Hard Deck Function

[Navigator53]

Originally Posted by MichiganFlyer

Which sensor does the HD sensor replace? The main sensor or the vertical sensor?

As I understand it, both would stay where they're mounted now, still need to see horizon with the main sensor and sky and earth with the vertical sensor

Edit: Ooooops.... Jumpin' Jack Flash got it, already

[ricoalonso]

Originally Posted by jdd1

Hi ricoalonso,

Wow, that is slow. I think the head speed on my Trex 550 FLB is over 2000. I will say this. CoPilot HD will apply as much corrective input as a pilot can to the cyclic input up to + or - 8 degree of collective during an emergency recovery.

Hope this helps.
Jack

Hello Jack.
Yes, I run my headspeed low since I find it less intimidating and more relaxing Even my 450 is running between 2100 to 2200 only. I haven't measured really my full collectives lately but I think I have +/- 9 on my 550. So maybe that will work out. Otherwise, I am still enjoying the security of my CPII.

Thanks,
Rico.

[nightflyr]

Originally Posted by ricoalonso

Hello Jack.
Yes, I run my headspeed low since I find it less intimidating and more relaxing Even my 450 is running between 2100 to 2200 only. I haven't measured really my full collectives lately but I think I have +/- 9 on my 550. So maybe that will work out. Otherwise, I am still enjoying the security of my CPII.

Thanks,
Rico.

You may well find if your pitch range that low.. when setting up the HD you may encounter an error message concerning "out or collective range"
Be advised you will need to increase your collective range

[ricoalonso]

Originally Posted by nightflyr

You may well find if your pitch range that low.. when setting up the HD you may encounter an error message concerning "out or collective range"
Be advised you will need to increase your collective range

Thanks, nightflyr. Will keep this in mind.

Rico

[R_Lefebvre]

Originally Posted by Jotto

I hate this new thing... but only because it will allow newbies to progress much faster than I did

For the record: obstacle avoidance doesn't need to be that expensive. ArduCopter already has it.

Uh, how's that?

Are you talking about the sonar?

[sutty]

Something that has been puzzling me for a while, as I have been pondering how this unit will work, is what happens if the weather changes?

I already know that it calibrates for 0 at initialisation, and does something else at 20 feet which I didn't quite follow, but how does it maintain its knowledge of 50 feet during conditions where the air pressure is changing? I don't think I have seen this mentioned already.

To be fair I don't know how quickly air pressure changes as a result of weather, but since these sensors must be amazingly sensitive, to spot changes of just a few feet, I would have thought a front rolling in could cause it some serious confusion. Might there be instructions about watching the weather? I mean I know we have to watch for changing conditions already, so that the attitude sensors can function, but can air pressure change without obvious visible changes?

I'm probably not understanding something about the principle of these devices, so if it is a stupid question, no problem just say so and I'll crawl away in shame. Likewise if this is secret, no problem, but either way I thought it worth asking.

Cheers

Sutty

[flyfasteddie]

The fastest speed at which air pressure can change is around .05" of mercury per hour in a really fast moving, nasty storm front. So in a 6 minute flight the max is around .005" or 5 feet of effective altitude change. Probably not a problem with a 50' minimum hard deck.

Having said that, if the pressure is changing that fast you likely wouldn't be flying anyway, as the the hurricane force winds and hail/lightning would probably have dissuaded you from taking off in the first place.

[sutty]

lol, you'd be surprised what I have flown in Eddie. Seriously though, that is very interesting and if that is the highest rate one is likely to see then it explains everything perfectly. Thanks for posting. For some reason I thought the rate of change would be potentially much higher, and not necessarily associated with such bad weather. Clearly under such circumstances you wouldn't be flying. Having said that, if you did, you'd probably be glad of the extra stability you could get from flying with your CPII switched on.

Great answer, thanks.


Cheers

Sutty

[jperkosk]

In grown-up aviation when the pilot requests a landing clearance from the control tower he gets a base surface pressure to calibrate all barometric altimeters. That's usually good enough for at least half an hour.

Tim has mentioned 10' of safety margin was due to the sensor reading; big part of it will be the barometric pressure drift, and he's probably calculated it for a 60 min gasser flight

[R_Lefebvre]

Originally Posted by flyfasteddie

The fastest speed at which air pressure can change is around .05" of mercury per hour in a really fast moving, nasty storm front. So in a 6 minute flight the max is around .005" or 5 feet of effective altitude change. Probably not a problem with a 50' minimum hard deck.

Having said that, if the pressure is changing that fast you likely wouldn't be flying anyway, as the the hurricane force winds and hail/lightning would probably have dissuaded you from taking off in the first place.

That may be the case in the scientific world, but in the real world, where we are talking a cheap, $2.00 barometric pressure sensor and mounting it on a vibrating airframe being hit by wind gusts from any direction, as well as prop wash...

I have played with these things extensively, and I can tell you it's a fact that you can't expect accuracy of more than ~20feet over a span of a few minutes. In fact, the sensor usually reports the altitude is 5 feet underground just from spinning up the rotor with a hovering pitch. (downwash pressure) So do you calibrate the ground as being with the blades turning or not? Can you then imagine what happens if you're inverted with negative pitch?

That is why most people using Arducopter go with a sonar to measure the true distance to the ground. Of course, that only works if you're mostly level.

[Tim Marks]

Originally Posted by jperkosk

In grown-up aviation when the pilot requests a landing clearance from the control tower he gets a base surface pressure to calibrate all barometric altimeters. That's usually good enough for at least half an hour.

Tim has mentioned 10' of safety margin was due to the sensor reading; big part of it will be the barometric pressure drift, and he's probably calculated it for a 60 min gasser flight

Hi:

Actually, I was referring to instantaneous accuracy of the pressure readings. At any given moment, the BP sensor readings are subject to about +/- 10 feet accuracy. This is far better than it was when we first started out. Nevertheless, this is another reason we can not reliably lower the min hard deck altitude. It's one thing to put a sensor on a full size aircraft moving slowly, or where you can always have a predictable angle of airflow into a pito or other type pressure tube; e.g., mounted on the leading edge of a wing, always facing forward. It's another thing entirely to utilize a pressure sensor in a model moving rapidly, continously changing direction, etc. The problem is particularly crazy in a model heli. As we draw nearer to shipping the HD Module, you will begin to learn what we have done to overcome the majority of these issues. Some of it's hardware, some of it's software. But we're not going to be tipping our hand on these things any time too soon. Stay tuned!

Tim Marks

[wocka_wocka]

I've read (most of) the thread. It's a classic. The HD module clearly isn't aimed at beginners, so I can't really understand the old-guard's grumpiness or indeed why this module might bring more beginners into the hobby. One thing's pretty likely, in 18 months time they'll be 4 different versions of this from 4 different companies, all with a slightly different take on the problem and solution. Personally, I think the sales volumes will go to the unit that will help beginners as well as hard-core 3D experts. Just my take.

[R_Lefebvre]

Yes, there will be more systems with this function in the future. Arducopter is already working on something that totally one-ups this. Not just a hard deck, but it also has a ceiling, and 4 walls. You can define a complete box, and if the pilot goes outside it, it returns to the home position automatically. And if you are flying mildly (not more than 30* pitch/roll) then the sonar allows you to set a hard deck much lower than 10 feet.

[jperkosk]

Reality check: none of these systems are really for a true beginner, as they require setup and configuration skills out of any noob's reach.

Arducopter sounds very interesting, but it hasn't had much market success as of yet, guess why?

[sarpilot]

Originally Posted by R_Lefebvre

Yes, there will be more systems with this function in the future. Arducopter is already working on something that totally one-ups this. Not just a hard deck, but it also has a ceiling, and 4 walls. You can define a complete box, and if the pilot goes outside it, it returns to the home position automatically. And if you are flying mildly (not more than 30* pitch/roll) then the sonar allows you to set a hard deck much lower than 10 feet.

Now THAT is something I would consider purchasing! Technology is a wonderful thing. I remember my first computer back in the 80's everything ran off tape there was no memory or hard drives. Now we are 30 years later and look at it all…


Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

[R_Lefebvre]

Originally Posted by jperkosk

Reality check: none of these systems are really for a true beginner, as they require setup and configuration skills out of any noob's reach.

Arducopter sounds very interesting, but it hasn't had much market success as of yet, guess why?

I agree, setup is an issue. Hopefully we can get to the point where it is much more plug and play, with more intelligence, which requires a faster processor, which is coming...

Still, this would allow an instructor to help set it up, and then reduce his buddybox workload.

Also, it will be useful in UAV applications where you will have to show a plan to not fly out of your permitted airspace. If you can say your system has a virtual fence, it helps a lot.

As far as market success is concerned... Well, they've sold over 20,000 APM2's. But there aren't a lot of helis. I think a large part of the reason for that is simple economics: Heli guys like to spend money, and show off how much money they spent on farkles. And when you say "Check out this awesome autopilot system. Yeah, it only cost $200!".

Doesn't work well with heli guys.

Plus I mean... a face only a mother could love:



That's an APM2 with an FrSky telemetry Rx built on. Tail gyro, Flybarless controller, autopilot, failsafe, unlimited waypoints, and telemetry... all for $230 total. Pretty darn good deal, but it doesn't have a shiny case.

[sutty]

I had been a big fan of the 3D box type solution, in its absence, waiting for its arrival shall we say, but more recently I realised that all I needed is for the heli to avoid the ground and stay level whilst I collect my thoughts for a second or two. I can easily fly it back thereafter. I would not pay a lot more for the 3D box type solution. Now if it came in at the same price, and did not introduce too much additional complexity, then why not but sadly I expect neither of these things will be true. As for a lower ceiling, I would pay a lot more for this. Honestly, a lot more, but not if it were only for tame flying. No use to me. I want to be able to practice my 3D, at a comfortable height, and have the unit save me when I screw up, as I inevitably do. 50 feet is good, but 20 feet would be perfect for me. I guess it is just a matter of time until such things arrive.

Have to agree with Jerry. None of these things are for noobs really are they. I mean when you are a noob it is difficult to even comprehend how these helis fly, let alone set them up correctly. When I first got my DX7, coming from an eSky POS, I was in a state of confusion for days with regard to what it all meant. When I came out of the other side of that learning phase, I knew a whole lot more about CP helis, I had to, we all have to, but it took ages to get to grips with it all. Not that I have even now, obviously, it is never ending, but a noob has practically no chance with devices like these, in my opinion.

Cheers

Sutty

[sarpilot]

Originally Posted by sutty

I had been a big fan of the 3D box type solution, in its absence, waiting for its arrival shall we say, but more recently I realised that all I needed is for the heli to avoid the ground and stay level whilst I collect my thoughts for a second or two. I can easily fly it back thereafter. I would not pay a lot more for the 3D box type solution. Now if it came in at the same price, and did not introduce too much additional complexity, then why not but sadly I expect neither of these things will be true. As for a lower ceiling, I would pay a lot more for this. Honestly, a lot more, but not if it were only for tame flying. No use to me. I want to be able to practice my 3D, at a comfortable height, and have the unit save me when I screw up, as I inevitably do. 50 feet is good, but 20 feet would be perfect for me. I guess it is just a matter of time until such things arrive.

Have to agree with Jerry. None of these things are for noobs really are they. I mean when you are a noob it is difficult to even comprehend how these helis fly, let alone set them up correctly. When I first got my DX7, coming from an eSky POS, I was in a state of confusion for days with regard to what it all meant. When I came out of the other side of that learning phase, I knew a whole lot more about CP helis, I had to, we all have to, but it took ages to get to grips with it all. Not that I have even now, obviously, it is never ending, but a noob has practically no chance with devices like these, in my opinion.

Cheers

Sutty

+1
If they could get there harddeck down to a more reasonable level I would consider it. 50 ft is just ridiculous I fly most the time eye level or maybe 10 ft above…

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

[R_Lefebvre]

Sutty, I agree with much of what you wrote.

Arducopter could give you exactly what you want right now. Flip to Stabilize, and it will just hang there, hands-off. And it could easily be programmed to do it at say, 20 feet (you need some room for error both for the barometer, and time to pull out). If you were in acro mode, went below the deck, automatically switch to stabilize and hover level until you switch out of acro and back in. Easy peasy.

The only problem is Arducopter is admittedly a terrible FBL controller. It works well for stabilize (ie: full right roll stick gives you 45° roll, and then holds. Release and it automatically goes back to hover). But the acro rate controller doesn't work well for helis (does for multis).

Unfortunately it's because we've been working a bit backwards, we developed the higher level functions before the basics, but that largely because it has evolved from Ardupilot which was already flying well, with all the Navigation stuff, so it was already there, and we had to work backwards from that to make a copter fly at all.

But I hope to get there. We've now got multis flying quite well, and just need to get helis working in rate mode. The biggest problem is getting the rate controller to see through the vibrations.

Now as for cost of other systems, put it this way:

The hardest part of the flight controller is getting it to fly in the first place, which there are tons of FBL systems that do that. Once it can fly, programming in barometer controls and GPS is relatively easy. Less than half the work already put in. As for the cost of the barometer and GPS, you're looking at about $20 and $30 respectively.

So when you say you'd love the functionality, but don't want to pay through the nose... you shouldn't have to. It shouldn't cost $1000's of dollars on top of the price of a FBL controller. It just doesn't make sense to me.

On the hard deck level: I saw somebody was working on a really neat idea where you set up a laser level on a tripod, and that is your altitude reference with a sensor on the copter. Eliminates the problem of baro drift. That's a much better way to go for what you guys want.

[pril250]

So can it work in conjunction with say BeastX therefore passing FBL control to another system.