Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
With the advent of microprocessor and miniaturization technology, autonomously controlled
vehicles have become a technologically feasible solution for a variety of applications. In order to
investigate this technology further, for our Senior Design Project, we designed and built a
wirelessly controlled quadcopter. The basis behind the project was the ASME Lighter than Air
competition, in which teams from different universities were to build their own unmanned aerial
vehicle, or UAV. The competition was divided into two parts, a course and a payload test. The
underlying goal was to design an airframe that was lightweight and easy to replicate. This was
achieved by designing our parts to use lightweight material and 3D printing. The quadcopter was
also equipped with an Arducopter control system. This interfaced the quadcopter motors with an
RC transmitter which controls the direction of flight. The control system also provided automatic
flight stability using a built-in PID controller. The PID controller prevents the UAV from
flipping or falling over if any disturbance, such as wind, is introduced. At the end of the year, a
fully functional and stable prototype was built and ready for flight.
Acknowledgements
The Lighter than Air team would like to thank Dr. Raymond Yee for the guidance he provided
throughout the school year.
The Lighter than Air team would also like to thank the San Jose State University Mechanical
Engineering Department for allowing us to use their facilities on campus for the project.
Table of Contents
List
of
Figures
.........................................................................................................................................
4
List
Of
Tables
..........................................................................................................................................
6
Chapter
1:
Introduction
......................................................................................................................
7
1.1
Motivation
for
Unmanned
Air
Vehicles:
...........................................................................................
7
1.2
Current
Status
of
UAV
Technology:
....................................................................................................
8
1.3
Project
Objectives
and
ASME
Lighter
than
Air
UAV
Specifications:
......................................
10
1.4
Significance
and
Challenges
of
Design:
...........................................................................................
11
.................................................................................................................................................................
40
Chapter
7:
Conclusions
and
Future
Work
.................................................................................
41
References
...........................................................................................................................................
42
Appendix
..............................................................................................................................................
44
List of Figures
Figure 1: Vertical Take Off and Landing (VTOL) UAV amid a forest fire ...................................... 7
Figure 2: MQ-9 Reaper (General Atomics Aeronautical Systems) ............................................... 8
Figure 3: Draganflyer X4 (Draganfly Innovations Inc.) ................................................................. 9
Figure 4: Aeryon Scout (Aeryon Labs) ......................................................................................... 9
Figure 5: Nano Hummingbird (AeroVironment) .......................................................................... 10
Figure 6: Sample Gate and Test Course (ASME) ...................................................................... 11
Figure 7: Euler angles fixed to the aircrafts center of gravity describe orientation .................... 13
Figure 8: Quadcopter maneuvers are executed by varying motor speed .................................. 14
Figure 9: Pitch is the distance of advance achieved in one rotation .......................................... 15
Figure 10: Propeller diameter is the distance between tips of blades ........................................ 15
Figure 11. Momentum balance of propeller ................................................................................ 16
Figure 12. CAD model of the center joint ................................................................................... 19
Figure 13. CAD model of the motor mounts ............................................................................... 19
Figure 14. Simulated von mises stress of carbon fiber tubing and aluminum tube enclosure
using FEA ............................................................................................................................ 20
Figure 15. Enlarged image of the FEA results............................................................................ 20
Figure 16. Preliminary CAD model ............................................................................................. 21
Figure 17. Failure of the motor mount due to the torsional force ............................................... 21
Figure 18. Motor mount redesign ............................................................................................... 22
Figure 19. Cross Support ........................................................................................................... 22
Figure 20. Final CAD model ....................................................................................................... 23
Figure 21: APM 2.6 Circuit Board (Ardupilot, 2013) ................................................................... 24
Figure 22. Exploded view of APM 2.6 with enclosure (Ardupilot) ............................................... 25
Figure 24: Futaba R617FS Receiver (Futaba) ........................................................................... 26
Figure 25: Aerodrive SK3 3536 Brushless Motor (Turnigy) ........................................................ 26
Figure 26: Multistar 30 Amp ESC (Turnigy)................................................................................ 27
Figure 27: 5000mAH 4S 20C Lipo Pack (Turnigy) ..................................................................... 27
Figure 28: Quadcopter Layout (code.google) ............................................................................. 28
Figure 29: Block diagram of propeller speed and lift experiment. .............................................. 29
Figure 30: RPM sensing circuit schematic. Includes an IR reflective sensor and an inverting .. 29
Schmitt Trigger. ............................................................................................................................ 29
Figure 31: Cutting of carbon fiber motor booms ......................................................................... 31
Figure 32. Complex geometries not possible with traditional machining processes .................. 32
Figure 33. 3D printing of motor mounts ...................................................................................... 32
Figure 34. Aluminum boom joint center hole drilling using a mill ............................................... 33
Figure 35. Final Electronics Center Mount ................................................................................. 34
Figure 36. Wiring diagram of quadcopter electronics ................................................................. 35
Figure 37. Wiring harness fabricated to deliver power to individual ESCs ................................. 35
Figure 38. Vibration dampening pad .......................................................................................... 35
Figure 39. Completed Assembly ................................................................................................ 36
Figure 40: Apparatus used to test different propeller pitches and configurations. This contains 25A power supplys running the propeller motor and remote. An oscilloscope connected to
an IR sensor was used to measure the RPM to the power input in Amps. A modified fish
scale was used to measure the force of the propeller in Newtons. ..................................... 37
Figure 41: Lift propulsion test results of various propellers ........................................................ 38
Figure 42: 2 DOF test apparatus (side view) .............................................................................. 39
Figure 43: 2 DOF test apparatus (top view) ............................................................................... 39
Figure 44: 3 DOF test apparatus ................................................................................................ 39
Figure 45: Roll measurements, red line is user input, green is measured input ........................ 40
Figure 46: Mechanical Drawing of Quadcopter .......................................................................... 47
List of Tables
Table 1: Advantages and disadvantes for different types of UAVs .......................................... 18
Table 2: Bill of Materials ............................................................................................................ 48
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Motivation for Unmanned Air Vehicles:
The Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, also known as a UAV or drone, is often characterized as a
powerful weapon in military operation and security. It has been designed and operated to
covertly target known enemies or gather valuable intel from afar. Essentially, the advantage of
being controlled autonomously or through remote control keeps any sort of pilot out of harms
way.
Today, drones are quickly branching out of their weaponized background as a helpful tool for
society. Engineers have purposed UAVs to be navigated through dangerous obstacles and to find
advantageous points of view during a disastrous event such as a forest fire or a flood. A UAV
equipped with the right sensor or payload can also assist in remote sensing of poisonous gasses,
search and rescue of disaster victims or hostages, and transport supply to those who require it.
The National Interagency Fire Center reported 67,774 total wildland fires burning over 9 million
acres of land in 2012. The cost to suppress these fires reached up to 1.9 billion dollars (NIFC,
2012). UAVs can help detect and monitor forest fire activity and communicate what areas need
to be contained. Fixed-wing UAVs can get a better overall picture of the wildfire, whereas
hovering UAVs can get a closer look inside any situation (Ollero, et al, 2006). Such uses can be
expanded to earthquakes, floods, gas leaks, and other potentially harmful disasters. Figure 1
below shows such a UAV during a forest fire getting a better view of the disaster from above.
Figure 1: Vertical Take Off and Landing (VTOL) UAV amid a forest fire
ASMEs Lighter than Air Competition challenges engineering students to design an unmanned
air vehicle with the flight capability to pass through an obstacle course and drop a payload on a
target, simulating a transport of any valuable supplies to unreachable area. There are many
different types of UAVs including helium blimps, helicopters, quadcopters, and RC airplanes. It
is up to the engineering teams to decide which design suits the situation best.
These designs are military grade UAV platforms used for surveillance and combat. Fixed-wing
designs generally would not be appropriate for the ASME competition due to the close quarter
objectives required of the vehicle and the test course provided. One would need relatively low
speeds and hover capability to maneuver through various obstacles to drop off a payload.
A more suitable design approach for the competition would be Vertical Take-Off & Landing
(VTOL) UAV. These aircraft do not require a runway, but generally run at low altitudes.
Propellers allow for VTOL UAVs hovering capabilities, which can be demanding on the battery,
often hindering flight endurance (Watts, et al, 2012).
VTOL UAVs, while having such low flight endurance, are generally used for quick analysis of a
situation and can easily adapt to urban settings unlike the fixed-wing design. VTOL can come in
single rotor helicopter or multi rotor designs. Helicopters are much harder to control since they
fly by varying rotary speed, blade pitch angle, and propeller cyclic angle. Multi rotor designs
move about space solely by varying rotary speeds of each motor (McKerrow, 2004).
The Draganfly Innovations Draganflyer X6 is a tri-rotor UAV with 6 propellers, two props per
motor. It is able to carry 500 g cargo and fly up to 20 minutes (Watts, et al, 2012). This design
has a 39 in max dimension, which is well over the ASME competition specifications. The use of
6 motors can be useful for generating a large amount of lift. However, the motors in VTOL
design would require a much larger airframe. Draganfly Innovations has also designed the
Draganflyer X4 (Figure 3), a four rotor design capable of a 250g payload with a 30.9 inch
maximum dimension. Its airframe is quite weak as the torque from the rotors puts much stress on
the arms (McKerrow, 2004).
Another four rotor VTOL is the Aeryon Scout (Figure 4) which has a 28.8 inch max dimension
and a 300 g payload capability, with a more rugged and durable design. This UAV is smaller in
size than the X4 and can carry 50 g more. Its control system also resists up to 50 mph winds,
making it ideal for both indoor and outdoor objectives. The Aeryon Scout, however, cost twice
as much as the X4, starting at $30,000 (Aeryon Labs Inc, 2013). The airframe designs on the X4
and Scout do not protect the propellers from collision, which might be necessary for close
quarter operation. Without a protective shroud, a single collision could deem either UAV
defective.
The last type of UAV is micro or nano UAVs which are very small and are sometimes equipped
with flapping wings. These are meant for covert surveillance and remote sensing but are
currently in development and research. The AeroVironment Nano Hummingbird is very small,
only weighing 19 g with a wingspan of 16 cm (Watts, et al, 2012). While it is capable of
hovering up and down and ideal for close quarters, it cannot carry a large enough payload
required to score points for the ASME competition. Figure 5 shows the small size and realism of
the Nano Hummingbird.
1.3 Project Objectives and ASME Lighter than Air UAV Specifications:
The ultimate goal is to design and build a lightweight quadrotor UAV capable of carrying a
highly adaptable, 2 kg payload which could consist of various sensors to help assess any
situation, a camera to capture pictures and video for surveillance, and a microphone for
communication with possible victims in need of aid. The UAV must also be just as efficient as it
is useful. It should stay in flight and not lose power during any objectives.
An automatic balancing control system must be interfaced with the quadrotor UAV to keep the
body horizontal in the air even if it is introduced to any outside disturbances such as high winds
or an accidental collision. Motors must compensate in thrust if they drop too low in relation to
the other motors.
A strong lightweight airframe is also needed to protect the propellers as well as the electronics
and microcontroller. This design will also include a system to carry and release several types of
cargo.
The design specifications given by the ASME Lighter than Air competition requires participants
to design a small UAV to carry cargo through two gates and drop the payload at a target, then
return to the starting point. Teams must build, at a minimum, the propulsion and control system
for the UAV and cannot purchase or modify an existing commercially available vehicle. Points
will be awarded based on time completion of the course and the maximum load carried. The
competition specifications are as follows:
1. The Vehicle must be able to maneuver around and through obstacles and change height
2. Vehicle dimensions should not exceed 28 inches (a 28 in hoop will be used to check the size
of the vehicle)
3. The vehicle must be powered by batteries
4. The device must be controlled through a wireless transmitter/receiver radio link
5. All devices must have a readily accessible and clearly labeled master shut-off switch
The test course area will be 5 by 7.75 meters in size in which the gates can be placed anywhere
10
within the specified area. Gates will be 2 by 3 meters with a 1.5 meter window.
11
continuous monitoring.
During the school year, our team will have many challenges to overcome. The UAV design must
generate enough lift from the propellers to not only carry the target payload but also the UAV
itself. Four motors and a large battery can add a great amount of weight, so any excess material
from the airframe must be trimmed off. The heavier the body, the more power will be drawn
from the battery. Less weight would result in a longer flight time, which is a necessity when
competing.
One of the most difficult challenges will be implementing the balancing control system. If the
UAV is unable to stabilize itself, much maneuverability will be lost. A control system, such as
closed loop PID, would allow the UAV to fix and balance itself in air. The IMU sensors will be
used to detect any error in stability, and the control system must not only react quickly to
compensate in propeller thrust but also be careful not to overshoot as well.
Lastly, time constraints may put a lot of pressure on the team. The team will need ample time to
practice and learn to fly the prototype in time for the competition.
12
Figure 7: Euler angles fixed to the aircrafts center of gravity describe orientation
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Rollpitchyawplain.png)
The mechanisms used to maneuver a quadcopter however, are quite different from those
used in helicopter flight. Due to the nature of rotary wing aircraft, spinning the propellers will
generate an inertial rotational torque about the yaw axis causing it to rotate in the opposite
direction. Single-rotor or Penny-farthing aircraft commonly associated with helicopters utilize
a main vertical rotor to generate lift in combination with a horizontal tail rotor to stabilize the
craft. The main rotor of a helicopter spins at a constant rate but can change the pitch of its blades
to vary lift force generation. Conversely, the blades of a quadcopter remain fixed and instead,
vary the power supplied to each motor. The fours rotors of a quadcopter are typically configured
so that two propellers, typically across from each other spin one direction, while the two
remaining spin in the opposite direction. This is done so that a zero net torque exists along the
13
crafts yaw axis. As seen in Figure 8, the navigational maneuvers of a quadcopter is done by
varying rotor speeds relative to each other (Austin 2011).
The propulsive lift generated by a quadcopter is largely dependent on the propeller and motor
used to drive it. Propellers allow the quadcopter to essentially float by accelerating a sufficient
volume of air downward to generate enough reactive force to overcome its own weight. A
propeller is typically characterized by the geometric parameters, pitch and diameter shown in
Figures 9 and 10, respectively. The pitch of a propeller is defined as the distance of advancement
achieved in one full rotation, while the diameter is a measurement of the distance between the
tips of blades. A higher pitch, larger diameter propeller will displace air at a higher rate thus
achieving more lift, however makes it more difficult to turn and typically requires a motor with
higher torque.
14
15
Where the variables A, P, , and V represent the sweeping area of the propeller, differential air pressure,
air density and air velocity (NASA 2013). A diagram detailing this derivation is shown below in Figure
11. This equation provides a rough estimate of the propulsive force generated, however omits boundary
conditions such as how far it is spinning from the ground and the spacing between other propellers. A
more thorough analysis of quadcopter lift would require more complex formulas or the use of
computational fluid dynamics software.
2.2 Control
Control theory is also very important to stabilizing the flight of a quadcopter. The UAV needs to
be able to automatically level itself after moving in any direction or if any collision were to
occur. The software team may need to implement a closed-loop feedback controller to minimize
error from the setpoint. The desired setpoint in this case would be a horizontally level sensor
reading value. The error would be any change in angle of the UAV. The controller would
automatically correct this error by outputting extra motor power to compensate the tilt.
A common feedback controller is PID control, which utilizes Proportional, Iterative, and
Derivative controllers combined. The team may implement PID or any variation of the controller
that would be sufficient to stabilize the system. Proportional control itself pushes system in the
right direction proportional to the systems error. The larger the error, the bigger the push.
Likewise, as the system gets closer to stability, the push mitigates. Iterative control dictates
accuracy, making sure the error is as close to zero as possible. Derivative control acts as a
damper to prevent overshoot (Nise, 2008). The software will require complex algorithms to
implement such feedback control.
16
17
The research concluded in designing the quadcopter, which consists of one motor on each of its
four arms. Given the ASME competition specifications and course, the quadcopter is the ideal
choice because of its high stability, maneuverability, endurance, and flight time. Designing hexarotors and octa-rotors vehicles are more complex to fabricate and control. As with most designs,
troubleshooting complex systems is more difficult and requires more time to fix. Although hexarotors and octa-rotors can provide more stability and maneuverability than quadrotors, the power
consumption for all the motors and electrical components may be too high. Aircraft vehicles with
high power consumption will have require a bigger battery and it adds more weight. Therefore,
quadcopters are seen the ideal choice to design and compete in the ASME Lighter than Air
competition.
18
carbon fiber tubes. The model of the center joint can be found in the figure below.
The material selected for the boom mounts and motor mounts are ABS plastic. This is an
exceptional material because it is lightweight, inexpensive, and complete diversity of parts can
be generated using a 3D printer. The boom and motor mounts are used to hold the arms and
motors in place.
The carbon fiber tube with the aluminum tube enclosure was analyzed using finite element
analysis. The results of the analysis for the von mises stress can be seen in the figures below.
19
Figure 14. Simulated von mises stress of carbon fiber tubing and aluminum tube enclosure using FEA
The material selection for the center platform needed to be rigid and lightweight to hold the
quad-copter arms and mount electrical components. The material selected for the center platform
is acrylic plastic because it is light, inexpensive, and be machined using a laser cutter. The final
quad-copter design is shown using CAD software.
20
Figure 17. Failure of the motor mount due to the torsional force
In the redesign, the motor mount was switched to a clamp style. This allowed for easy
disassembly. This fixture was mounted using nuts and bolts instead of epoxy like the first design.
The CAD model for the new motor mount can be found in figure 18.
21
Another part that was added to the initial design is a cross support, as seen in figure 19. This
added additional rigidity to the quadcopter. The final CAD design can be found in figure 20.
22
23
4.1.1 Arducopter
As stated on APMCopters website, the Arducopter (or APM: Copter) is a complete UAV
solution. It is a complete open source system that boasts features such as auto level and auto
altitude control. A simple mode called simple flight mode allows for easy flying. By using the
onboard magnetometer, this system can identify the UAVs orientation to ensure that it will stay
level. Another feature is the loiter mode which allows, with a flip of a toggle, to hold its position
by using the GPS and altitude sensors. Arducopters most impressive feature is the ability to
create fully automated missions. Additional features include Return to launch, which will return
the UAV to its starting position, Automatic takeoff and landing, which will execute a mission
and return to its home position. For the purpose of this project, the main features that would be
exploited include the auto level control and the loiter mode. In addition to quadcopters, the
Arducopter is capable of controlling traditional helicopters, tricopters, hexacopters and
octacopters. The main component that make up the Arducopter is the APM autopilot.
The latest revision of the APM autopilot is the APM 2.6 as seen in Figure 21. This is the actual
hardware that contains all the sensors that will be used to control the quadcopters. As with
previous iterations, the APM 2.6 features a 3-axis gyroscope, accelerometer and magnetometer.
It also includes a barometer and recommends the 3DR uBlox GPS with Compass unit as the GPS
option. For its processing needs, it is powered by Atmels ATMEGA2560 (3DRobotics). When
purchasing the APM 2.6, an enclosure with foam to protect the barometric pressure sensor is
included
To program the APM 2.6, a free, open-source software called Mission Planner will be used to
24
25
The R617FS receiver was designed to be used with the 6EX, so it is fully compatible. It is very
small and relatively light, with its dimensions coming in at 1-11/16 x 1-1/8 x 3/8 inches and weighs
just 6.4 grams. For durability, the antennas include rubber grommets, which minimizes the stress on the
antennas (6EX: 6-Channel 2.4GHz System).
26
To power all the electronics in the system, a 5000mAH 4S 20C Lipo Pack will be used. It is a
14.5V, 4 cell battery weighing 536g. It will be the single heaviest component on the quadcopter.
4.2 Setup
To set up the electrical components, each of the four motors will be connected to an ESC. The
ESCs will all connect to one lithium-polymer battery and will each connect to a port on the APM
2.6. The R617FS receiver will connect to the APM 2.6 as well. The final setup will look similar
to the figure below.
27
28
Since numerous propellers were to be tested in a single session, a power supply which would
provide a constant voltage throughout the testing period was required. A 12 volt wall-connected
source which was capable of supplying 30 amps continuously was used in place of a high
discharge rate lithium polymer battery for testing. This was because the performance of the
battery would begin to quickly degrade as the charge dropped. The power supply was connected
to the Electronic Speed Controller (ESC), which provides power to do the brushless motor. The
motor was connected to a digital scale which has a visual read-out that the user can easily record.
To detect revolutions per minute (RPM) of the system, a white tag was placed on one blade of
each propeller, and an IR reflective sensor was pointed at the blade. The reflective sensor was
hooked up to a National Instruments DAQ Signal Accessory. The data was logged using a
custom made LabView Virtual Instrument (VI). The block diagram of this set up can be seen
below.
The QRD1114 was chosen because it is a low cost, non-contact sensor which allows for
extremely high frequency sensing. The IR reflectance sensor circuit utilizes an inverting Schmitt
trigger to filter out low amplitude noise and condition the signal to a square wave for more
accurate detection of high/low transitions. A diagram of the circuit can be seen below.
Figure 30: RPM sensing circuit schematic. Includes an IR reflective sensor and an inverting
Schmitt Trigger.
29
In order to record data, a VI was developed which was capable of automatically measuring the
RPM of the system using data acquired from the DAQ. Since the load scale had a simple digital
read out, an input box was added to the front panel of the VI which allowed the user to manually
type in the thrust value and record it along with the corresponding RPM reading. Each time a
value was recorded in the VI, it was appended to an Excel file containing the previous
measurements. This file was used to generate thrust vs. RPM curves for different propeller/motor
combinations.
This data acquisition system had few sources of error, but they needed to be investigated in order
to verify that the data was correct. The three systems which could introduce error were the
Rapala digital scale, the IR reflectance sensor, and the data acquisition system. To verify the
operation of the Rapala scale, a set of OHAUS calibration weights was used. Each weight was
added, noting its actual value and its measured value. To the resolution of the scale (0.01 kg),
there was absolutely no error. The IR reflectance sensors operation was verified at low RPM by
spinning it slowly by hand and ensuring that the revolution count was advanced every time the
marker passed the sensor. To verify the ability of the data acquisition system to accurately
measure the frequency (RPM) of the propeller at high speeds, the output of the IR reflectance
sensor was hooked up to an oscilloscope. Measurements of thrust and RPM were manually taken
using the oscilloscope and the Rapala digital scale. These measurements were compared with the
ones obtained through the DAQ, and were nearly equal to those taken using the data acquisition
system. With the operation of the scale, RPM sensor, and the DAQ verified, there are no major
sources of error present in this measurement system.
30
31
Figure 32. Complex geometries not possible with traditional machining processes
Parts could be printed in either Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) or Polylactic Acid
(PLA). Tradeoffs between the two thermoplastics are that ABS has a higher flexibility and
temperature resistance, while PLA has a higher ultimate strength and is easier to print due to its
lower melting temperature. For parts requiring medium strength like center supports and landing
legs, PLA was chosen. ABS was originally chosen for the motor mounts due to the materials
resistance to potential heat generated by the motors. However, through testing it was found that
it lacked the strength required for our purposes. PLA was ultimately chosen for this part as well.
In regards to PLAs lower melting temperature, it was reasoned that softening was unlikely due
to the fact that a great deal of air circulation would be occurring in that area.
Other parameters that affected the prints of parts included layer height and the percentage
of infill the part was printed in. Layer height directly contributes to the prints finished quality
and is limited by the extruder nozzle used. The amount of infill used during printing affects the
strength of the part. It is typically calculated as a percentage of plastic versus empty cavity
32
space. Parts were printed with a 0.2mm layer height and infill levels ranging from 70-90%.
Figure 34. Aluminum boom joint center hole drilling using a mill
33
rectangular sizes to fit the electronic components in a stacked orientation. The center mount
panels were cut from a 1/4 inch acrylic panel using a bandsaw. In total, four center mount panels
were cut to size and a drill press was used to drill mounting holes to accommodate M3 hardware.
Using standoffs and 3D printed boom supports, the center mount was successfully fabricated.
5.5 Assembly
After all parts were manufactured and off-the-shelf components received, assembly of the
craft was possible. Individual pieces of the craft were assembled and mounted using hardware
and adhesive connections. Since many of the components purchased had 3mm mounting holes,
M3 screws and nuts were used across the craft. Nylon lock nuts with Loctite threadlocker
solution was used exclusively in order to reduce the risk of craft vibration loosening the
hardware during operation. This allowed for components to be rigidly attached, while still being
removable if required. The ESCs were strapped to the individual boom arms with zip-ties. This
solution was chosen for its simplicity and robustness. Due to the complexity and extra weight
associated with designing mounting points for the aluminum boom joint, adhesives were instead
chosen as the mounting solution. A 2-part epoxy was used to attach the carbon fiber booms to
the aluminum boom joint as well as the boom joint to the center supports. The use of vibration
isolating adhesive pads was also used to mount the Ardupilot microcontroller in order to reduce
vibratory noise transmitted through the frame and picked up by the onboard IMU.
Many of the electronic components used in our craft were selected for their plug-and-play
compatibility as seen in the diagram below. All electronic components were purchased through
an online website or a local R/C hobby shop and required very little modification to connect. A
wiring harness was fabricated using 16 AWG wire and EC3 connectors to deliver power from
the battery to the individual ESCs.
34
35
36
Figure 40: Apparatus used to test different propeller pitches and configurations. This contains 2-5A
power supplys running the propeller motor and remote. An oscilloscope connected to an IR sensor was
used to measure the RPM to the power input in Amps. A modified fish scale was used to measure the force
of the propeller in Newtons.
The lift propulsion test apparatus was used to measure five propellers of different diameters and
pitches. The diameter of the propeller implies the tip-to-tip distance of the prop whereas the pitch
signifies the angle of attack and volume of air moved when in operation. The available propellers
that were tested included 8, 10, and 11 inches in diameter ranging from 4.5 to 8 inches in pitch.
The results in Figure 41 show that all the propellers overall generate the same maximum thrust.
This is because the motor being used is only able to produce a certain amount of torque. Since
the maximum thrust in this test is somewhat negligible, the range of thrust produced by the
propeller should determine which is best suited for quadcopter control. The larger and higher
pitched propeller generated more thrust at lower speeds than the smaller and lower pitched
propellers. These propellers would make the quadcopter harder to fly due of the sudden jump in
thrust at lower RPMs. For the best control and stability, the 8x4.5 propeller was chosen for the
quadcopter because it had a better range of thrust when the motor spins at different RPMs.
37
38
The Arducopter flight log showed a quick response in control inputs from the RC transmitter.
Figure 45 shows a very small delay between the user input (red) and the measured actual output
(green).
39
Figure 45: Roll measurements, red line is user input, green is measured input
40
41
References
Aeryon Labs. "Aeryon Scout." Aeryon Labs Inc, 2013. n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2013.
<http://aeryon.com/products/avs/aeryon-scout.html>
APM 2.6 Circuit Board. Illustration. APM 2.5 and 2.5 Overview. Ardupilot.com. Web 02 Dec.
2013.
Austin, Reg. Unmanned aircraft systems: UAVS design, development and deployment. Vol. 54.
Wiley. 2011.
Basta, Peter O. Quad Copter Flight. MA thesis. California State University, Northridge, 2012.
Casbeer, D., Beard, R., & McLain, T. (2005). Forest fire monitoring with multiple small uavs.
Portland, Oregon: American Control Conference.
"Draganflyer X4 Tech Specs." Draganflycom UAV News RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2013.
<http://www.draganfly.com/uav-helicopter/draganflyer-x4/specifications/>
Exploded view of APM 2.6 with enclosure. Illustration. APM 2.5 and 2.5 Overview.
Ardupilot.com. Web 02 Dec. 2013.
Hoffmann, Gabriel M., et al. "Quadrotor helicopter flight dynamics and control: Theory and
experiment." Proc. of the AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference. 2007.
Leong, B., Low, S., & Ooi, M. (2012). Low-cost microcontroller-based hover control design of a
quadcopter. Bandar Sunway, Malaysia: Science Direct.
McKerrow, P. "Modeling the Draganflyer Four-rotor Helicopter." International Conference of
Robotics & Automation (2004)
Nise, Norman S. Control Systems Engineering. [Hoboken, NJ]: Wiley, 2008. Print.
Ollero, A., J.r. Martnez-de-Dios, and L. Merino. "Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as Tools for
Forest-fire Fighting." Forest Ecology and Management 234 (2006): S263.
Quadcopter Layout. Connecting your RC input and motors. code.google.com. Web 02 Dec.
2013.
Propulsion Systems: Propeller Thrust. NASA Glenn Research Center. n.d. Web. 13 Dec. 2013.
"Statistics." National Interagency Fire Center. Web. 16 Oct. 2013.
<http://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/fireInfo_statistics.html>
U.S. Air Force. "MQ-9 Reaper Fact Sheet Display.". Web. 16 Oct. 2013.
<http://www.af.mil/AboutUs/FactSheets/Display/tabid/224/Article/104470/mq-9-reaper.aspx>.
42
Watts, A., V. Ambrosia, and E. Hinkley. "Unmanned Aircraft Systems in Remote Sensing and
Scientific Research: Classification and Considerations of Use." Remote Sensing (2012)
6EX: 6-Channel 2.4GHz System. Futaba-rc.com. Futaba. 5 Dec 2013
43
Appendix
Appendix A: Motor Calculations
44
Vehicle Requirements
1. The Vehicle must be powered by batteries.
2. The device must be controlled through a wireless transmitter/receiver radio link. The
45
46
47
ASME
ROFLCOPTER
BILL
OF
MATERIALS
(BOM)
Line
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Component
NX 4005 650kv Brushless Motor
SlowFly 1047 Propeller
Carbon Fiber Tube, 0.600in OD
APM 2.6 Ardupilot Control Module
3DR uBlox GPS Module
Turnigy SK3 3536 1400kv Brushless Motor
8045 Propeller
Purchased By:
Eric
Eric
Michael
Damion
Damion
Eric
Eric
Eric
Jon
Eric
Harminder
Harminder
Michael
Michael
Harminder
Harminder
Rey
Rey
Damion
Damion
Damion
Damion
Eric
Damion
Damion
Damion
Damion
Source
HobbyKing
HobbyKing
ACP Composites
3DRobotics
3DRobotics
HobbyKing
HobbyKing
HobbyKing
TAP Plastics
AeroMicro
McMaster
McMaster
Southern Lumber
Southern Lumber
HobbyKing
HobbyKing
HobbyKing
HobbyKing
AeroMicro
Hobbyking
HobbyKing
HobbyKing
Amazon.com
Amazon.com
Amazon.com
Amazon.com
OSH
GRAND
TOTAL
919.38
Table 2. Bill of Materials
48