Electrical motor for symmetrical helicopter?
Morgan Gunnarsson
matthew
driven by its own electrical motor.
Any ideas?
buy the Roswell Flyer. It is what you describe
--
Matthew Orme
Orme Design http://www.orme.org
4568 Calle Argolla, Camarillo, Ca 93012,
Phone/Fax:(805)987-1777
Microsoft "Where do you want to go today? It doesn't matter, you're coming
with us."
for answers to your electric questions, sign up for the eflight list at
http://www.ezonemag.com
Ian Maclaughlin
Like Matthew said, a similar model is avaiable. See some good
pictures of it at http://www1.minn.net/~mjohnson/roswel1.html
Ian
San Diego
-----------------------------------------------------------
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
Herb Montes
Ed Johnson
http://www.nyblimp.com/roswell.htm.
Follow all links for a wealth of information.
....Ed....
MartinL
wrote:
>Morgan: You can get a lot of info on this type machine at
>http://www.nyblimp.com/roswell.htm.
Even closer, look at UK made
Hoverfly...http://www.quickuk.co.uk/hoverfly.htm
MartinL
http://www.quickuk.co.uk/hoverfly.htm
Declan Hughes
>On Wed, 09 Aug 2000 21:32:22 -0400, Ed Johnson <ejoh...@maine.rr.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Morgan: You can get a lot of info on this type machine at
>>http://www.nyblimp.com/roswell.htm.
>
>Even closer, look at UK made
This is not a symmetrical helicopter.
Declan Hughes
>I'm going to build a symmetrical helicopter with 4 propellers, each
>driven by its own electrical motor.
>
>buy the Roswell Flyer. It is what you describe
How much weight can it support ?
Declan Hughes
dhu...@aero.tamu.edu
mike
John Stachniewicz
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 8/9/00, 11:46:52 PM, dhu...@aero.tamu.edu (Declan Hughes) wrote
regarding Re: Electrical motor for symmetrical helicopter?:
Actually it is. Take a closer look at the second image down.
Declan Hughes
news:1Vik5.1139$HK.4...@newsc.telia.net...
driven by its own electrical motor. The diameter of the helicopter
should be about 60 cm (25 inches) and it has to be able to lift its
power source and a small digital camera with two servos plus a circuit
board mounted with the brain (RISC processors) and a simple digital
tranciever. It's going to look like an X with a propeller in each
corner and the circuit board in the middle.
In article <20000810...@vxt1.arl.psu.edu>, John Stachniewicz
<js...@psu.edu> wrote:
>On 8/9/00, 11:46:52 PM, dhu...@aero.tamu.edu (Declan Hughes) wrote=20
>> In article <39920f13...@news.mel.connect.net.au>, ml...@agco.com.=
>au=20
>(MartinL) wrote:
>> >Even closer, look at UK made
>> >http://www.quickuk.co.uk/hoverfly.htm
>> This is not a symmetrical helicopter.
>Actually it is. Take a closer look at the second image down.
Actually it isn't. Take a closer look at the tail rotor in the second image
down.
**** ****
the course of that time, it has ocurred to me that electrical motors are
unsuited for this. Sure, some really clever individuals may be able to make
them work tolerably well, but this speaks well of only their talent...
nothing more. What I'm thinking is this. Why not use gasoline engines, like
the vast majority of model helicopters? I'm even thinking that if you could
steal just a bit of the motor's energy for a small alternator of sorts, you
could even eliminate the need for a battery. It would generate the
electricity it needs for 'brains' on the fly, forgive the pun. Not only
that, but the challenge of designing the robot to refuel itself is too much
to pass up. I imagine a sensor indicating fuel level, and once it gets
beyond a certain point, the thing would fly back to a gas can, extend its
tube, and pump in more gas until full again. Then of course, there is that
miniature jet engine that I saw on slashdot...
Umm, anyway, I can only offer brainstorming at this point, since flybot
won't be built forr over a year, if ever. Too many things going on now
Thanks,
John
di98...@my-deja.com
snr1.gtei.net>,
"matthew" <mo...@aveox.com> wrote:
> I'm going to build a symmetrical helicopter
with 4 propellers, each
> driven by its own electrical motor.
>
> buy the Roswell Flyer. It is what you describe
I know about it, but it's NOT what i describe!
What's the fun with BUYING a helicopter when
you can BUILD a much more intelligent one??
And it's actually my B.Sc. project, so buying
is not an option here.
But thanks for the link!
Morgan
> --
> Matthew Orme
> Orme Design http://www.orme.org
> 4568 Calle Argolla, Camarillo, Ca 93012,
> Phone/Fax:(805)987-1777
> Microsoft "Where do you want to go today? It
doesn't matter, you're coming
> with us."
> for answers to your electric questions, sign up
for the eflight list at
> http://www.ezonemag.com
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Robert Posey
**** **** wrote:
>
> I've been contemplating an aerial robot myself, for the past few weeks. In
> the course of that time, it has ocurred to me that electrical motors are
> unsuited for this. Sure, some really clever individuals may be able to make
> them work tolerably well, but this speaks well of only their talent...
> nothing more. What I'm thinking is this. Why not use gasoline engines, like
> the vast majority of model helicopters?
I would agree with this idea for any serious effort on a helo, robot or not.
Electric Motors are fine, and actually very eff., the problem is batteries are
not. Thus Gas motors are far better, unless you can use a fuel cell or
a thermal battery, both of which are big bucks to my knowledge. Of course
if your main interest is only the controls aspect, then electric motors are
the way to go. However, if you want your robo-helo to be able to lift enough
to have a variety of sensors, and some real processing power, I would think
gas motors are the way to go.
I have a question for the gear head types. If you use gas motors, and you
want to maintain the symmetric quad form, do you want 4 motors, or just one
motor and some form of belts? With one gas motor, you could afford the
weight of a more complex transmission, since you would need only one. A
simple method of horizontal movement might be a problem though.
Muddy
> Thanks,
> John
John Stachniewicz
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 8/11/00, 3:30:04 AM, dhu...@aero.tamu.edu (Declan Hughes) wrote
regarding Re: Electrical motor for symmetrical helicopter?:
> Morgan Gunnarsson <di98...@chl.chalmers.se> wrote in message
> news:1Vik5.1139$HK.4...@newsc.telia.net...
> I'm going to build a symmetrical helicopter with 4 propellers, each
> driven by its own electrical motor. The diameter of the helicopter
> should be about 60 cm (25 inches) and it has to be able to lift its
> power source and a small digital camera with two servos plus a circuit
> board mounted with the brain (RISC processors) and a simple digital
> tranciever. It's going to look like an X with a propeller in each
> corner and the circuit board in the middle.
> In article <20000810...@vxt1.arl.psu.edu>, John Stachniewicz
> <js...@psu.edu> wrote:
> >On 8/9/00, 11:46:52 PM, dhu...@aero.tamu.edu (Declan Hughes) wrote=20
> >> In article <39920f13...@news.mel.connect.net.au>, ml...@agco.com.=
> >au=20
> >(MartinL) wrote:
> >> >Even closer, look at UK made
> >> >http://www.quickuk.co.uk/hoverfly.htm
> >> This is not a symmetrical helicopter.
> >Actually it is. Take a closer look at the second image down.
> Actually it isn't. Take a closer look at the tail rotor in the second
image
> down.
Oops.. You're right. Thanks..
Kevin FitzGerrell
Robert Posey <muddy_tak...@raytheon.com> wrote:
> I would agree with this idea for any serious effort on a helo, robot
or not.
> Electric Motors are fine, and actually very eff., the problem is
batteries are
> not. Thus Gas motors are far better, unless you can use a fuel cell
or
> a thermal battery, both of which are big bucks to my knowledge. Of
course
> if your main interest is only the controls aspect, then electric
motors are
lift enough
> to have a variety of sensors, and some real processing power, I would
think
> gas motors are the way to go.
>
> I have a question for the gear head types. If you use gas motors,
and you
> want to maintain the symmetric quad form, do you want 4 motors, or
just one
> motor and some form of belts? With one gas motor, you could afford
the
> weight of a more complex transmission, since you would need only
one. A
> simple method of horizontal movement might be a problem though.
In the multi-engine RC planes I flew when I was younger, it was
difficult to synchronize two small engines, and very difficult to
synchronize 4. Synchronization was especially difficult across a range
of throttle settings. On an airplane, you can compensate for minor
differences between engines with rudder and ailerons, but when using
engines for lift rather than just forward motion I would see this as a
serious problem, especially as what we need is very good speed control
at close to synchronous engine speeds. As I recall, larger engines
were easier to synch than smaller ones. I would see good
microcontroller based speed control (rather than just proportional
throttle response) to be the key to making this work.
A single drive with a transmission system presents it's own problems.
As you no longer have variable speed control over each driven unit you
need adjustable prop pitch or ducts/vanes to give you control over the
amount and direction of thrust from each driven unit. You also have to
provide for cooling of your engine now that it is not in a propellor's
airflow.
-Kevin FitzGerrell
Genesis
news1.southeast.rr.com>:
>I've been contemplating an aerial robot myself, for the past few weeks. In
>the course of that time, it has ocurred to me that electrical motors are
>unsuited for this. Sure, some really clever individuals may be able to make
>them work tolerably well, but this speaks well of only their talent...
>nothing more. What I'm thinking is this. Why not use gasoline engines, like
>the vast majority of model helicopters? I'm even thinking that if you could
>steal just a bit of the motor's energy for a small alternator of sorts, you
>could even eliminate the need for a battery. It would generate the
>electricity it needs for 'brains' on the fly, forgive the pun. Not only
>that, but the challenge of designing the robot to refuel itself is too much
>to pass up. I imagine a sensor indicating fuel level, and once it gets
>beyond a certain point, the thing would fly back to a gas can, extend its
>tube, and pump in more gas until full again. Then of course, there is that
>miniature jet engine that I saw on slashdot...
>Umm, anyway, I can only offer brainstorming at this point, since flybot
>won't be built forr over a year, if ever. Too many things going on now
>
>Thanks,
>John
>
>
>
Hello fellow /.er!!
That jet engine on /. is big compared to one I saw, I think Lost Alamos is
developing it for covert military operations.
It's diameter is the size of a quarter dollar (USD).
Now for an ever smaller jet...
<http://www.wired.com/wired/4.10/es_batteries.html>.
The size of a shirt button, *WOW*
I like your idea of a generator attached to a model engine!
I was thinking though, do you think it would be better to spin the generator
at 30,000 RPM,
or reduce the engine output speed with a gear box before we send it in to the
generator?
Now if you are talking about a true gasoline powered engine like the Zenoha
(sp?) G23,
I was looking in Northern Equipment Supply and they had a small generator, it
used a weed wacker style
engine (Zenoha (sp?) G2). I am sure it had far too much junk attached to it
that does not improve its performance
(labels, fascia, cowls, enclosures, etc.), that just added weight. So just
take a G23 (or larger) and mount a small
generator on it. One would get the runtime, ease of starting, and no oily
mess qualities of a gasser.
It could generate enough power to run multiple motors to lift the thing,
electronics, camera, etc.
It also solves power (mechanical energy) distribution problems in bigger
machines.
If you want to talk about this some more, feel free to email me:
freedomfighter2015 (at) home (dot) com it should be in the
header :-)
Later,
Genesis
Ian Stirling
>**** **** wrote:
>>
>> I've been contemplating an aerial robot myself, for the past few weeks. In
>> the course of that time, it has ocurred to me that electrical motors are
>> unsuited for this. Sure, some really clever individuals may be able to make
>> them work tolerably well, but this speaks well of only their talent...
>> nothing more. What I'm thinking is this. Why not use gasoline engines, like
>> the vast majority of model helicopters?
>I would agree with this idea for any serious effort on a helo, robot or not.
>Electric Motors are fine, and actually very eff., the problem is batteries are
>not. Thus Gas motors are far better, unless you can use a fuel cell or
>a thermal battery, both of which are big bucks to my knowledge. Of course
>if your main interest is only the controls aspect, then electric motors are
>the way to go. However, if you want your robo-helo to be able to lift enough
>to have a variety of sensors, and some real processing power, I would think
>gas motors are the way to go.
Late comment, but what about a motor-generator setup?
Use an extra motor, as a generator, to power the others, for ease of
use, and easier control?
--
http://inquisitor.i.am/ | mailto:inqui...@i.am | Ian Stirling.
---------------------------+-------------------------+--------------------------
"Give a man a fire, and he's warm for a day. Set him on fire, and he's warm
for the rest of his life" -- Terry Pratchett-Jingo
Hugo Marien
To see amazing achievents of "electric" helicopters, take a look at
http://www.planetinternet.be/pixel
Hugo
"Ian Stirling" <Inqui...@I.am> wrote in message
news:IaxA5.18187$4b5.5...@east6.usenetserver.com...