Turning my dreams into a reality..

PBraunstein

PBraunstein

Active member
yesterday marked the first successful flying gopro for me. this is something that i have dreamed of for a long time. ive been working my ass off for the past month building and tuning this flying robot. this is just the start. the sky isnt the limit anymore...

474014.png

I still have tons of hard work in the months ahead of me, between more gopro testing (practicing), to building a website, to tearing down and rebuilding the whole chopper (with a 2 axis r/c gimbal ad the 7d).. If people are interested, I will do a few updates along the way.

 
Damn dude that's super sick, definitely sOmething I've wanted to do, it's cool you made it happen! Congrats dude
 
Ok, I'm really sorry.

"DUDE that is so sick I love helicopters, way to go thats awesome I wish I had one it would be amazing to have aerial videos of chase scenes and other cool stuff, because I like flying and flying cameras are the best. cool, cool, so cool, dope amazing sauce I love helocopetersernjnvjnvjnfjnskjhnr acnken sherbev"
 
your negativity is like a plague on m&a.

if you read his post, you would have seen that the gopro helicopter is for practice, since i'm assuming you want to get pretty confident at flying one of these before you attach a DSLR to it. he also said he is going to rebuild it with a 2 axis gimbal or something so he can use his 7D with it, which will be more stable i'm guessing.
 
the video you see, again the first attempt at flying with the gopro, was run with on the 11th and 12th flight of the helicopter, since i built it. the amount of tuning (mechanical and digital) that goes into this thing is unbelievable and between more tuning, the rebuild (with shock absorbing gimbal), and tons more practice, i promise the stability and quality of the video will increase ten fold.

as a side note.: the gopro is mounted on a mop handle, pushed through a pool noodle, suspended by rubberbands and d-rings and secured with zipties... no ability to see the footage or control where its pointing.

this isnt an attempt at having more fun with a hobby. this isnt some frivolous spending on a toy. this is purely a business venture with intent to produce some very thrilling shots.

you have to start somewhere..

 
Get Zac (Downtofilm) to hook you up with a gyro, pretty much the only way to get a good shot (or get a camera that isn't a 7d/gopro for it, with decent Optical Stabilization and a sensor not prone to jello)
 
no gyro needed. the helicopter has 2 gyros onboard already actually (one for the head and one for the tail). i insure you that once the gimbal is mounted and balanced out, that the jello effect with be virtually eliminated. This is a very long thought out process and i have a pretty good understanding about what I'm doing/ trying to accomplish. There are many, many steps involved, but only so much can be achieved each day. for a first go at it, i was very pleased (especially considering there were 15-20mph constant winds during this shoot) with what i procured.
 
I'm not "talking shit". I'm simply stating the facts exactly how they

present themselves to me. The footage is shaky. It can never be used in a

video. Fact. Once again, Crotchkiller, shut the fuck up, get off the

internet and read a book.

Why should he need people to tell him he did a good job? He built an RC

helicopter that can film things, he knows its awesome, I know its

awesome, we all know it's awesome. But what is the point in explaining

things we both already know? Why not get to the shit that people don't

usually think about, which in most cases is the shitty stuff about their

work. Its the only way you can truly gauge anything.

I'm not trying to be "negative", I don't say these things because I

enjoy pissing people of, I say it because I mean it. I'm actually sorry

that everyone always get so uptight about it. Some things just need to

be said. If my posts really bother you than I would suggest PMing a mod and requesting a ban.
 
ok, well then using your logic:

he built an RC helicopter that can film things. he has hardly flown it on its own, and this was his first time flying it with the GoPro. he knows his footage is shaky, i know his footage is shaky, we all know his footage is shaky and can't be used. so what is the point in saying it and being a dick about it?

it isn't hard to figure out that he wasn't making this thread to show off perfectly smooth aerial footage.
 
Then why did he make this thread? To tell everyone that he is undergoing a project to build a helicopter and maybe get feedback on how to improve it, or any input as to people's thoughts on the entire concept.

I gave my feedback.

You gave yours.

They were both different.

Move the fuck on Mr. Start.
 
Definitely looking forward to seeing your progress on this. I'd love to see updates along the way.
 
Great work on the project, I know how many hours you must have put into this! I've been involved with a team at my Uni which had to find targets on the ground using remote controlled aircraft as autonomously as possible, so I've got a bit of knowledge in the area.

I don't know how much knowledge you have in the area (you might already know much of what I'm about to say) but here's some of my own insight for you.

Rubber bands aren't good to use alone, or at all. You primarily need damping as well as springs (mass-spring-damper systems). The pool noodle should have some damping, but try checking out some other materials. One thing I've seen mentioned is a type of gel from McMaster-Carr (see forums discussion and McMaster-Carr item Ultra-Elastic Clear Rubber Gel). Try your best to isolate the vibrations from the rotor hub and the camera (anywhere between the two).

For seeing the video on the ground, there are video transmitters you can get fairly cheap (some better than others). It's generally all grouped under the term FPV. Transmission power and antenna gain (dB rating) will determine your range. Note that the higher the dB, the more directional the antenna signal (for send and receive). This can result in you needing to have a high-gain antenna on the ground follow the aircraft. The GoPro has a video out that can send SD video to a video transmitter. Video goggles can be used to fly the aircraft or control the camera from the camera's point of view.

Pan-tilt systems are often used to control the camera on-board the aircraft. They are very basic, but can give you some degree of control. You can have them be auto-stabilized if you have an IMU on board the aircraft, or another form of orientation sensor (thermopiles, etc). See this photo for the one I used recently at a competition. It will be difficult to get smooth motion using standard servo motors. Here's a video of some of the footage taken from the same flying wing aircraft without a pan-tilt installed, but still using a GoPro with the 720p FOV. It didn't have anything special used to dampen the vibrations -- just the foam aircraft body. Your best bet for stabilization, as mentioned above, is stabilizing gyros. These are different than the MEMS (electronic) gyros used for instrumentation -- they would be mechanical gyros. I've also heard of using water levels on board some larger RC aircraft. I don't know the details, but you can ponder the thought if you are interested.

If you want to try something a little different with the GoPro before upgrading cameras, you can check out the Sunex lens mod. It will get rid of most of the fisheye, but tends to be a little soft around the edges. I've found the diagonal FOV to be around 80-60 deg (depending on 720p or 1080p). It might be a little too great a focal length. Ragecams has some other lens, but I've heard that their optical quality is worse.

For your custom aircraft design, be sure to start with the payload (camera). Get your stabilization system worked out, then plan on designing the aircraft around that. Doing it the other way around will compromise your footage. I'm likely going to have to do a compromise with a current custom aircraft, and it won't be fun to say the least. (This aircraft modified to have a stabilized downwards-facing Canon Rebel DSLR or point and shoot controlled using custom firmware and an on-board computer). My purposes are of course a little different than yours.

Good luck, and I look forward to seeing what you put out with your system. If you have any questions, feel free to shoot me a PM and I'll do my best to help.
 
I actually didn't really give feedback, as it didn't really seem like he needed it. The problem (shaky footage) was pretty clear, so I thought pointing out that the footage was unusable (which was obvious and not the point of the thread) seemed unnecessary.

i took the thread to be paul simply showing a project that he was proud of and maybe wanting to inspire other people to try it too. who knows. either way, there are better ways to deliver constructive feedback than you did. and im not sure how to reply to the last line of your post.
 
thanks for all the awesome insight! its cool to see other people trying different things, trying to achieve the same results for completely different reasons! While pretty much all of your info has already been accounted for, im very grateful for your response.

I didnt mention this earlier, as i didnt feel i had to, but the way i had the go pro mounted now was actually in a way to get the most 'hardmount' setup, without actually drilling into the frame. At this point, I'm experimenting with different headspeeds and (without certain measuring devices), this is to try and get a rough idea what type of vibrations the heli is going through across the spectrum of different headspeeds. (right now i have, for example, 60,70,and 80% motor governers set up on a 3 way toggle, so i can flip between different (calculated) headspeeds)

the dampening system for my gimbal is a fairly simple system involving some dampeners and shock absorbers that work to suspend a much larger, but same concept as your pan-tilt you have on your gopro. As far as rebuilding the craft, not much to actually be done except some small (and very delicate dremel work) frame 'lightening,' battery relocation to the boom, and some new landing gear, and we'll have a flying 7d.

I am also aiming to have everything that i need to control the camera (reciever, downlink, battery, camera control) mounted on the camera gimbal itself, letting the gimbal servos move the camera a full 360 degrees on the X and Y axis. while not needed for the Y axis as much, this will be a very nice capability for the X axis.

I will post some more pics as I get them, and some of the rebuild process as it seems some are interested enough.

and ps- maybe a little something i can help you out with... when youre looiking into that rebel dslr setup.. to maybe saver youself some work and weight, check out the strato-snapper system.. its honestly an amazing control system for an unbelievable value.
 
pretty cool project, something I've wanted to do for a while. But have you thought about just fronting the money for a cinestar octocopter? seems like there are already a lot of companies out there flying their RED Epics around. It might be better just to get up to speed because when 2015 comes around, UAV's will be taking our jerbs
 
while multi copters are good for certain situations (indoor, close to people, static type shots) there are many draw backs as well. multi copters are a cheaper, slower and not as reliable as a single rotor design. They dont do nearly as good with foward flight and one of the more serious issues is that you can no auto-rotate a multi copter.. if you have ONE malfunction in the electronics (and for an octo, your talking 8 times the amount of fail rate then a single rotor/motor option) you will watch all of your money fall to the ground like a glass brick. With the traditional heli design, they have a one way bearing that enables you to land with no power, using the weight of the heli against the blades (this is refered to as auto rotation). The setup im building is as "up to speed" as you can get without getting into military style UAVs (or the $80,000 yamaha).
 
haha.. the yamaha is a more affordable base, but even that, starting at 80,000, only the most highest of budgets will be able to afford it. There's been helis based off of the size im using (stretched) that can fly up to 30 pounds of camera weight for around 20 minutes. (ive seen a 800 size heli carrying a 3d, 4k setup with a cinedeck on board).. i dont forsee ever needing to carry much more the 30 pounds for even the most high quality, high budget shoots. not to mention, the size of the 700-900 ships is perfect for getting low altitude as well as high altitude shots.
 
^Aren't gas powered helicopters subject to more vibration than electric/battery powered? I know it all depends on the stabilization and vibration control of the camera equipment but in general the less vibration the better, right?
 
I'm not sure if you've covered this in the thread yet (I didn't read the two long posts, sorry), but a few questions on the business side of things:

1.) What is your general timeline for the redesign / getting everything fully operational with your 7D?

2.) Where are you located?

3.) Will you be looking at traveling with your services or staying local?

I might be looking at a need for some aerial shots at some point in the coming few months.
 
Lets cover Gas first. The pro's for gas are the

LOOONG flight times and low $$$ to operate. The con's are having to tune

that darn carburetor! EVERYTHING in AP centers around how smooth your

machine is. You MUST learn how to tune your engine AND heli to obtain

the smoothest possible platform. The tricky part is figuring out if a

vibration is an ENGINE problem or a HELI problem...Higher altitudes can

be difficult for Gas power, relating back to tuning the carburetor for

the conditions.

Electric....Pro's are how EASY it is to get it

SMOOOOTH.....If there's a vibration, it's in the heli. there is NO

tuning needed, the electric motor either runs or it doesn't. Altitude is

NO problem for electrics as it doesn't care that there is no oxygen to

breath...Con's are the low flight times (comparatively speaking), the

cost of the batteries/chargers/power supply, and the time it takes to

charge the batteies. In recent months and years, flight times have gone

up (15 minutes is not unheard of) and charging times have gone down

with the ability to charge at up to 5C. But the cost is still there.

Turbine....Oh how we LOVE the sound and smell!! Pro's

are again the smoothness of the engine and the lack of needing to be

tuned, it's either running or it's not. Again altitude is less of a

concern for Turbines, it compresses it's own air...Turbines are very

powerful, therefore able to carry possibly larger payloads in larger

airframes. Con's..Price. That Turbine engine is expensive. It also

LOVES to suck down the Kerosene so careful calculations must be made for

weight vs onboard fuel capacity. The Turbine is typically a larger,

heavier heli, so transportation must be given consideration.

this is a copy and paste from a custom heli builders website. this is describing helis sized around the one that im building. the yamaha and other largerer UAVs (the yamaha has a 2stroke 250cc motor in it!) can carry a much more sophisticated camera gimbal, have exponentially longer flight times, and can carry much more extensive GPS type systems as well.

 
Nice, I didn't know about that. For point and shoots, I was going to use CHDK with a small Linux-based computer on board using a Wifi network to communicate with the aircraft from the ground. That would give me control of a bunch of things, including optical zoom.

I was thinking for the Rebel I would use the 3.5mm remote jack. I've previously made a program to do time lapses using a Ti-83, before I gave up due to the inconsistency of it. I figure I can just measure the signal it sends, and wire something up to do the same. I'd probably just throw on a prime because getting the zoom on an SLR lens would likely need another servo. That, and the weight and size savings.

You seem to really know what you're getting into. I look forward to your updates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top