Damion Engelbart, Harminder Toor, Michael Tran, Eric Tse,
Jonathan Dee, Rey Tabayoyong, Jason Lin
Spring 2014
San Jose State University, Mechanical Engineering ASME Lighter Than Air UAV Dr. Raymond Yee, ME195B
1 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.
2
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.
3 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 Chapter 2: Theoretical Background ......................................................................................... 13 2.1 Flight Dynamics.................................................................................................................................. 13 2.2 Control .................................................................................................................................................. 16 Chapter 3: Prototype Design ....................................................................................................... 17 3.1 Existing Designs ................................................................................................................................. 17 3.2 Preliminary Design ........................................................................................................................... 18 3.3 Final Design ......................................................................................................................................... 21 Chapter 4: Microcontrollers and Electronic System Interface .......................................... 24 4.1 Components ........................................................................................................................................ 24 4.1.1 Arducopter ..................................................................................................................................................................... 24 4.1.2 Futaba 6EX Transmitter/Receiver Combination ........................................................................................... 25 4.1.3 Turnigy SK3 3536 DC Brushless Motor ............................................................................................................ 26 4.1.4 Turnigy Multistar 30 Amp ESC ............................................................................................................................. 26 4.2 Setup ..................................................................................................................................................... 27 4.3 Data Acquisition................................................................................................................................. 28 Chapter 5: Fabrication and Assembly ...................................................................................... 31 5.1 Motor Booms....................................................................................................................................... 31 5.2 3D Printed Parts ................................................................................................................................ 32 5.3 Boom Joint ........................................................................................................................................... 33 5.4 Electronics Mount.............................................................................................................................. 33 5.5 Assembly .............................................................................................................................................. 34 Chapter 6: Testing Results........................................................................................................... 37 6.1 Lift Propulsion Test: ......................................................................................................................... 37 6.2 2-DOF Test: .......................................................................................................................................... 38 ............................................................................................................................................................. 40 Chapter 7: Conclusions and Future Work ............................................................................... 41 References ....................................................................................................................................... 42 Appendix .......................................................................................................................................... 44
4
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
5 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. .....................................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
6
List of Tables
Table 1: Advantages and disadvantes for different types of UAVs ...........................................18 Table 2: Bill of Materials ...........................................................................................................48
7 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.
8 1.2 Current Status of UAV Technology: UAV designs are generally classified in to different platforms based on size, flight endurance, and capabilities. The most popular UAVs are fixed-wing like airplanes and require a runway to take off and land. These are further distinguished by their altitude capability (from low, medium, and high) and by endurance (short and long). These can vary in size, but are generally of a fixed- wing design (Watts, et al, 2012). One of the most recognized of such designs is the General Atomics MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper. The Predator is classified as Medium-Altitude, Long-Endurance (MALE), whereas the Reaper is High-Altitude, Long-Endurance (HALE). Figure 2 shows the sleek fixed-wing design of the MQ-9 Reaper equipped with several missiles.
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.
Figure 4: Aeryon Scout (Aeryon Labs)
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.
10
Figure 5: Nano Hummingbird (AeroVironment)
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
11 within the specified area. Gates will be 2 by 3 meters with a 1.5 meter window.
Figure 6: Sample Gate and Test Course (ASME)
1.4 Significance and Challenges of Design:
VTOL UAV has become a powerful, multi-purpose tool appropriate for many dangerous situations. They are especially helpful for disaster sites where a human life could potentially be harmed. What makes them so valuable is the customization of sensors and payloads that could adapt for a wide variety of events and the ability to fly directly to the target objective.
Currently, forest fires are fought with helicopters in the air and firefighters on the ground. In order to map out the fire and where it is heading, satellites are used to photograph the fire. However, these images are produced in low resolution and cannot provide accurate elevation levels either. Furthermore, satellites only have a 10 hour span of the day to record fires due to its orbit. Because of the limitations of satellites, firefighters do not always have the most accurate information needed to fight such fires. This puts them in danger due to the lack of information. Helicopters equipped with infrared sensors can also map out the direction and the magnitude of the fire. Unfortunately, this takes a great deal of resources including fuel, trained pilots, and other on-call services. They also can carry payloads of water and fire retardant to special areas not walkable for humans (Ollero, et al, 2006).
The money that is spent on these resources is tremendous and with a high level of risk. As a result, this makes false alarms extremely expensive. This can be minimized by sending out UAVs in order to gather information and relay it to home base (Leong, et al, 2012). Also, they can provide close range images which allow the professionals from afar to map out their attack and the path of the fire (Casbeer, et al, 2005). Additionally, autonomous UAVs are currently being designed to map out the perimeter of a fire as well as check for false alarms using infrared sensors. These devices are only limited by fuel or battery life which can easily be replaced or refilled. These advantages limit the amount of time needed to record fires and which allows for
12 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.
13 Chapter 2: Theoretical Background
2.1 Flight Dynamics The concept of multi-rotor copters is a relatively new technology in aviation. As the components used in the design and fabrication of multi-copters become more efficient and accessible, the more attractive it is to pursue research and development in this field. Multi-rotor copters utilize multiple rotary propellers to generate lift and allow it to perform maneuvers not typically possible with traditional fixed wing aircraft. Quad-rotor copters, or quadcopters, share many similarities in terms of flight dynamics with their single-rotor helicopter cousins, but reduce the number of mechanical systems required during fight. They both use rotary propellers to generate lift and are capable of vertical take offs and landings as well as hovering and flying backwards.
The control and flight dynamics of almost all aircraft centers around the movement about a set of three principal axis used to describe its orientation about the vehicles center of mass. The angles of the crafts rotation relative to these axes are commonly defined as Euler Angles (Basta 2012). They consist of yaw, pitch, and roll about their respective axis shown in Figure 7.
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
14 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).
Figure 8: Quadcopter maneuvers are executed by varying motor speed (https://sites.google.com/site/npaecopterguide/_/rsrc/1339119764290/multirotor_getting_started/flight- theory-multi-rotor/Untitled2.jpg)
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.
15
Figure 9: Pitch is the distance of advance achieved in one rotation (http://www.propellerpages.com/content/articles/images/tnl502.jpg)
Figure 10: Propeller diameter is the distance between tips of blades
The thrust generated by a propeller can be approximated by performing a momentum balance on the regions upstream and downstream from the propeller.
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.
16
Figure 11. Momentum balance of propeller (http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/Images/propth.gif)
The thrust generated by a propeller can be approximated by performing a momentum balance on the regions upstream and downstream from the propeller.
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.
The objective of the preliminary design phase is to recognize the specifications, components, and design requirements in order for success in the ASME Lighter than Air competition. In this competition, the UAV must have high maneuverability, speed, and strength while holding a payload. The competition consists of a number of gates, approximately 28 inches in diameter. As with most aircrafts, the primary challenge of the UAV is its weight. During the preliminary mechanical design phase, it is imperative to place size and weight specifications in order to achieve high maneuverability and speed. The overall material selection and amount of material used will also play an important role to fabricate a compact, strong and rigid frame. After the important design specifications were recognized, different classifications of UAVs was researched to determine the ideal design of the UAV.
There are many classifications of UAVs from single rotor, to multirotor, and even winged aircrafts. Selecting the optimal UAV type plays an important role in the UAV prototype design. Because of the gates, a winged aircraft would not be able to navigate through the course. The initial research involved looking at all the available options that can meet our design specifications and requirements. Fixed wing UAVs have rigid wings to generate lift and utilize the same flight dynamics and characteristics as traditional airplanes. These aircraft are typically used for applications where speed, endurance and payload capacity are required. The helicopter UAV utilizes one large rotary wing for lift and a tail rotor for stabilization. It basically mirrors its manned siblings in every way. It is also very difficult to fly and requires great skill. Lighter than air type vehicles rely on buoyant force to provide vertical lift. Similar to blimps or airships, they are typically filled with helium gas and rely on rotors for directional control. Multicopter UAVs generate vertical lift with propellers the same way a helicopter does but utilize multiple rotors to provide increased lift and maneuverability. They are typically smaller and are popular among researchers, military, and law enforcement agencies. Common configurations include tri-, quad-, hexa- and octa- rotor crafts. The advantages and disadvantages of each UAV type are shown in Table 1.
18
Table 1. Advantages and disadvantages for different types of UAVs
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 hexa- rotors 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 hexa- rotors 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.
3.2 Preliminary Design
When designing the quad-copter, there are a number of materials that can be considered. The choice of using different materials is based upon weight, strength, durability, manufacturability, and price. The materials that were ultimately chosen include: carbon fiber, aluminum, PLA and acrylic.
Carbon fiber is possibly the best material available for the quad-copter arms because it is lighter and absorbs vibration better than other materials such as aluminum. The disadvantage to using carbon fiber is the price, since it is more expensive than the common materials.
For the center joint, an aluminum tube with a hole through the side will be used to mount the
19 carbon fiber tubes. The model of the center joint can be found in the figure below.
Figure 12. CAD model of the center joint
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.
Figure 13. CAD model of the motor mounts
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.
20
Figure 14. Simulated von mises stress of carbon fiber tubing and aluminum tube enclosure using FEA
Figure 15. Enlarged image of the FEA results
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.
21
Figure 16. Preliminary CAD model
3.3 Final Design
In the final design, improvements were made to the structurally weak areas. Additionally, a few changes were made to improve modularity and ease of disassembly. The first redesign was of the motor mounts. The initial design failed due to the torsional force from the motor. Additionally, because of the orientation of the mount, the layers were printed in a manner that resulted in a weaker resistance to torsional force. Furthermore more, during testing, the motor mount sheared off, as can be seen in figure 17.
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.
22
Figure 18. Motor mount redesign
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.
Figure 19. Cross Support
23
Figure 20. Final CAD model
24
Chapter 4: Microcontrollers and Electronic System Interface 4.1 Components 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
25 configure the flight control.
Figure 22. Exploded view of APM 2.6 with enclosure (Ardupilot) 4.1.2 Futaba 6EX Transmitter/Receiver Combination To send and receive signals to the Arducopter, the Futaba 6EX transmitter and the R617FS receiver will be used. The 6EX is a 6-channel 2.4 GHz system that utilizes Futabas FASST (Futaba Advanced Spread Spectrum Technology). The FASST system allows better frequency control and increased reliability due to its interference-free performance (6EX: 6-Channel 2.4GHz System)
Figure 23: Futaba 6EX Transmitter (Futaba)
26
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).
Figure 24: Futaba R617FS Receiver (Futaba) 4.1.3 Turnigy SK3 3536 DC Brushless Motor The motor that was used is the Turnigy Aerodrive SK3 3536 Brushless Motor. This motor is designed for multi-rotor applications, so it is an ideal motor to use. It is rated at 1200 kv, which is RPM/V. This rating is used to calculate the max RPM that can be achieved. Its max current is 38A, which is important in determining the correct electronic speed control it should be paired with.
Figure 25: Aerodrive SK3 3536 Brushless Motor (Turnigy) 4.1.4 Turnigy Multistar 30 Amp ESC The electronic speed controller, or ESC, that will be used is the Turnigy Multistar ESC 30A. As indicated in its name, it is rated at 30A, which is compatible with the selected motor.
27
Figure 26: Multistar 30 Amp ESC (Turnigy)
4.1.5 Turnigy 5000mAH 4S 20C Lipo Pack 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.
Figure 27: 5000mAH 4S 20C Lipo Pack (Turnigy)
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.
28
Figure 28: Quadcopter Layout (code.google)
4.3 Data Acquisition In order to characterize the quadcopter system and choose drive components which would provide the craft with the required aerial agility, it was necessary to acquire data about the lift generated by the motor/propeller combination. Lift versus RPM curves can be generated from theoretical relationships, however accurate analysis often requires expensive computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software, or extensive knowledge of aerodynamics. Neither were viable options, so a simple test apparatus was designed which allowed for quick and easy testing of different propeller and motor combinations using a load cell, an optoreflective sensor for RPM counting, and a data acquisition system. The material list for this set up can be seen below.
Required Materials: 1x QRD1114 IR Reflective Sensor 1x 10K ohm resistor 1x 330 ohm resistor 1x 74HC14 Inverting Schmitt Trigger or equivalent 5 volt source, <30 mA required Load cell (Rapala 15lb digital scale) Brushless motor (Park 450 Brushless Outrunner Motor, 890Kv) 12 volt source capable of supplying 30 amps Brushless Electronic speed controller (ESC) capable of supplying 30 amps Radio receiver and transmitter combo (Futaba T6EX Transmitter and R617FS Receiver) Propellers for testing National Instruments DAQ signal accessory (PN 77382-01) National Instruments PCI-6024E multifunction DAQ board Miscellaneous: Bench clamp, ring stand, Phillips screw driver, crescent wrench, tape
29 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.
Figure 29: Block diagram of propeller speed and lift experiment.
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.
30
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.
31 Chapter 5: Fabrication and Assembly
Goals that were set forth for the design and fabrication of our craft were manufacturability and repeatability. In order to achieve this, effort was made to select off-the- shelf components and design parts that did not require a substantial amount of hands on machining. This objective in addition to the tools available were taken into consideration when selecting the best methods of fabrication for the craft. Due to the fact our team had access to a Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) 3D printer, many of the crafts structural components were chosen to be printed. Incorporation of 3D printing in our fabrication process not only supported our objectives of design manufacturability and repeatability, but allowed our team to iterate through stages of design very quickly. Machine tools utilized in the fabrication of this craft included a drill press, band saw and Dremel rotary tool. 5.1 Motor Booms The use of carbon fiber in fabricating the crafts motor booms allowed it to be extremely lightweight while maintaining superior structural rigidity. Carbon fiber tubing with an outer diameter of 0.60 was purchased in a 2 meter long round stock and needed to be cut down to size for our applications. A Dremel multi-tool with a rotary cutting attachment was used to cut the tubing. Due to the inherent strength and properties of carbon fiber tubing, care was taken in order to cut the tubing without damaging the fibers that could compromise its strength. An aluminum tube was fitted around the carbon fiber during cutting to minimize the amount of fibers fraying.
Figure 31: Cutting of carbon fiber motor booms
32 5.2 3D Printed Parts As 3D printing gains popularity in the home and classroom for personal use, individuals now have the ability to take components from inception to prototype in a fraction of the time compared to traditional machining methods. 3D printing allows for parts with complex geometries to be modeled in CAD software and printed in thermoplastics like ABS or PLA yielding a fully functional part. Due to the irregularity of mounting patterns of many components, parts could be designed and printed requiring little to no post machining.
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.
Figure 33. 3D printing of motor mounts
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
33 space. Parts were printed with a 0.2mm layer height and infill levels ranging from 70-90%. 5.3 Boom Joint The aluminum boom joint is used to connect the carbon fiber motor booms of the UAV. It is important to make sure that the four carbon fiber arms fit securely into the aluminum sheath. The forces from the motors are applied to the ends of the carbon fiber arm. As a result, there is reaction moment at the aluminum boom joint connection. The fabrication goal with the aluminum sheath boom joint was to minimize clearance and ensure proper connection with the carbon fiber arms. The aluminum tube was cut using a Dremel rotary tool into a 5.71 inch length. In order to make the carbon fiber tubes fit with the aluminum sheath, the center connection hole needed to be 0.75 inches in diameter. The connection hole was drilled using a vertical drill press. One particular problem encountered while drilling the center hole was securing the aluminum tube during drilling. Numerous C-clamps and vices were used to secure the aluminum tube. When drilling the center hole, the aluminum sheath experiences a high magnitude of vibration. If the RPM was too high, the finish of the center hole was rough and un-centered. Thus, the RPM of the drill press was decreased in order to reduce the vibration when drilling. Furthermore, multiple pilot holes were made with drill bits in increasing sizes to ensure a smooth and centered finish. The fabrication of the aluminum boom joint met specification as evidenced by minimal clearance observed when attaching the carbon fiber arms.
Figure 34. Aluminum boom joint center hole drilling using a mill
5.4 Electronics Mount The electronics center mount is a central series of plates used to secure many electronic components of the UAV. The electronic payload of the center mount include components such as battery, receiver, and microcontroller. The electronic center mount was dimensioned into various
34 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.
Figure 35. Final Electronics Center Mount 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.
35
Figure 36. Wiring diagram of quadcopter electronics
Figure 37. Wiring harness fabricated to deliver power to individual ESCs
Figure 38. Vibration dampening pad
36
Figure 39. Completed Assembly
37 Chapter 6: Testing Results
6.1 Lift Propulsion Test:
Blade Selection will determine the agility and payload capacity of the Quadcopter. The lift propulsion test apparatus in Figure 40 was used in finding the optimum blades for this size quadcopter.
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.
38
Figure 41: Lift propulsion test results of various propellers
6.2 2-DOF Test:
In the beginning stages of developing a quadcopter control system, a simplified 2 degree of freedom test apparatus was built to test the pitch and yaw as seen on Figure 42. The test apparatus consisted of a wooden see-saw type mechanism with motors at the ends of the beam. The Ardupilot control system, sitting in the center of the beam, allows the testing of 2 DOF control and stability. Pitch control was tested by using the RC transmitter, which was able to move the beam up and down smoothly. The on-board IMU sensors from the microcontroller detected the orientation of the pitch from any input from the RC transmitter or pushing the see- saw up or down. The control system proved to have a quick response time in stabilization when any disturbance was introduced.
39 Figure 42: 2 DOF test apparatus (side view)
Figure 43: 2 DOF test apparatus (top view)
6.3 3-DOF Test:
In the final development of the control system, the fully built quadcopter was used to test stability of pitch, roll, and yaw. The quadcopter was tied down to several weights to set limitations on altitude. This was done for safety reasons as to protect the team and quadcopter when flying for the first time. The quadcopter was set to a low hover and pitch, roll, and yaw were input into the system. The pitch and roll control were stable midair, but the yaw control would become unstable in flight causing the quadcopter to lose altitude.
Figure 44: 3 DOF test apparatus
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).
40
Figure 45: Roll measurements, red line is user input, green is measured input
41 Chapter 7: Conclusions and Future Work
In conclusion, the Lighter than Air team was able to design and build a fully functional quadcopter. Additionally, the control system and the electronics were successfully integrated into the quadcopter. Unfortunately, due to a defective electronic component, the team was unable to compete in the ASME competition. For future improvements, the team would like to create a mount for a GoPro camera, since aerial photography is has gained popularity. Additionally, a design for a fairing to protect the electronics would like to be made. In addition to having protection for the electronics, the team would like to add an external propeller guard to protect the propellers from damage from any crashes. Lastly, further tuning of the PID control system to ensure optimal stability under all conditions.
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>.
43
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
44
Appendix
Appendix A: Motor Calculations
Turnigy Aerodrive SK3 3536 Brushless Motor
Kv: 1200 rpm/v Turns: 24T Resistance: 0.147Rm Idle Current: 0.6A Can size: 45mm Can Length: 10mm Shaft: 3mm (Includes Prop saver mount for GWS style props) Suggested ESC Amps: 20A Rated Watts: 130W Weight: 59g Cell count: 3~4S Lipol
45
Appendix B: ASME Competition Specifications
Vehicle Requirements 1. The Vehicle must be powered by batteries. 2. The device must be controlled through a wireless transmitter/receiver radio link. The
46 following requirements pertain specifically to the device controller. A radio transmitter may have its own batteries rechargeable or non-rechargeable. the transmitter/receiver link may be commercially available model controller. During the trial, the device must be completely controlled via the radio link no other contact, interaction or influence is permitted. One team member must control the device through the trial. All radio controllers will be impounded and shut off during the competition, except during the teams run. 3. All Devices must have a readily accessible and clearly labeled muster shut-off switch.
Tasks to be accomplished. 1. Navigate through the gates in the fastest time. 2. Teams will be scored on the maximum cargo carried. 3. Bonus: Release a simulated 1-gm water bladder. (Note: Use a bag of sand.) 4. Bonus: Does the canister hit the intended fire? Target is 1-m in diameter. 5. Hitting or touching the gates will incur a penalty. 6. Provide photographic visual evidence of the construction of your vehicle. 7. Signed Ethical Statement that you constructed the vehicle. 8. One page Design Calculations.
Run Score = Max(300 s Trial Time, 0) + (Number of gates successfully negotiated)x200 + (Number of grams carried) x50 +(release of bladder)x20 +(bladder hits target)x100 +(Lighter than air)x100 -(number of gates hit)x20 -(unacceptable design calculations)x100
47 Appendix C: Mechanical Drawing
Figure 46: Mechanical Drawing of Quadcopter. Units in mm.
48
Appendix D: Bill of Materials
Table 2. Bill of Materials Line Component Price Quantity Tax/Shipping Total Category Purchased By: Source 1 NX 4005 650kv Brushless Motor 30.81 1 Propulsion Eric HobbyKing 2 SlowFly 1047 Propeller 1.20 1 Propulsion Eric HobbyKing 3 Carbon Fiber Tube, 0.600in OD 54.00 1 4.86 58.86 Frame Michael ACP Composites 4 APM 2.6 Ardupilot Control Module 159.99 1 Electronics Damion 3DRobotics 5 3DR uBlox GPS Module 79.99 1 Electronics Damion 3DRobotics 6 Turnigy SK3 3536 1400kv Brushless Motor 28.48 1 Propulsion Eric HobbyKing 7 8045 Propeller 3.51 1 Propulsion Eric HobbyKing 8 Turnigy Multistar 30 Amp ESC 13.13 4 7.24 59.76 Propulsion Eric HobbyKing 9 0.118in Acrylic Sheet, 24" x 24", Opaque White 28.60 1 2.57 31.17 Frame Jon TAP Plastics 10 SPM1511 Connectors 3.00 6 0.27 18.27 Electronics Eric AeroMicro 11 Aluminum Tube, 0.750" OD, 0.609in ID 5.30 3 6.43 22.33 Frame Harminder McMaster 12 M3 Hardware (misc.) 15.00 1 0.00 15.00 Frame Harminder McMaster 13 Black Spray Paint 8.00 1 0.72 8.72 Frame Michael Southern Lumber 14 Plastic Expoy 5.99 1 0.54 6.53 Frame Michael Southern Lumber 15 Turnigy SK3 3536 1400kv Brushless Motor 28.48 3 Propulsion Harminder HobbyKing 16 Turnigy 5000mAh 4S LiPo Battery 35.04 1 Electronics Harminder HobbyKing 17 Turnigy 5000mAh 4S LiPo Battery 35.04 1 Electronics Rey HobbyKing 18 Slow Fly Propeller 9047 Set 3.16 1 Propulsion Rey HobbyKing 19 8045 Propeller Set 3.99 3 1.05 13.02 Propulsion Damion AeroMicro 20 Turnigy Multistar 30 Amp ESC 13.13 2 Propulsion Damion Hobbyking 21 8045 Propeller Set 3.51 3 Propulsion Damion HobbyKing 22 Turnigy Multistar Programming Card 4.24 1 3.99 8.23 Electronics Damion HobbyKing 23 1kg PLA Filament 42.50 1 3.83 46.33 Printing Supplies Eric Amazon.com 24 Misc. Hardware 15.13 1 1.36 16.49 Frame Damion Amazon.com 25 EC3 Connectors (10 pk male & female) 30.90 1 0.00 30.90 Electronics Damion Amazon.com 26 Kyosho Z8006 Zeal Vibration Absorption Sheet 14.94 1 1.34 16.28 Frame Damion Amazon.com 27 Loctite Plastic Epoxy 5.99 1 0.54 6.53 Frame Damion OSH 6.09 6.09 6.09 5.99 39.11 6.09 39.19 42.88 28.94 268.92 126.57 44.29 ASME ROFLCOPTER BILL OF MATERIALS (BOM) GRAND TOTAL 919.38