Such a cool idea! Now to make a super fast one axis brushless gimbal so it can be used for FPV

@LS-xb2fh

Жыл бұрын

"Simply" build an optical derotator ;). It uses a rotating assembly of mirrors (or a dove prism) to get a stationary image of a rotating object (or the opposite in your case: stationary surroundings, rotating camera).

@mrreddog

Жыл бұрын

Or just fix the video in post with flow state.

@christofbeaupoil8035

Жыл бұрын

A rotation compensator like this? kzread.info/dash/bejne/mJ-OlteqlJCYoto.html - that way you can also include a swash plate for cyclic pitch :) Can't wait to see what you have planned for directional control!/cb

@LS-xb2fh

Жыл бұрын

@@christofbeaupoil8035 The concept in your linked video seems very interesting, but I meant an optical image derotator. US patent US3625612A Fig. 7 shows the version with mirrors I was referring to. These are used for vibration measurement of rotating objects (e.g. Polytec PSV-A-440) and in telescopes to eliminate motion blur due to the earths rotation (e.g. "Barboza, 2018, Design and Prototyping of the Image Derotator for the ELT Infrared Instrument MICADO").

@christofbeaupoil8035

Жыл бұрын

@@LS-xb2fh Also a cool idea! But I was trying to answer to @rctestflight's comment about a brushless gimbal. That might be useful for everything that can not be stabilized optically :) /cb

The last part when it glides forward like an airplane was so cool. This thing has so many flying options.

@davialves5970

Жыл бұрын

It reminds me Darth Vader's space ship. Imagine if he could somehow get independent servos for each wing/blade so the bottom ones would act like conventional wings and the top one like a rudder.

@buckstarchaser2376

Жыл бұрын

@@davialves5970 Servos can do this pretty easily. It's actually harder to gear the booms together like he did, but it arguably saves weight and complexity.

@michaelbuckers

Жыл бұрын

@@davialves5970 You actually don't need to do that. Simply tilting the entire vehicle accomplishes the same thing.

@kooshanjazayeri

3 ай бұрын

yes, totally reminded me of the Lambda-class T-4a shuttle from starwars

This concept was actually explored over a decade ago with the Air Hogs toy “Switchblade”. It had basically a much simpler version of this concept but with two rotors during launch. You locked the toy into “Launch Mode” by twisting the two rotors away from each other, and let it spin itself to altitude, and when you were ready, hitting a button to unlock it from launch mode to fully fly like any plane-esque twin-rotor RC. Pretty neat to see this concept again in my 20s after seeing it before i even hit 10 :D

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

Good times with the switchblade

@bigmackmusic174

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm ​ do you think this is what disc shaped ufos are doing? it makes sense for such an efficient filing object, and would get better with better technology

@drewmiller4057

Жыл бұрын

​@@bigmackmusic174 that's EXACTLY where my head went.

@wristocrat

Жыл бұрын

@@bigmackmusic174 he’s not going to answer that because it’s an incredibly stupid question lol. Those round spacecraft are just SCIFi. They use a completely different probably warp style propulsion so it’s irrelevant

@Webeltjes

Жыл бұрын

​@@bigmackmusic174 probably not cause this system wouldnt work in space

I couldn't fail to notice another way to improve the efficiency of your setup: Just let it spin in the other direction! As any winged aircraft, your drone suffers from wing tip vortices due to induced drag. These vortices reduce the wing's ability to generate lift, so that it requires a higher angle of attack for the same lift, which tilts the total aerodynamic force rearwards and increases the drag component of that force. In the flights you showed us, the propellers were turning in the same direction as the vortices, hence enhancing them. Now if the drone spins in the other direction the wing tip vortices switch direction too. Since the spinning direction of the prop would stay the same, those vortices would be reduced by the prop spin. The effect would be even more pronounced if the props would be at the very tip of the wing. See: Chance Vought V-173 Chance Vought XF5U Bell-Boeing V-22 On all these planes the outside tip of the props were moving downward.

@onepointufo

Жыл бұрын

In addition, it could be torodal design

@davidthomson8010

Жыл бұрын

where would u suggest I learn more about what u've said?

@1u8taheb6

Жыл бұрын

@@davidthomson8010 Wherever you are right now is fine man, just gotta start! Good luck!

@Good_Hot_Chocolate

Жыл бұрын

​@@onepointufo toroidal*

@willinton06

Жыл бұрын

@@1u8taheb6 useless answers 101

This is a remarkable breakthrough - a 30 watt hover. As far as I know, the longest continuous flight for a multirotor is 175 minutes (happy to be corrected if anyone knows differently) - you could knock up a big Li-ion pack and claim the un-official world record (though you'd probably need 6S and more efficient, larger props)

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

Tempted to go a little bigger and try this out!

@jackwiedemann

Жыл бұрын

How is "multirotor" defined in that world record? I mean a helicopter also has 2 props and it drives them directly instead of moving the bigger one by smaller ones... I would guess that's more efficient?

@someonespotatohmm9513

Жыл бұрын

@@jackwiedemann It wastes energy by not rotating whatever is rotating the helicopter. And when using counterrotation you artificialy limit the blade length. So my gues is that theoreticaly a flying prop is more efficient.

@Jessarcobe

Жыл бұрын

Wowzers.....

@jackwiedemann

Жыл бұрын

@@someonespotatohmm9513 hm interesting question. I mean only having to drive 2 motors instead of 4 has efficiency improvements too, but there's also the added benefit of the increase in efficiency with incoming air in these props. Hovering one big single rotor like a helicopter will also not result in incoming air... So it's actually a more complex problem, but i think you're right.

A little correction at 00:35 60 degree tilt from vertical results in requiring twice the thrust to match the initial vertical thrust component, not 45 degrees. You’d think I’d know my vectors by now….

@Sekir80

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, I frowned a bit, but your concept is so amazing I'm still happy I clicked! Great experiment!

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

@@Sekir80 thanks for being patient with my annoying error lol. A good lesson in not rushing through the editing process or else things like that go overlooked

@Sekir80

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm Don't worry about it! I await your next chapter of experiments. :)

@Chris-oj7ro

Жыл бұрын

That's news to me and I'm sure it is to others also. 45 degrees seems like it would be the right answer. Care to quickly explain why 60 degrees produces half thrust for the rest of us?

@Jwmbike14

Жыл бұрын

@@Chris-oj7ro if you recall F=MA, F being Force, M=mass, A= Acceleration. Apply it to F_net = MG•sin30°, where G is "Acceleration due to Gravity." If you recall your unit circle, sin30° is equal to 1/2. So essentially (weight on earth)/2.

Its insane how you managed to apply such a simple concept to such a popular platform and create something which i hadnt seen before. Very well made design and nicely explained too

Toroidal shaped propellers create less eddy at the wing tip where the air foil stops, maybe this can be used on the macro and micro propellers to harness even more energy, stellar video! You’re onto something big and we don’t even realize it yet

I am astounded at how you can share your findings and teach new concepts in a fun way at the same time. Great job!

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

Really appreciate your comment

@ekinteko

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm The concept actually comes from a children's toy. It's a stick that you attach to a small propeller, and you rub it in your palms which causes it to spin, lift up and hover like a helicopter. Putting that on a drone makes it more efficient, just like you touched on, the whole unit becomes one large, slow spinning, "passive" propeller. Also, having tri-drone is a more efficient design than a quad-drone. You basically can have three larger active-propellers, rather than four smaller ones. So these two attributes fit together nicely. The reason why people opt for the quad-drone setup is because it is actually more simple, cheaper, and easier to navigate (you can assign each side as front/back/left/right). Each of the four arms can be rigid and controlled by a simple on/off switch. A tri-drone needs more tweaks, and have each arm needing to pivot and spin at different rates. As for energy source, fossil fuel is still better method at the medium to heavy weight. Electrical is only viable at the super lightweight scale. Not sure about nuclear, we don't have the technology for it (small nuclear engine). The best compromise is using solar energy for splitting water, generating hydrogen, using solar energy to compress it, then having hydrogen engine for helicopter flight. It can scale to heavyweight sizes, and is based on a renewable source.

You, sir - and I mean this sincerely - have finally discovered a practical use for the tip jet... rotor... whatever. Super impressive.

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

Thanks! We’ll see where we can take this idea…

@ARVash

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm bigger! for more efficiency :P

@diveforknowledge

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm How does the power requirement compare to a single motor running the larger propeller? In other words, could this concept be used to improve efficiency of propeller aircraft assuming the fuel routing issues could be resolved? Edit: alternatively, could this be used to improve the viability of electric prop planes?

@samuelglad2695

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm I feel like this flies very similar to what a classic UFO would, a few more propellers/wings shaped to curve downward near the tip and a stabilized ring in the center for a camera that doesn't spin and you have it. course, I have no idea what shaping the wings differently would do

@minhducnguyen9276

Жыл бұрын

@@diveforknowledge They tried it in WW2 and the cold war. It didn't really work because back then they didn't have fly by wires and LiDAR. So landing the plane was very risky. It's like parking a car without rear mirror. It's the main reason this kind of air plane design was discarded. To get it into the air is not the problem, to get it back to the ground is. Maybe modern computer assisted flight control can help fix it.

Not sure if I'm getting old, but seeing such beautiful data and nicely labeled plots made me happy... Subbed!

Nicholas, You have a real gift for making incredibly complex subjects understandable. Thank you so much for making all of this - especially your flight control system - open source.

You know, like a helicopter! Fun fact, there have been helicopters that had their main rotor propulsion take place at the end of the rotors by little rockets. These tip jet Copters came in several different formulations. Including ram jets! You’re essentially recreating this basic idea. Thrust at the end of the rotors! Another benefit of propulsion at the tip of the rotors is a lack of torque applied to the center mass. This makes it not necessary to have tail rotors on these types of craft!

@icantseethis

Жыл бұрын

Came here looking for somebody mentioning a helicopter and here you are. Somebody else on here made a comment about separate servos for rotor tilt and I think they stumbled upon the cyclic.

@florabee9283

Жыл бұрын

There used to be advertisements in the back of magazines like Popular Science that sold plans for one-man helicopters that used pulse jets on the rotor tips. Apparently they did work but the pulse jets were so loud that they were no fun. Pulse jets are simple and cheap and precession is not a problem, but damn they are stupid loud.

@icantseethis

Жыл бұрын

@@florabee9283 pulse jets are a great way to convert potential chemical energy into noise.

@rcpmac

Жыл бұрын

Attach razor blades to the trailing edge of those “wings” and your kid will volunteer to cut the lawn.

@jamesbizs

Жыл бұрын

There is a KZreadr that already made that

Very interesting. I love how 3d printing has enabled R&D and exploring engineering and ideas on a mass level.

@shukrantpatil

Жыл бұрын

anyone in any part of the world can create cool stuff now ( which could make a huge change in the field they are working on

It would be cool if you put a swashplate in the centerbody and used cyclic for directional control. No need for anti-torque because the rotors self propelled. If the battery was in the non rotating centerbody you'd need some kind of power coupling to deliver power to the tip propellers which might be hard to do, brushes or something I guess. Reminds me a bit of one of the human powered helicopter attempts to win the sikorsky prize (before they all went quadcopter, the cal poly one from 89 i think)

@southtexasspecials175

Жыл бұрын

That could be done with slip rings. Like on a car Steering wheel n such.

@mrkiky

Жыл бұрын

Then you'd kinda have a helicopter with tip propellers on the big propeller. I guess you'd need a way to brake the rotor so that it can still function as a tricopter in order to be able to choose between high efficiency and high stability, which I'm guessing is the whole purpose of this.

@_..-.._..-.._

28 күн бұрын

@@southtexasspecials175most cars use clock springs because they only need 3 turns max

A fantastic good video! No intro music, no music at all! This is how I love informative videos!

When I saw the winged version, i never saw it as a paradox as the wings itself is already pushing down static air providing lift.

@mozarteanchaos

Жыл бұрын

yeah, it didn't really seem like a paradox to me either - seemed quite obvious that drone + propellers angled to make it spin + wings angled in the direction it's spinning = more lift for less energy. if i had to guess, the title/claim might be an example of "experts on a topic either drastically over- or under-estimate average layperson's knowledge", or perhaps it's based on reactions from people with less intuitive understanding of how wings work, if that makes sense. ...or, maybe the "paradox" is more to do with how much more efficient it is than a wingless drone? in that case i don't know nearly enough to comment on that lol no judgement towards OP one way or another, ofc, just theorizing a bit

@jeffl4802

Жыл бұрын

Yes and no. It is not pushing down. Its using the same principle as airplane wings. Air moving faster over one side of the wing causes lift. Its basically a hover jet with helicopter props.

@TheLK641

Жыл бұрын

@@mozarteanchaos I think the "paradox" in the title is "less power spent going up => drone goes farther up", which is just a paradox for the tiny propellers themselves and not the entire drone.

@mozarteanchaos

Жыл бұрын

@@TheLK641 hm, that seems pretty plausible!

The prop taking off without the rest of the drone made my day. 😂

@XBullitt16X

Жыл бұрын

Yep, was pretty funny to watch haha.

I used to play around with this in Kerbal Space Program. Maybe I should go back and explore the idea now that I know there are better controls I can use. You explain it well in your video. Well done!

Your work is fantastic. We appreciate your contributions. Thank you.

Now I'm envisioning a future where we fly around sitting in the middle of a giant prop.

@robinbennett5994

Жыл бұрын

Isn't that a helicopter?

@KangJangkrik

Жыл бұрын

@@robinbennett5994 yup, helicopter with three tails and wing for each tail

@pauljs75

Жыл бұрын

A triebflugel that goes from being a crazy 80 year old concept to something that actually works.

@gravitomagneticpower

Жыл бұрын

Yes and not only Triebflugel but Flugelrad as well...

@gravitomagneticpower

Жыл бұрын

And Flugkriesel...

I’d consider the copter to be a quad. Technically when you’re “spin hovering” you turn the arms into a giant prop. If that makes sense.

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

haha true

@jonsimpson6240

Жыл бұрын

Tri plus one maybe?

This is some incredibly brilliant stuff!

Physics, engineering, CS, cinematography, editing, chill voice this guy got talent

I love it! Now make a gigantic quadcopter with four of these and see how much it can lift. Seems like you already have good feedback about the yaw rate, which could be fed into another PID for the quad control. An added benefit is you could adjust the 'cyclic' or average pitch of all corners so that the rev/s aims for the minimum of the blue line in the graph at 5:52. It would be hard to program, expensive, and as agile as a school bus. Yay!

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

This is so insane that I just might do it LOL

@aerialcombat

Жыл бұрын

Oh i just saw watched this video and thought i thought of this first, i hope you do this though

@KwongKan

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm you're using a 4-in-1 ESC anyway, so, why not 4th motor?

@jackwiedemann

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm well it won't be more efficient than strapping 4 bigger motors directly to the bigger props, will it?

@mrreddog

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm Is there enough space for 4 pinion gears? Suppose ya could just go bigger?

Wow, this is incredible! I am imagining a future version of this with a payload section underneath that is counter-rotated to be kept stationary. This could be super applicable to long-distance/payload flights with sensitive cargo or cameras. Can't wait for the next video!

@battlewing221

Жыл бұрын

can you explain your first statement little bit more ??

@BootyRealDreamMurMurs

Жыл бұрын

@@battlewing221 Well basically, what they meant is that they are inagining a version of the drone in the video where it is used as a carrier drone, Now you might be wondering, how can a drone that spins be something that carries objects carefully and safely? What this dude just said in his first statement is that hes imagining a version that fixes such an issue, and how it iss fixed is by attaching a contraption that will contain the objects that are to be transported to places, and that contraption is designed in a way that rotating it doesnt really rotate the inside, such mechanism and technology already exist, you might as well think of it as a box and larger version of the bearings that was inserted in the middle section of the drone that allows rotation on the inside that was shown in the video in the "showing the process of building the drone" part.

@battlewing221

Жыл бұрын

@@BootyRealDreamMurMurs yes thanks,

@mikestaihr5183

Жыл бұрын

Maybe not "counter-rotated" as much as just stationary. How about the payload section on a bearing with an internal gyroscope?

@battlewing221

Жыл бұрын

@@mikestaihr5183 yea a bearing design would be better i think

THIS. IS. IMPRESSIVE !!! Instant subscribed, wow.

Great idea, excited to see what you do with part 2 :)

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

Forward flight testing is underway for part 2, then maybe a part 3 with directional control while spinning

Nice! In forward flight you get some lift from the two lower blade/wings! (I propose blades + wings = blings😄) Maybe you can use the top one as rudder. In fwd flight, looks like a Imperial Lambda-class shuttle!

Really neat! In forward flight, if the arms were all on separate servos, then two could rotate in opposite directions inward to make a plane with reverse sweep, using the third motor to keep the tail up.

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

That’s a really cool idea. V2 might need to have separate servos per wing now

@JMMC1005

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm what about using the current design (but non spinning) in fast forward flight, with pitch angle near 90 degrees? This might be what you meant at the end of the video, but maybe you were talking about spinning forward flight. It won't be passively stable, but it would be interesting to see if you are able to hold altitude with similar efficiency. Great project.

@sysbofh

Жыл бұрын

@@JMMC1005 It could be. He flew like an inverted "Y", but he could have flew it as an upright "Y". This way the two arms up would provide lift, and the third arm down would be there just for propulsion. It wouldn't even need to move the arms independently: just put them at 90 degrees, and use engine speed to control the drone.

@aby0ni

Жыл бұрын

The same thought hit me at 8:20, it looked like a plane..

@suigintouivanhoe1167

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm Probably two of this drones could be connected on one central axis, and up one turns in one side, second one - in the other, so axis is somewhat stable and load can be attached to it. Would be kinda similar to helicopter with coaxial rotors.

Very cool idea. Simple and effective Congrats!

7:53 is the most creative way I’ve been asked to subscribe. I’ll allow it.

Great design and explanation. Try removing 1/2 or even 2/3 of the wing on the inside. The inside part of your rotor-wings are more weight than lift.

@kekogonzalez677

Жыл бұрын

Why?

@mtbsieppo

Жыл бұрын

@@kekogonzalez677 the inside has lower wind speed so it generates less lift

@Trebseig

Жыл бұрын

@@mtbsieppo exactly

@montithered4741

Жыл бұрын

@@mtbsieppo That depends on the design of the airfoil, camber, taper, twist, and angle of attack. Elliptical lift across a propellor or rotor is possible, as well as other lift profiles.

@xFD2x

Жыл бұрын

@@mtbsieppo Still, removing that part of the wing introduces a vortex.

Extremely impressive! This makes me think of a German concept aircraft designed at the end of WW2. It would use 3 jet engines in the same configuration as yours to take off and land vertically. It never reached the prototyping phase though. Here is a link for more info: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Wulf_Triebfl%C3%BCgel

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

I want to make one of these eventually!

@gregorycherni9005

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm contra rotating

@korkee1111

Жыл бұрын

That thing was the epitome of WW2 German Grandiose.

@robtristram8395

Жыл бұрын

That concept was also used in the famous Fairey Rotodyne

@samernajia

Жыл бұрын

That was the TriebFlugel (en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Wulf_Triebfl%C3%BCgel). The US had the Pogo which is not the same idea but also was a VTOL. Landing was always a problem since the pilot couldn't see what he was doing as he set down.

This is brilliant. Well done!

Your comparison to a

Impressive! I wonder how the "big propeller mode" would perform in horizontal flights

@samanthms123

Жыл бұрын

The angular momentum would give it excellent stability in extreme weather conditions. Like a spinning bullet shot out of a rifle.

@BVLVI

Жыл бұрын

Imagining horizontal big prop mode.... Wow. That just kept my imagination busy for the past hour.

@woodyhunt

Жыл бұрын

I could get interested in investing in same design and larger assembly.

@Mira_linn

Жыл бұрын

@@BVLVI you whould have no lift though as all your trust is either cancelling each other out of giving you forward momentum

@250tegra

Жыл бұрын

Hi Phillippe, 'Big Propeller Mode' will have most of the characteristics of a Helicopter, so it will need to balance the advancing/retreating blades lift, etc. Aaand for manoevering, Cyclic pitch control, perhaps?

3:28 - Let's catch it gently (reaching for it). Drone: A sharp whirring "No!" your not touching me ground-hand & Full throttle escape to the sky. 😂

Glad I found your channel, very cool project!

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

Welcome aboard

Your work is just amazing!

Holy crap dude... I can't remember the last time I saw something this brilliant! Is this an existing concept I just happened to never hear of, or did you come up with it on your own? Either way, you u got a sub from me! I can't wait to see more!

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

There are other spinning drones that leverage the efficiency boost of the tip-driven blade configuration, but none that can do regular multirotor hover, spinning hover, and forward flight all in one to my knowledge

@megatesla

Жыл бұрын

Shibeeb, there was at least one toy "drone" that used this concept in the mid to late 2000s. Those toys could spin hover (no normal hover) and fly forward/back and side to side as seen from the pilot. It used an infrared controller and pulsed the motors at the right times for directional flight.

@shiheeb7333

Жыл бұрын

@pyropulse why don't you use your gigabrain to go create something impressive or help others instead of insulting strangers on the Internet? I doubt this is less efficient than a traditional helicopter for a number of reasons: 1. There's no fuselage obstructing air flow. Instead, the prop wash is moving air across an airfoil which aids lift. 2. There's no tail rotor needed to overcome the rotation from a traditional helicopter design. Newton's third law dude... "Equal and opposite reaction". If you have to impart force into a fuselage to keep it from rotating, how efficient is that really?

@donovanreid427

Жыл бұрын

@pyropulse old brain🥴

@dozer1642

Жыл бұрын

@pyropulse I too am amazed at the amazement over this design. Over a hundred and ten years ago, a man thought of and was doing research on “tip jet” design that used compressed air to spin the blades of a “helicopter.” It’s not exactly the same as this, but it’s the same general principle that has been tried and tested throughout the last one hundred years. I love this video of a homemade design that works amazing, with actual data to show its efficiency, but come on people, this isn’t a new invention. Idiocracy wasn’t a comedy.

Great idea, ive been dreaming about stuff like this for some time. Also the footage of the prop flying off cracked me up

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

The worst part is that I didn’t have a wrench or pliers in my car to re-tighten it. So I had to use my jumper cable clamps lol

@bokusimondesu

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm time to get a good little multitool 😜

@sypeiterra7613

Жыл бұрын

@@NicholasRehm can't be worse than when I had to use a pair of sticks pinched together lol

Great content! Thanks for sharing

Awesome ! Congratulations !

Additionally let's all take a hard pause to admire the pure beauty of this 8:16 ! THIS IS DOPE!!!!!

@RichardBronosky

Жыл бұрын

The whole video I was wondering if he would do this!

This is a profoundly simple and wonderful design. I want to see more

Wow, very cool idea. Not the first time I've seen a rotor powered this way. but to combine it into a drone concept is outstanding.

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

Thanks!

This is brilliant. Keep going.

The idea of substantially less energy made me immediatly think of the Focke-Wulf Triebflügel plan. Vertical take off jet thing, but instead of normal jet thrust, it had 3 engines placed at the ends of wings that spin around the center of the fuselage. Nothing beyond the initial concept was made, but it did make its way into the Captain America movie

@spinnetti

Жыл бұрын

yep, literally the same idea, just 80 years ago....

That's pretty sick! And I love how it looks like an imperial shuttle when it was flying forward!

@Lunym

Жыл бұрын

i wonder if two wings can be turned oposite directions and the third be used as stabilization like a plane's tail. it would be so weird but so cool see it flying like that

This is simply amazing! Wow

Blown away! Thank you!

Wow, suddenly this "simple" design looks like a prime VTOL configuration!

@chrispollard6568

Жыл бұрын

You mean a tip powered helicopter like the Fairey Rotodyne? From 1957

@cameronbarnes5882

Жыл бұрын

@@chrispollard6568 that's a mad helli / plane for its time

5:24 damn fallen and can't get up sweet project

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

lol thanks!

Great idea and a correct observation that large, low speed props are more efficient than high speed small props. You can see the practical application of this if you look at human power air vehicles. They have huge props that turn very slowly. Planes that need efficiency, like solar powered planes use this trick too. Very innovative approach and fun to watch your progress. Keep up the good work.

Most interesting video I've seen in a while.

This seems like a really cool idea for drone photography. Yes the camera spinning would pose a challenge, but the extra flight time would be a huge draw while still being able to hold position, slowly move around with that efficiency, and even fly like a plane

@Myrzghe

Жыл бұрын

For lidar drones the rotation would not be that much of an issue. Doesn't really matter how the laser hits the ground as long as the instruments can geolocate it properly

@greggotheeggo2354

Жыл бұрын

The camera spinning would prob cancel out the energy savings as it’s turning the exact same amount inverse

@GodmanchesterGoblin

Жыл бұрын

@@greggotheeggo2354 It's not really a function of the speed of rotation. The camera support would impose little mechanical resistance, and any air resistance on the camera would actually help to keep the camera from rotating, so the camera stabilisation would not require that much power. The power required to spin the propellers and pull the (much larger) three bladed wing through the air would be significantly greater.

@SyntheticFuture

Жыл бұрын

Maybe have the center hub in a bearing so it doesn't spin with the rest of the drone. Or have the camera on a bearing so it can't spin with the body of the drone. Framing would be a bitch though 😅

@chucknaussie

Жыл бұрын

I am not sure the spinning is any real problem and may in fact be a benefit. It would give an automatic panorama view with a fixed frame view derived computationally. Think how synthetic aperture radar improves image resolution as the camera traverses terrain giving result likea much larger apparent lens. Numerous satellites spin to cover a larger field of view and specific images are collected with the object comes into view. All this is done by software and don't need to be mechanically corrected on the drone itself.

this sort of reminds me of the so called "engineless helicopter" called the XH-26 jeep jet, that was basically a one person cockpit with a tiny tail boom, single bladed tail rotor, and a dual-bladed main rotor that had a pulse jet engine attached to each end, such a weird yet interesting piece of technology, and this one just brings it to whole new levels of both

@JayHeartwing

Жыл бұрын

That helicopter is still on my mind since seeing it on the internet for years. Tip jet helicopters are always interesting. The only issues I think are the noise, and the gas consumption (this one's the one I'm not sure) but if we can make a helicopter like that it would be awesome since they're simple, and doesn't need tail rotors to fly.

@technicolorskies5432

Жыл бұрын

I was looking for this before I posted my own comment lol

@johnaweiss

Жыл бұрын

@@JayHeartwing Won't gas consumption be significantly less than a standard copter, as explained in this vid?

@TheRealNeill

Жыл бұрын

@@johnaweiss I don't think so as pulse jets are so thirsty. Noise and fuel consumption were always their problem

@Varue

Жыл бұрын

@@johnaweiss It is more efficient to just use a rotor spun by torque from a motor.

First time watching your vid and i am glad i clicked. Funny and fascinating. Exactly what I wish for when i want to watch an engineering build especially about aeronautics

Amazing idea and video explanation

I want to watch more about the capabilities of this design. So nice of you to share it publicly.

A flying propeller. So genius! You just got my subscription. Can’t wait to see what comes next.

So obvious. I'm astonished at the fact that I've never thought of this, bloody well done!! PS: my findings in sustaining longer flight times without foils were as follows. 1- larger props 2- more torque (less kvs) 3- higher voltage Those in combination have taken some designs from a 25min to a 90min flight! Larger props wouldn't work well with your design however they do as a rule of thumb and should also still work great with a maximum rotation of 45deg. Wonder what would happen if you incorporated this current design with a 10' - 3 blade prop powered by a 100kv motor in the center!? 🤪

Very interesting concept !!

My jaw dropped when you whent forward flight with this _TOTALLY HYPED_

Dude this is awesome. You've stumbled onto something that could change drones forever. Just isolate that center with a camera or a payload and you've got yourself a promising platform!

Very cool and makes complete sense. You get exponentially more lift per square inch of propeller/wing. I also like the comment that suggested having the smaller propellers on the back of the wings pushing them forward rather than pulling them forward as that would reduce drag and make it even more efficient. I imagine something like this might be utilized for package delivery where in the main drone is above the package holding section attached via cable and the main drone does this spinning drone effect to minimize power usage while the package holding section is lowered to the ground. It's also good for surveillance drones that just need to hover in place for extended periods of time.

Hello, thanks so much for doing this, very interesting to see. I could never actually make this, but I had almost the exact same idea, where a single central motor would power shafts that would run props that push wings like you have done here, but the wings would not tilt, just the props. What would be cool is another set of props + wings on top, facing opposite and counter-rotating where lift is generated by both sets. This could allow a cylinder in the center that separated the two to carry a non-spinning payload like a camera. The center hub would allow the wings to spin on bearings while remaining mostly stationary. Very nice project! really cool. .

Dude, this is awesome. Great stuff you've developed. I'm gonna look into that flight controller you mentioned, Thanks!

My first view of your videos, and I am now very interested in the next generation of developements this design causes. I am a nerd without any budget at the time and vuicariously live through such content, Thank you sir for sharing.

Very interesting project

This is insane. I love it. Here, take my subscription 😊

So awesome! What a great solution for climbing and descending incredibly efficiently!

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

This guy gets it

When I was about 12/13 I built this *exact* setup (albeit in a quad rotor configuration) in a game called SimplePlanes. I wasn't measuring efficiency or anything, it was just fun to play around with the game's physics. Super cool video!!

This is why I love physics, and wish I would've have good math teachers in my lower education to entice me to pursue higher education in physics. I always struggled with math in grades 6-12. It wasn't till my senior year or college that I took an advanced business calculus class, and realized I wasn't terrible at math, I just didn't have very good instructors before this. The guy was a literal rocket scientist who helped develop the space shuttle fuel tanl jettison rockets after the Challenger disaster. I thought I was screwed as soon as I heard he was a rocket scientist, but I ended up excelling in his glass, and, for the first time in my life, understood the theory behind the problems presented to me (as opposed to just memorizing steps). As a result, I aced every test without even needing to use my allowed double-sided note card. I didn't need to memorize steps because he ensured we knew the "WHY"/theory behind our calculations/problems. So many of these situations don't make sense to me, logically. But when the science is explained to me in a way I can understand, it makes perfect sense!

*Innovation at it's finest! Great job!*

As always impeccable work man. It’s like a tip jet rotor but so much better!

@Haawser

Жыл бұрын

My thoughts exactly. I wonder if you could make a highly efficient 'personal helicopter' by replacing the tip jets with electric motors and small props ? Or ducted fans maybe ?

@mefobills279

Жыл бұрын

@@Haawser Thay was my first thought too.

I’ve seen footage of devices that operate this way used to deliver shaped explosives, couldn’t understand why they were spinning, thanks for explaining what’s happening when they spin!

Great video and a cool idea. Besides the energy efficiency, this should also be more robust to position errors. The angular momentum will keep it from tilting and thrusting in the wrong direction. Did you have any problems with MPU data while spinning?

The rotor setup reminds me of how the Rotodyne was setup for hover.

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

Love me some tip jets

You should use this design to build a working Focke-Wulf Triebflügel.

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

That would be awesome. Might not be too hard to strap a fixed-frame fuselage to this thing….

That's a nice lawn mower right there, this bad boy can spin real fast and efficiently

What an interesting video. Thank you.

Really cool work! If you add another wing you can benefit from wing lift, like a plane, when moving in a lateral direction

The German, Focke Wulf Trebfluegel VTOL may not have been as much fringe science as previously believed. Nice work getting your Tri-copter to outperform other multi-copters in hover. I will definitely be following your progress of this unique model.

@Yuki_Ika7

Жыл бұрын

That was my first thought too!

Nice info, thanks for sharing :)

Very cool thinking!

Awesome build man. I might just have a play with the print files.

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

Thanks! Go for it!

This may have already occurred to you but I realized while watching that if you want to carry a load with this the best option may be to use a sort of hanging gyro ball connected with a bearing beneath the center so that the load (potentially people) would not be affected by the entire body spinning. I'm not sure how practical that is to implement but I would definitely enjoy seeing an attempt! (or even an attempt at another potentially better method)

@mandowarrior123

Жыл бұрын

Potentially people? Why'd you fly in this over a helicopter?

That is soo impresive.

You should really make 3 more of these and use them and props for a single large drone. Might actually catch on with future drone designs!

@redbaron07

Жыл бұрын

And so on and so on... a Russian doll drone!

@hchang007

Жыл бұрын

Recursive! And even better: why not have smaller drones that assemble themselves into the recursive structure and then repeat? Keep recursion into bigger and bigger recursively spinning system. It'll be like a fractal drone.

Descent could be very efficient, you would need to store momentum thanks to the air the drone meets during descent....at the end of the descent you change the wings angle, so that you transform the drone from turbine that has stored the potential energy in to a propeller that pushes it self upwards to slow down. I also wonder how a spinning drone like that could understand its horizontal direction of travel while the entire system is spinning, in a future model

Nicholas: "I'll try spinning, that's a good trick!"

I've had this in my head for 40 years still haven't quit got the skills to reinvent aircraft control to make it work. Looking forward to your approach. My imaginary version used one wing and one motor counterweighted by the battery. Also a strip scanning camera in conjunction with a post processor that reconstructs a conventional view. All this is all way more achievable now than 40 years ago but remains above my skill level. Not sure why you thought it was counter intuitive though.

I was blown away by those horizontal flights at the end!

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

More coming soon!!

I’ve had this idea for years. Good to see it being tried. Believe it can work. My idea has the props tilt separate from the central props tilt. The central prop would just be on a ultra bearing. It made me think the drone motorized props would provide the speed and stability control. While the central gave the thrust. Which was regulated thru the motors the same. With tilt control on the central prop I thought the drone would be able to launch into a zero g 180 flip. Then tilt the central prop, launching back up instead of down. Don’t know what purpose it would serve besides fun. 🤷

This is another really fun project. 1. Can the "headless" feature of many flight controllers keep up with the rotation of the tricopter? If so you could use this feature to better control the drone. 2. I wonder how useful a variable pitched propeller would be. There are a few quadcopters which use something similar to a helicopter tail rotor for the main flight motors. It might be interesting to see if these sorts of propellers could make the drone more efficient. Of course this would add a lot of complexity and should probably wait until more pressing issues are solved before trying this. Since this is KZread comments, I feel compelled to add my nitpick of a correction. At 0:35 you mention the vertical component of lift being cut in half with a 45 degree tilt. You actually need to tilt the motor 60 degrees (from it's normal position) to reduce the vertical vector to half of the total vector. I believe the vertical component of lift is: verticalComponentOfLift = cos(angleFromVertical) At a zero degree angle all the lift is vertical. At a 90 degree angle, the vertical lift would fall to zero. Thanks for the really fun and interesting video.

@NicholasRehm

Жыл бұрын

Damn it, you’d think I would know my vectors by now…. Equal components != half the vertical thrust. That’s what happens when you rush to get a video done lol. I don’t know if any commercial flight controllers can handle it, but I’ll be trying to modify mine for headless mode flying.

This is seriously brilliant! Thinking out of the box to the nth degree.

Love to make something like this one day! Great video!!!

Great idea! I'd be interested in knowing if this design is more efficient than a coaxial platform of similar dimensions.