Hello everyone my name is Tomy and not so long I started to work on a birotor VTOL .
I'm a Automation and computer science student I want to implement a Hovering algorithm for my aircraft.
The main idea is that I will not use any RC equipment, all of it will be controlled from the onboard arduino. What i wish to accomplish is that the aircraft should take of autonomously till it reach a certain altitude hover for a while and after that land . The first part to take of and get to a certain altitude is done but it lose balance and starting to drift in one direction i tried to balance it mechanically using a rope tied to the CoG witch is on the same ax like the motors ax. I want to control the 2 motors separately, the motors for the moment a fixed you can see it on the next picture.
In this way i will control only the roll angle by differential control . I have an MPU 6050 IMU board with this i will try to achieve balance .I will implement a pid control to control the motors rpm , and I am trying to find out witch of the filters is better for my application. kalman or complementary .
Any idea or link to other posts or topics witch are related to this kind of project its welcomed .
I read many topic and post about this and I'm still confused a little bit :).
Comments
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/r8gnTc2bGoY?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I'm building this VTOL. It's designed to carry an existing airplane. I have a KK Board and OpenAero2-VTOL. I want to integrate with APM/Pixhawk. Any thoughts?
http://youtu.be/r8gnTc2bGoY
Ah yes Robert you are of course correct. I was referring mostly to the looks of it.
Actually for a precise description, I am interested in fixed pitch twin bi-rotors (Avatar style or with open rotors), not so much tandem bi-rotors (such as air mule). Thinking about it, control wise there's probably not too much difference as long as forward speed is slow.
Variable Pitch seems way too complicated for small aircrafts.
What about the (theoretical) efficiency of bi-rotors? Anyone?
FD, I forgot about that! As far as I know, that code was never finished and I never saw flight tests from it. I don't know what happened with Francisc, but he just stopped posting.
Also, about the Osprey... we need to be careful here. The Osprey actually operates completely different. It has a swash plate and variable pitch blades just like a helicopter. It does not tilt the nacelles for control. It's like two helicopters bolted together. Or rather, a Chinook turned sideways. With a wing. ;) The UAV version of these would have 4, 6 or even 8 servos.
I think in the code, we need to properly define these frame types. What you guys are talking about here, is a Fixed Pitch Bi-rotor. But then we have the other case of the Variable Pitch Tandem-Rotor Helicopter.
Interesting thx for the post I will study them .
Hi Randy, just found this old thread
http://diydrones.com/forum/topics/apm2-stabilizing-a-bi-copter?id=7...
Are you aware of the code from Robert Lefebvre and Francisc Bereczky? It's 1.5 years ago, but maybe it's useful...
I ping'd Uemura-san earlier today and he's sent me the code now so I'll try and get it merged into AC3.2. At first glance it doesn't look too bad, mostly just a new way to mix the motors and servos.
Holy crap, didn't know bicopter code was so advanced. Have to agree with Monroe, would be really cool to have that in the main code. As far as I understand the Osprey type bicopters only need two fixed pitch rotors and two servos to tilt the nacelles, right?
What about efficiency, could be quite good, considering the lower disk loading compared to other multicopters?
Now I get excited about this...
Shinji Uemura posted a video a few days ago in the DIY Drones Japan group. His code is apparently a new AP_Motors library for Arducopter to support this layout. I've ping'd him to submit the code back to master but I haven't heard from him yet.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next