You are on page 1of 49

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.


Figure 2: MQ-9 Reaper (General Atomics Aeronautical Systems)

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).


9

Figure 3: Draganflyer X4 (Draganfly Innovations Inc.)

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.


17
Chapter 3: Prototype Design
3.1 Existing Designs

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

Figure 21: APM 2.6 Circuit Board (Ardupilot, 2013)

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.


42

References

Aeryon Labs. "Aeryon Scout." Aeryon Labs Inc, 2013. n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2013.
<http://aeryon.com/products/avs/aeryon-scout.html>

APM 2.6 Circuit Board. Illustration. APM 2.5 and 2.5 Overview. Ardupilot.com. Web 02 Dec.
2013.

Austin, Reg. Unmanned aircraft systems: UAVS design, development and deployment. Vol. 54.
Wiley. 2011.

Basta, Peter O. Quad Copter Flight. MA thesis. California State University, Northridge, 2012.

Casbeer, D., Beard, R., & McLain, T. (2005). Forest fire monitoring with multiple small uavs.
Portland, Oregon: American Control Conference.

"Draganflyer X4 Tech Specs." Draganflycom UAV News RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2013.
<http://www.draganfly.com/uav-helicopter/draganflyer-x4/specifications/>

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