motopreserve

Motopreserve

Drone Enthusiast
Really? That would be a giant leap forward and have to be tied into the FC. That's a tech if be interested in learning about - and never trying myself! :)
 

F

fengshuidrone

Guest
There is probably a way to include this devices sensors in my MW Arduino sketch so it interacts with the FC like my TX does. I am not the "developer" that I would need to be to do this so I'll just be happy with a little good old FPV.
 

Motopreserve

Motopreserve

Drone Enthusiast
I would imagine MW or APM would be the first places that would happen. It's a wild idea - but one I will let the young dudes take first crack at!
 

F

fengshuidrone

Guest
There's some brainy doods working with that platform.:D I'm going to check out the MW forum and see whats going on with this head tracking stuff there these days. Maybe I can get one of 'em to guide me. Maybe we could bring it to market (if someone hasn't already.)
After delving into what it does a little more, I see it is only a two axis gyro so flight by head-tracking is probably not possible with this particular unit. I can't see why a regular 3 axis gyro module couldn't be made to work somehow.
 
Last edited:



F

fengshuidrone

Guest
Got my FPV equipment all at once (minus the two batteries and two cloverleaf antennae I ordered late) today. Did three 3 videos about the stuff. First the quad all decked out in cam and RX:
Then a little close up of the Quanum headset:
And finally the quad in an indoor quick test flight to make sure it can fly ok still:
First real FPV test flight soon, weather permitting.
 

F

fengshuidrone

Guest
Review on the quality of my FPV RX and TX. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00GWFUTSK?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=od_aui_detailpages00
After reading some of the reviews on the Amazon page that I bought the unit from, I was not expecting a top grade device. It was advertised as a "Boscam" but it is clearly not made by a company called "Boscam". Actually, there is no company name anywhere on the box or instruction manual, just a generic 5.8 ghz TX and RX label. I'm pretty sure it is just a no name Chinese product being passed along as a name brand product by everybody's favorite drone enthusiast, Amazon. For the price, it's not too bad. It has a fairly complete (if small) user manual NOT printed in Chinglish which is a breath of fresh air. I paid $36.97 S&H included. It really does have 32 channels divided up into 4 frequencies of 8 channels and there are two buttons on either side of the power and signal port to change the frequency and channels on the TX. Mine seemed to work fine with the buttons making a little click when making changes just like one would expect. The TX seems to be made well enough and I experienced none of the issues that some of the Amazon reviewers experienced with the unit not working with 3s and so on and so forth.
The RX looks a little shabby mostly because of the wiggly, loose frequency and channel change buttons. It is solidly built other than that. I did not have any trouble getting the power cord to plug in all the way (another common Amazon complaint,) but it is what I would call a nice tight fit. The stock 2db antennae are being replace with cloverleaf on this setup and are your typical short stubby black ones. I haven't had the chance to test the actual performance but that will be in another post soon. Too soon to pass final judgement. If it works as well as it seems to and actually is 600mw, then I would say it is a good buy.
 
Last edited:

F

fengshuidrone

Guest
Got the Quanum HK headset up and running. The wiring is a little janky but once I got everything wiggled just right it finally powered up the viewscreen. The first lens I had in it wasn't going to workout with it making all kinds of crazy visual distortions. They supply three lenses all different magnifications and the second one I put in worked nicely. Here is a quick video of the headset ready to rock:
 

C

cootertwo

Member
I hope the headset works out for you. I've got and tried 3 different makes of headsets, including my first, "Headplay", then the Hobby King version, then VuXL's. They all work, but not for me. I can't get a good focus, no matter which lens I try. Even tried with reading glasses on. Neither as good (for me) as my Skyzone or Fatshark goggles.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.
Top