QuadFrame motor mounts and (KDE) 42mm motors

[fltundra]

Alright fellas - this one is resolved.

I tried the QuadFrame V2 mount and they turned out to be identical to the ones from my foldable pro sixcopter kit, minus the slots for ESC mounting tie wraps. Same hole. So I'll set those guys aside for another project, I suppose.

Today I received the M325 mounts from AerialPixels and they are PERFECT! 12mm hole vs <10mm, perfect for 42mm motors like the KDE 3520's. These mounts top and bottom motor plates, so I could either build a dodecacopter (!!!), or set them aside and use the QuadFrame tube clamps and G10 strips for a simpler look. Turns out it looks great (to me), especially with boom end caps! I appreciate the wire protection on the rounded end as well, since my only other copter piloting has been on crazy 250-class racers.

View attachment 25191

The only issue, if you can call it one, is that these mounts have the motors inward a bit vs. the QuadFrame mounts, so I will have a bit less prop-to-prop clearance. I will be testing 15", and since @Mactadpole has used 16" with the QuadFrame mounts I should be OK even with this difference in clearance:

View attachment 25193

Now that I've got no more blockers the real build can begin!

Make sure you pin the mounts to the tubes or they will eventually twist.

 

[crayfellow]

Make sure you pin the mounts to the tubes or they will eventually twist.

what is the correct protocol, drill a hole between the nuts and drive a screw? would it be less prone to twisting if I used the bottom plate since that would hold things more square?

 

[fltundra]

what is the correct protocol, drill a hole between the nuts and drive a screw?

Yes

wh would it be less prone to twisting if I used the bottom plate since that would hold things more square?

Maybe, but are you willing to risk it.

 

[crayfellow]

Maybe, but are you willing to risk it.

Honestly, I'm starting from scratch so I'm amenable to guidance from the experienced! I really don't even know what I'm risking. poor alignment resulting in instability and errant vibration, I presume.

So it seems like even with the bottom plates to hold things square, a screw is a good idea. As an engineer my fear would be having it just a touch out of level (via a mis-calibrated instrument, or whatever) then making the error permanent with the screw

 

[Motopreserve]

With just the mounts the way they are, they can spin on the round boom (this is the argument for square booms like Vulcan or Hexacrafter).

If you drill a hole through you can key them so they don't move. Of course you'd have to have the level correct. But a digital angle finder can be had fairly cheap.

You want a bolt running through. Not just a screw into one side.

 

[crayfellow]

yeah, makes sense. I will use a bolt all the way through.

For me on this project, round made sense since it can be easily and cost effectively found from multiple sources at any length. And I'm no mechanical engineer but I think round tube gives the best aggregate balance of aerodynamic resistance, rigidity, strength, etc. Although Hexacrafter and Vulcan frames definitely look cool!

 

[Motopreserve]

I hear you on availability. I can't say I fly the larger MRs fast enough to have them get too much resistance. But that's just me. I fly. Then plant and sit for a while and let the camera capture some pretty pics