The blades need to be at a higher pitch at the root than at the tip because at the tip the move much faster. It also might help to build a 3 blade rotor because it is more stable than a 2 blade rotor.
I didn’t watch every last second of the video but on my RC helicopters only fixed pitch blades are like what you described. On my collective pitch helis there is no blade pitch. They are flat blades that tilt with a servo so I wonder if he could do something like that with this project.
Howdy, James! Hydrofoil guy Dave here. This looks like another awesome, yet challenging project. My intuition says that even though it is a tip jet helicopter, it is still subject to the same gyroscopic effects as a traditional helicopter-the only advantage being that you have eliminated the torque effect of the rotors. Other than that, it is still, in every other way, a helicopter. To that end, you will still need some form of dynamic control. As Tom Stanton's bicopter video shows, a weight hanging down low simply isn't enough. I think there are two ways to go about this; but in my mind, one is clearly a better option than the other: Option A. (The I-want-to-make-this-as-hard-for-myself-as-possible method): Code a custom flight controller to mount to the hub and spin with the rotor. Mount a set of servo-controlled tabs to the outer portion of the trailing edge of the rotor. The flight controller will use these to fly the rotors as they spin, thus giving you some modicum of cyclic control. But. There would be no directional indication, and the flight controller would have to know exactly which direction is pointing away from you at all times. Believe me, you don't want to go down that road. Instead... Option B. (The this-might-actually-work method, and you don't have to change a thing on your hub and rotors): Duplicate the control method of the Hiller Hornet. I will work backwards from there. Hopefully it will make sense. Background: Weight shift trikes: The pilot controls the aircraft, not by changing the pitch and roll of the wing, per se, but rather by shifting the weight of himself and the trike relative to the wing. If the pilot shifts his weight to the left, it will bank the wing to the left. If he pulls his weight forward,, the wing will pitch down. In the same way, in the the Hiller Hornet, when the pilot would pull his weight forward, the rotor would tilt forward. If the pilot pushed his weight to the left, the rotor would tilt to the left. I'll get to yaw control later, but here's how I would manage pitch and roll: Replace your original landing gear with a simple gondola. All it needs is a three servos, a receiver, and tiny battery to power the receiver and servos-nothing more. Something like a 2s350 battery. Two servos will be used for pitch and roll, respectively, and the third will drive a rudder for yaw control. On top of this gondola, you will need a pivot akin to a universal joint or gimbal. In fact, if I was doing this, I would use a Lego universal joint as my pivot. The bottom of this pivot would be securely mounted to the gondola, and the top would be connected to the axle that the hub mounts on. Just above the pivot, I would put two arms at 90° to each other. To put it in terms of the SolidWorks coordinate system, you would have the rotor's axle on the Y-axis, and one arm each on the X and Z axis. To put it another way, looking from the top, I would have one arm pointing forward (longitudinally), and the other arm pointing left (or right. Just oriented laterally.). One servo connects to each arm with a ball joint. The servo on the Z-axis arm will control pitch-the servo on the X-axis arm will control roll. The end result should be that as you command down elevator on your transmitter, the axle will angle forwards. If you command left aileron, the axle should angle left, and vice versa. (Ideally, you would want to adjust the pivot in each axis such that it is purely pitch or roll without veering to one side as it moves in that axis. You may have to mix in a small amount of the other servo to extend a small amount to keep the axle angling in the proper plane without veering to one side.) Finally, YAW: This is as simple as using a rudder, except instead of rotating about a vertical axis, like an airplane's rudder, it needs to twist on a longitudinal axis. The rotor wash will blow over this, and will be directed to the left or right by the rudder, thus affecting yaw control. The beauty of this method is you can use your existing rotor and hub without modifications. The only difficulty is you will need two receivers bound to the same transmitter: One receiver is in the gondola, controlling roll pitch and yaw, and the other receiver is on the hub, controlling the throttle of the EDF's as you have it now. It is as easy as that! I am not going to claim these are the only two ways it can be done, but I think option B will be the easiest to achieve. Good luck with getting the project in the air! -Dave
these are exactly my thoughts as well regarding gyro and torque effect. I would even say that the torque effect on the model could be worse since there's literally no weight hanging from the rotors.
Hey Dave, First off, sorry it's taken a while to get back to you. Thanks for your helpful comment! I absolutely like the sound of option B and was concidering something along these lines previously. Although option A seems like a theoretically good way of controlling the rotor, I think you hit the nail on the head when you say it is "as hard as possible" haha. Although B sounds like a good idea, I'm currently aiming to make it simpler still - by creating a Rotordyne type aircraft. This is a goal I wasn't to explicit in convaying to the viewer in this particular video as, honestly, I don't know if the project will get that far! In the next episode I'm concidering building a rough fuselage under the rotors. Later I would add two differential motors for forward flight along with tail controls. Although this makes the aircraft more of a vtol autogyro, I think it's probably the easiest way to create a fully fledged tip jet aircraft from scratch. Anyway, we'll see if I get that far. ;) Thanks, James.
Hey James, I like the idea of building a Rotodyne! I had some suspicions about the Rotodyne's control system, however, so I did some research during my lunch break. What I found is quite interesting. The blades of the Rotodyne did not have a fixed pitch. Instead, they had the same swash plate style control that a traditional helicopter has. In a hover, the dynamics of controlling the Rotodyne are no different from a traditional helicopter, except that a tip jet helicopter produces nearly zero torque. A spinning rotor of any form is inherently unstable. In other words, it will not return itself to a level attitude in a hover without some form of dynamic control input. If you want to mimic the controls of the Rotodyne, you will need to create some way of dynamically varying the pitch of the rotors, essentially, what I described in section A before. The alternative would be to build some swash plate system, and rebuild your rotor with variable pitch blades. Trust me, it would be even more complicated and expensive than what I had described in section A. Having taken some time to study the dynamics of tip jet and Rotodyne-style aircraft, I can confidently say simply adding two propulsion motors to a fuselage hanging below the rotor will not give you any form of control in a hover. Instead, my research has confirmed my previous recommendation that the easiest way to achieve a stable, controllable hover is the weight shift method I mentioned above in section B. It is the only way I have found that will achieve a hover with fixed-pitch blades. For your project, the gondola hanging below the rotor would simply look like a Rotodyne fuselage.
@@Project-Air I did a bit more digging, and found this video of a RC weight shift helicopter. It's not a tip-jet rotor, but it uses the same control system I have described: ua-cam.com/video/Q2wNT3_qJ90/v-deo.html
Hello, I think you should put some counterweights at 90º from the wings, something spinning with only two long things is highly unstable, watch the veritasium video on that subject :The Bizarre Behavior of Rotating Bodies, Explained.
As a physicist thought I'd pick you up on centripetal and centrifugal; centripetal is the force on the rotational object, the one where your concern is that it would fail. Centrifugal is the feeling of centripetal, like what you feel in a cornering car as you're pushed up against the window [Tom Stanton in your van, sic] Nice work, great videos.
G'day, Welcome to Reality Awareness Therapy. The Fairey Rotodyne was an overweight, underpowered, horribly inefficient way to fly short distances while carrying tiny little loads..., meanwhile converting huge amounts of Fossil Fuel into STUPENDOUS amounts of NOISE. Nobody ever ordered any of them, there were no Customers, anywhere on Earth ; it was FUNCTIONALLY USELESS. It was essentially a Twin Turboprop powered Gyrogoflopter, with Tip-Jets to pre-spin the Rotor for Vertical Take-offs & Landings. Ie, all the weight & complexity of a propper Chopper, but none of the advantages, yielding a terrible Aerodyne which was not worth building, or flying, or paying to store...; not even for ardent adoring Posterity-ans like thyself. So, yeah, it was chopped up, for Scrap.... Good riddance to bad Rubbish. The last really GOOD Aerodyne to ever emerge from the Fairey Company was the Swordfish..., in the 1930s ; everything they ever did after that was a costly disappointing failure. (eg, Albacore, Barracuda, Gannet, etcetera ad infinitum, ad nauseum). As well as being as ugly (actually..., "F'Ugly !" is the term) as the proverbial, "Hatful of Arseholes" ! Just(ifiably ?) sayin', Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !
@@arthurturner3080 G'day, Thankee f'r thy concern... But I'm fine..., quite calm ; but I have little patience with those who think that merging two distinct Genres of Design into one hybrid then one must necessarily tap into the Theory of Hybrid Vigour. To unpack that, there, then...; please do feel free to backtrack me to my Videos, or title-search YT for, "Theory Of Arselbows, Elbarsoles ; & Even Elbarseyeballs...!" Once one "gets" the concept, it's both a hilarious joke, and a permanently lurking Trap For Beginners, & the Hubristic... Mind you, if you try viewing, "The 8-Hp, 1975, Red Baron Skycraft Scout ; World's 1st Legal Minimum Aircraft !" to see what made my First Solo with , and to see why - if I say that a machine is "Not worth trying to levitate while sitting within it...(!)" then it's really seriously bad... (because the Wright Brothers had a better Aeroplane in 1903 than I had in 1978) - and the Rotordyne strikes me as being too bad to have ever been worth building. Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !
@@WarblesOnALot nonetheless it still reminds me of the philosophy that 'the road to success is planned with the absurdity of optimism, paved with failure, and powered by coolness factor' .. and something to do between getting laid..
@@Dr_Wrong G'day, Someone once put it that. "The Difference between Optimism, and Pessimism...; Is that the Pessimist is Generally better Informed....(!)". Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !
Interesting project. But that’s not a monocopter. A monocopter has a single rotor, similar to a sycamore seed. LM’s SAMARAI is a good example of one: www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?1491947-Lockheed-Martin-s-Samurai-monocopter
I think you need to make lighter wings with cleaner profile. You also need to have some twist in the wing. The air speed is high at the tip and near zero at the center. To have an optimal angle of attack on the entire wing, you need to have some twist in the wing.
God has said in the Quran: { O mankind, worship your Lord, who created you and those before you, that you may become righteous - ( 2:21 ) [He] who made for you the earth a bed [spread out] and the sky a ceiling and sent down from the sky, rain and brought forth thereby fruits as provision for you. So do not attribute to Allah equals while you know [that there is nothing similar to Him]. ( 2:22 ) And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Servant [Muhammad], then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah, if you should be truthful. ( 2:23 ) But if you do not - and you will never be able to - then fear the Fire, whose fuel is men and stones, prepared for the disbelievers.( 2:24 ) And give good tidings to those who believe and do righteous deeds that they will have gardens [in Paradise] beneath which rivers flow. Whenever they are provided with a provision of fruit therefrom, they will say, "This is what we were provided with before." And it is given to them in likeness. And they will have therein purified spouses, and they will abide therein eternally. ( 2:25 ) Quran
@@ahmdabdallah5811 im muslim myself but its unnecessary for you to just randomly comment this when it has no relevance to the comment or video right now youre just setting a bad example for our community
This was done waaaay back in the 60's with an .020 cox nitro motor as a single blade monorotor . It was an excellent fun free flight . Was very efficient and would easily fly off if over fueled . Look up some vintage free flight videos and you may find it in them.
Well ... that is fun. I remember in the 70's that every popular electronics and popular mechanics would be offering drawings for sale in the back, for such a thing. I wonder if those little ducted fans would actually get up to speed enough. You might want to use quadcopter brushless motors as an experiment. Propellers are way way more efficient than a ducted fan. A slipring would be great too to allow putting the batteries on the frame.
man you deserve so many more likes views and subs simply with the quality and content of your videos! you have inspired me on many occasions. love your work and keep it up!
9:07 i love how you are hiding and guys who don't know whats going on just waiting till the potential explosion :D And dude, you are awesome! Keep making videos!
If there is a vertical hole through the main hub, put it over a dowel or tube to test lift while it will be held in place. "Night Flyer" built a platform for helicopter beginners years ago and it worked really well.
I was just about to make this very same suggestion! good for testing lift force without worrying about it wobbling around. but only if you can drill a large enough hole at dead center.
Jet tip rotor helis were planned to be used by NASA to recover returning space capsules. The helicopters envisioned had something like 4 to 6 rotor blades with the jet turning engines on each tip. This was a 1980s idea when they were planing on to back to capsules because of the shuttle limitations.
Hello! If you shape the rotor blades more like a regular propeller with a wide base and pointed tip. The speed is slower towards the center of the rotor blade so you can also adjust the pitch angle accordingly. You should gain greater lifting power and less weight. ... FliteTest fades ... You have much more !! Thanks!
Yeah I was just about to comment this. Optimum AoA and airfoil shape will shift with distance from the hub. Once you know your target rpm a better blade profile could help a lot. aircraft-design-software.experimentals.de/propeller/propeller-design-analysis.html
This is the only video in the channel where something new where actually being built. This is the exact territory where incremental results, small steps toward success would be interesting to see. Sadly it never took off.
I think you're missing something that's used in almost all modern helicopters. If I remember correctly, the problem of a stable hover was solved in the early history of helicopters, via the "flapping" rotor. What that does is allow each airfoil on the rotor to move several degrees fore and aft, in relation to the other blades. So, if you hinge each of the foils, where it attaches to the hub, maybe it'll be more stable. It's completely self-regulated by centrifugal force. And, to be clear, those hinges would be parallel to the axis of rotation, not allowing the rotors to sag, but rather, allowing them to get a little ahead or behind the mean rotation. Hope that helps.
After a little research... The part I'm referring to is actually called the "offset lead/lag hinge." If you aren't employing variable pitch, I think the lead-lag hinge may be more important.
I definitely considered this! ☺️ Josh Bixler created something on Flite Test a while ago and put the motors about half way along the wings which I remember thinking was an excellent idea. I wanted to design mine more like the originals that inspired the project, however. 👍
Putting the motors at 3/4 distance out will reduce the torque on the whole system (force x distance = torque). What James could think of is that the inner part of the rotating wing moves at a slower speed so he could remove the first inner 1/3rd of the wing completely to reduce weight? Use the saved weight to make a greater wing chord at the tips for extra lift Not sure how this will pan out but worth a try.
@@Project-Air I believe there is one design of a small craft of this type from the 1960's that had the engines on two short non-lifting supports that were mounted cross-wise on the rotor to the pair of lifting blades. (Engines acting as part of the fly-bar or something like that?) Much simpler, but same principle as having the motors mounted inboard on the rotor. Don't recall the name of it, but remember seeing pictures somewhere.
@@Project-Air Glad to see a young guy for a change who isn't into piercings-tatoo's and blue hair....( just joking). The "originals" you refer to all used jet power (pulse-ram) on the rotor tips, not propellers or ducted fans. Research the German WWII era Nagler-Rolz prop-copter which you probably know. Use a steel tube with a base plate screwed to the bench and mount a plastic tube on the helicopter that fits into the steel tube loosely. This way you dont have to worry about drifting of the helicopter and you can put a simple measuring device to detect the lifting force at a certain rotor RPM. Obviously incorporate some "security" so that the helicopter cant lift itself out of the tube. There are foam RC wings available in the size you're using which will have much greater efficiency than the homemade wings/rotors. Hat's off to you young man !! Very interesting project !!!
Try putting the battery packs (not the electronics) suspended underneath the rotor. You can get the power to the electronics on the hub using a pair of simple slip rings. After reading some of the other posts it might make sense to try: 1: Use a varying lift / angle-of-attack rotor. Higher at the hub, lower near the tips. 2: Bring the EDF's into the 50% or 66% point on the rotor _OR_ 3: Mount the EDF's on short arms at 90 degrees to the main rotor 4: No idea how adding some dihedral to the rotors would affect it. It would definitely complicate the rotor design! It would make sense if the dihedral was added where the motor pods are mounted.
Use a bungee strap to anchor the craft to the centre of the workshop table and minimize damage. Lay tarp over the whole table and raised table edges to minimize damage (light weights to keep it taught (could be turned into a launch mechanism 😉)) .
Try giving the main rotors need both some dihedral and either some flex on the attachment to hub or a semirigid, teeter-head system to account for the unequal lift. Some empennage for directional control and stability would help as well
I was thinking (always a dangerous thing) that an engine at 30% from center molded onto the wing would be an improvement. The tip forward speed would be more stable and engine would fight intake air less,.
This was intense. I had to put my phone across the room and hide behind a door just to watch it. Can't imagine what being in the room with it would be like. Great job!
Play around with the depron a bit. Bend it in every possible direction. It has a 'grain' and bends way more easily in one direction than others. Even flipping it over makes a big difference. Find the right way to bend it and you can form it by hand over a round dowel. Some sellotape on the leading edge pre bend can stop it breaking too. You can make a full 180 degree bend in this way. Super smooth, and sellotape can be removed if desired to save mass.
Use a counterclockwise propellers/ Or a gyroscope to help stability The toy you used as a demo has that long shaft as weight to keep it stables so keep That in mind also. Like the video keep experimenting
2 carbon tubes, more ribs, and monocoat for the skin. I've also noticed that these types of helicopters sometimes have a flap on the trailing edge possibly for AOA control.
NASA had plans to use a large tip jet powered helicopter used to capture falling space capsules as they parachuted to earth an idea that NASA revisited in recent years but thankfully gave up on as so many variables need to line up perfectly and anyone whose ever served in the military can tell you that you just can’t rely on perfection happening 100 percent of the time.
I think it needs very secure almost like a weighted base to prevent oscillations, maybe move the batteries below for a lower center of gravity. Shorter wings might also be better?
I thought about clamping it down until getting up to speed but that might get a bit complex. The new landing/takeoff gear setup should help keep it fixed in one spot though without it wandering off!
Nice work on this! I’d say you’ll need either some rotor dihedral or cyclic control to keep that thing from careening out of control. Love what you’ve done on it so far!
You are ready for a flight controller and some cyclic control. I wonder if fast servo's will be fast enough for direct control or will a mechanical swashplate or Hiller bar be required. Remember gyroscopic forces act 90 degrees of rotor rotation after the input. I love the fluid mechanics citations and math. People should know what you are doing and how you arrived at the design choices you made. Post more! Subscribed.
I would use stretched canvas and with more framing paying closer attention to the wing contour. The lift is by the outer half of the rotors. Just a thought but love the channel. 👍👏
I suggest you use tubes that are more "weighted" that will stabilize the craft enough--to enable "lift" The wobbling effect I feel is due to the"unequal balance" of the props v.s. the rods. The rods are just not able to support such powerful props. You need "weighted material " Heavier iron that will enable the proper stability in making a successful "takeoff " Or think of using plastic tubing that arebigger...like the helicopters that lands on water. They have such tubes (You can imorovise) in home depot type store😁BRILLIANT !! Best wishes! I can't wait to see it fly!
for balance you can attach under the main rotor some ball ...but hat means you must increse the power to the wing :) to be able to takeoff with the added weight :)
Make a pitch curve and throttle curve separately. That way you can control the speed of the rotor and the pitch of the blades, independently on certain settings with your pitch curve. Idk, something to check out.
That was quite interesting! I wish my spare electronics box was as full as yours :). I think balsa rotors might be too easily damaged if something goes wrong while testing it, and they would take a lot more repair work if they did get damaged. Looking forward the next vid!
Yes I agree.- that's one reason I definitely didn't want to go down the balsa route initially 😂 Maybe a far improved mk 2 would benefit from balsa blades when there's less chance of binning it into the ground.
Great video! I can't wait to see where this goes! Love your channel! Tip for forming the rotors: peal the paper off of the inner surface of the foam, and pre-bend the leading edge over a closet rod or broom handle.
You need the equivalent of dihedral. They made a counter rotation weight shift with the guy standing above the angled blades. If you use the fans on shorter arms at right angle to the blades you decrease the tip mass. Double Macrutchen.
Lose the skin on the underside of the wing, it will generate way more lift, with the downside of creating more drag, but for your use that will not matter. Keep up the good work.
My first thought was some form of gyroscope to dampen the landing gear wobble. Also, maybe check out the Focke Wulfe Triebflugel - probably worth a look. Looks great - can’t wait to see where this is going!
You need a controllable directional counter-torque mechanism, and cyclic and collective pitch modulation, along with symmetrical main rotor blades, and a main rotor system tachometer.
Not knowing how this really works I'm wondering, what would be the ideal weight ratio between the wings and the hub? Is it important that the hub is heavier to keep the wings rotating around it and stop the helicopter going off in a random direction? On a real helicopter I would expect the weight and aerodynamics of what the rotors are carrying (ie. the fuselage and tail) to have a significant influence on its stability. Are you able to compensate for the missing fuselage or does it in fact not matter?
Likely no stability unless the sling load is heavier than the rotor. Balance is essential of course, but you need that mass to establish the center of rotation.
As I think, on the ground the blades are rotating, but in the air the landing gear will rotate also. You need a small tail rotor. Or you can add another counter rotating jettip rotor on the same axis.
I wonder if it would be more stable with three or maybe even four rotor blades. This might sound daft, but I'm making this speculation based on two-bladed vs three bladed fidget spinners! I noticed that there is far more wobble with the two bladed types, tri-spinners rotating much more smoothly.
I think it would be wise to anchor the landing skids down with weights then placed on two bathroom scales. A. It will stay in place if balanced well enough. B. You can measure thrust at various speeds.
Wow, what a great video. Please continue with your very interesting videos. My pensioner brain can still take in what you're trying. looking forward to next video
I bet if you were to use the fans at the center of the hub to blow through the wings and right angle out the tips it would work take off and have better acceleration. I am actually working on a similar project as well. Also you could try adding rockets to the tips if you want it to really go fast! Lol
Use servo to the flaps and add a flight controller for stabilization. Flight controller will continuously adjust the pitch of every wing. AND try to keep the heavy item like battery at the bottom of the frame to lower the centre of gravity.
Suggestion: you need some sort of weight underneath in order to balance any effects caused by rotating the blades. Only try outdoors on large flying-field.
I don't know anything about this stuff, but just in case : seeing how hard it is to actually get it up to speed without it "walking" away, maybe you could try to hold it on the ground and only release it when it's going fast enough ? Like rockets in a sense !
You could use the lighter foam board by marking where you want the curve for the leading edge (i'm presuming this is this difficulty you encountered!?) and make score lines on the inside of the sheet every 5mm or so! Also by adding a thin (1 - 2 mm) strip of carbon fibre along the leading edge would increase the strength but not add that much extra weight 😎
I would angle the thrusters at a 15° angle into the propeller and place them closer for less loss of energy at high speed all that force will rip it apart Adding a stronger spine in a leaf spring fashion using sharp angled thin V or U shaped brackets might do it Good luck 👍
You're doing the things I wanted to do 55 years ago! Kind of reliving my childhood through you. Thanks
The blades need to be at a higher pitch at the root than at the tip because at the tip the move much faster. It also might help to build a 3 blade rotor because it is more stable than a 2 blade rotor.
I didn’t watch every last second of the video but on my RC helicopters only fixed pitch blades are like what you described. On my collective pitch helis there is no blade pitch. They are flat blades that tilt with a servo so I wonder if he could do something like that with this project.
Howdy, James! Hydrofoil guy Dave here. This looks like another awesome, yet challenging project.
My intuition says that even though it is a tip jet helicopter, it is still subject to the same gyroscopic effects as a traditional helicopter-the only advantage being that you have eliminated the torque effect of the rotors. Other than that, it is still, in every other way, a helicopter. To that end, you will still need some form of dynamic control. As Tom Stanton's bicopter video shows, a weight hanging down low simply isn't enough. I think there are two ways to go about this; but in my mind, one is clearly a better option than the other:
Option A. (The I-want-to-make-this-as-hard-for-myself-as-possible method): Code a custom flight controller to mount to the hub and spin with the rotor. Mount a set of servo-controlled tabs to the outer portion of the trailing edge of the rotor. The flight controller will use these to fly the rotors as they spin, thus giving you some modicum of cyclic control. But. There would be no directional indication, and the flight controller would have to know exactly which direction is pointing away from you at all times. Believe me, you don't want to go down that road. Instead...
Option B. (The this-might-actually-work method, and you don't have to change a thing on your hub and rotors): Duplicate the control method of the Hiller Hornet. I will work backwards from there. Hopefully it will make sense.
Background: Weight shift trikes: The pilot controls the aircraft, not by changing the pitch and roll of the wing, per se, but rather by shifting the weight of himself and the trike relative to the wing. If the pilot shifts his weight to the left, it will bank the wing to the left. If he pulls his weight forward,, the wing will pitch down. In the same way, in the the Hiller Hornet, when the pilot would pull his weight forward, the rotor would tilt forward. If the pilot pushed his weight to the left, the rotor would tilt to the left. I'll get to yaw control later, but here's how I would manage pitch and roll: Replace your original landing gear with a simple gondola. All it needs is a three servos, a receiver, and tiny battery to power the receiver and servos-nothing more. Something like a 2s350 battery. Two servos will be used for pitch and roll, respectively, and the third will drive a rudder for yaw control.
On top of this gondola, you will need a pivot akin to a universal joint or gimbal. In fact, if I was doing this, I would use a Lego universal joint as my pivot. The bottom of this pivot would be securely mounted to the gondola, and the top would be connected to the axle that the hub mounts on. Just above the pivot, I would put two arms at 90° to each other. To put it in terms of the SolidWorks coordinate system, you would have the rotor's axle on the Y-axis, and one arm each on the X and Z axis. To put it another way, looking from the top, I would have one arm pointing forward (longitudinally), and the other arm pointing left (or right. Just oriented laterally.). One servo connects to each arm with a ball joint. The servo on the Z-axis arm will control pitch-the servo on the X-axis arm will control roll. The end result should be that as you command down elevator on your transmitter, the axle will angle forwards. If you command left aileron, the axle should angle left, and vice versa. (Ideally, you would want to adjust the pivot in each axis such that it is purely pitch or roll without veering to one side as it moves in that axis. You may have to mix in a small amount of the other servo to extend a small amount to keep the axle angling in the proper plane without veering to one side.)
Finally, YAW: This is as simple as using a rudder, except instead of rotating about a vertical axis, like an airplane's rudder, it needs to twist on a longitudinal axis. The rotor wash will blow over this, and will be directed to the left or right by the rudder, thus affecting yaw control.
The beauty of this method is you can use your existing rotor and hub without modifications. The only difficulty is you will need two receivers bound to the same transmitter: One receiver is in the gondola, controlling roll pitch and yaw, and the other receiver is on the hub, controlling the throttle of the EDF's as you have it now. It is as easy as that!
I am not going to claim these are the only two ways it can be done, but I think option B will be the easiest to achieve. Good luck with getting the project in the air!
-Dave
I have some custom code looking for a test vehicle for Option A. ua-cam.com/video/BbZSmPiyiSs/v-deo.html
these are exactly my thoughts as well regarding gyro and torque effect. I would even say that the torque effect on the model could be worse since there's literally no weight hanging from the rotors.
Hey Dave,
First off, sorry it's taken a while to get back to you. Thanks for your helpful comment!
I absolutely like the sound of option B and was concidering something along these lines previously. Although option A seems like a theoretically good way of controlling the rotor, I think you hit the nail on the head when you say it is "as hard as possible" haha.
Although B sounds like a good idea, I'm currently aiming to make it simpler still - by creating a Rotordyne type aircraft. This is a goal I wasn't to explicit in convaying to the viewer in this particular video as, honestly, I don't know if the project will get that far!
In the next episode I'm concidering building a rough fuselage under the rotors. Later I would add two differential motors for forward flight along with tail controls. Although this makes the aircraft more of a vtol autogyro, I think it's probably the easiest way to create a fully fledged tip jet aircraft from scratch.
Anyway, we'll see if I get that far. ;)
Thanks,
James.
Hey James, I like the idea of building a Rotodyne!
I had some suspicions about the Rotodyne's control system, however, so I did some research during my lunch break. What I found is quite interesting. The blades of the Rotodyne did not have a fixed pitch. Instead, they had the same swash plate style control that a traditional helicopter has. In a hover, the dynamics of controlling the Rotodyne are no different from a traditional helicopter, except that a tip jet helicopter produces nearly zero torque.
A spinning rotor of any form is inherently unstable. In other words, it will not return itself to a level attitude in a hover without some form of dynamic control input. If you want to mimic the controls of the Rotodyne, you will need to create some way of dynamically varying the pitch of the rotors, essentially, what I described in section A before. The alternative would be to build some swash plate system, and rebuild your rotor with variable pitch blades. Trust me, it would be even more complicated and expensive than what I had described in section A.
Having taken some time to study the dynamics of tip jet and Rotodyne-style aircraft, I can confidently say simply adding two propulsion motors to a fuselage hanging below the rotor will not give you any form of control in a hover. Instead, my research has confirmed my previous recommendation that the easiest way to achieve a stable, controllable hover is the weight shift method I mentioned above in section B. It is the only way I have found that will achieve a hover with fixed-pitch blades. For your project, the gondola hanging below the rotor would simply look like a Rotodyne fuselage.
@@Project-Air I did a bit more digging, and found this video of a RC weight shift helicopter. It's not a tip-jet rotor, but it uses the same control system I have described: ua-cam.com/video/Q2wNT3_qJ90/v-deo.html
Hello, I think you should put some counterweights at 90º from the wings, something spinning with only two long things is highly unstable, watch the veritasium video on that subject :The Bizarre Behavior of Rotating Bodies, Explained.
ww.youtube. com /watch?v=1VPfZ_XzisU
Absolutely !
Or make a 3 or 4 blades instead of 2. But the propulsion can stay just on two.
Yup, this behavior has killed many spinning bar battle bots. Very entertaining to watch though :D
This can be used to control pitch, which is the only direction that is relevant here.
nice content
Ah yes C O N T E N T . I love H I S C O N T E N T as well.
Sounds like a bot
Terrible content takes forever b
As a physicist thought I'd pick you up on centripetal and centrifugal; centripetal is the force on the rotational object, the one where your concern is that it would fail. Centrifugal is the feeling of centripetal, like what you feel in a cornering car as you're pushed up against the window [Tom Stanton in your van, sic]
Nice work, great videos.
Calling artist content creator and art C O N T E N T is the worse thing 😤
I still can't believe they chopped the rotodyne up, amazing aircraft!
G'day,
Welcome to Reality Awareness Therapy.
The Fairey Rotodyne was an overweight, underpowered, horribly inefficient way to fly short distances while carrying tiny little loads..., meanwhile converting huge amounts of Fossil Fuel into STUPENDOUS amounts of NOISE.
Nobody ever ordered any of them, there were no Customers, anywhere on Earth ; it was FUNCTIONALLY USELESS.
It was essentially a Twin Turboprop powered Gyrogoflopter, with Tip-Jets to pre-spin the Rotor for Vertical Take-offs & Landings.
Ie, all the weight & complexity of a propper Chopper, but none of the advantages, yielding a terrible Aerodyne which was not worth building, or flying, or paying to store...; not even for ardent adoring Posterity-ans like thyself.
So, yeah, it was chopped up, for Scrap....
Good riddance to bad Rubbish.
The last really GOOD Aerodyne to ever emerge from the Fairey Company was the Swordfish..., in the 1930s ; everything they ever did after that was a costly disappointing failure. (eg, Albacore, Barracuda, Gannet, etcetera ad infinitum, ad nauseum).
As well as being as ugly (actually..., "F'Ugly !" is the term) as the proverbial,
"Hatful of Arseholes" !
Just(ifiably ?) sayin',
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
@@WarblesOnALot alright mate calm down
@@arthurturner3080
G'day,
Thankee f'r thy concern...
But I'm fine..., quite calm ; but I have little patience with those who think that merging two distinct Genres of Design into one hybrid then one must necessarily tap into the Theory of Hybrid Vigour.
To unpack that, there, then...; please do feel free to backtrack me to my Videos, or title-search YT for,
"Theory Of Arselbows, Elbarsoles ; & Even Elbarseyeballs...!"
Once one "gets" the concept, it's both a hilarious joke, and a permanently lurking Trap For Beginners, & the Hubristic...
Mind you, if you try viewing,
"The 8-Hp, 1975, Red Baron Skycraft Scout ; World's 1st Legal Minimum Aircraft !"
to see what made my First Solo with , and to see why - if I say that a machine is
"Not worth trying to levitate while sitting within it...(!)"
then it's really seriously bad... (because the Wright Brothers had a better Aeroplane in 1903 than I had in 1978) - and the Rotordyne strikes me as being too bad to have ever been worth building.
Such is life,
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
@@WarblesOnALot nonetheless it still reminds me of the philosophy that 'the road to success is planned with the absurdity of optimism, paved with failure, and powered by coolness factor'
.. and something to do between getting laid..
@@Dr_Wrong
G'day,
Someone once put it that.
"The
Difference between
Optimism, and
Pessimism...;
Is that the
Pessimist is
Generally better
Informed....(!)".
Such is life,
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
Here are the next episodes in this mini series:
Part 2 ua-cam.com/video/vrygXf-cejI/v-deo.html&t
Part 3 ua-cam.com/video/-G2K2PYWGv8/v-deo.html
ProjectAir
I think you forgot the tail.
You've been watching to much of CaseyNeistat
Well done James, I very much appreciated this video. Been watching a while (learned of you through Tom Stanton) and this video converted me to a sub.
Interesting project. But that’s not a monocopter. A monocopter has a single rotor, similar to a sycamore seed. LM’s SAMARAI is a good example of one: www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?1491947-Lockheed-Martin-s-Samurai-monocopter
I think you need to make lighter wings with cleaner profile.
You also need to have some twist in the wing. The air speed is high at the tip and near zero at the center. To have an optimal angle of attack on the entire wing, you need to have some twist in the wing.
You Should do it outside buddy. Great project, hope you make it fly :) later. Will gyros and control surfaces help?
God has said in the Quran:
{ O mankind, worship your Lord, who created you and those before you, that you may become righteous - ( 2:21 )
[He] who made for you the earth a bed [spread out] and the sky a ceiling and sent down from the sky, rain and brought forth thereby fruits as provision for you. So do not attribute to Allah equals while you know [that there is nothing similar to Him]. ( 2:22 )
And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Servant [Muhammad], then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah, if you should be truthful. ( 2:23 )
But if you do not - and you will never be able to - then fear the Fire, whose fuel is men and stones, prepared for the disbelievers.( 2:24 )
And give good tidings to those who believe and do righteous deeds that they will have gardens [in Paradise] beneath which rivers flow. Whenever they are provided with a provision of fruit therefrom, they will say, "This is what we were provided with before." And it is given to them in likeness. And they will have therein purified spouses, and they will abide therein eternally. ( 2:25 )
Quran
@@ahmdabdallah5811 God has also said in the quaran not to be a pushy asshole bringing up unrelated religious topics.
@@ahmdabdallah5811 im muslim myself but its unnecessary for you to just randomly comment this when it has no relevance to the comment or video
right now youre just setting a bad example for our community
This was done waaaay back in the 60's with an .020 cox nitro motor as a single blade monorotor . It was an excellent fun free flight . Was very efficient and would easily fly off if over fueled . Look up some vintage free flight videos and you may find it in them.
Well ... that is fun. I remember in the 70's that every popular electronics and popular mechanics would be offering drawings for sale in the back, for such a thing. I wonder if those little ducted fans would actually get up to speed enough. You might want to use quadcopter brushless motors as an experiment. Propellers are way way more efficient than a ducted fan. A slipring would be great too to allow putting the batteries on the frame.
This project intrigues me
man you deserve so many more likes views and subs simply with the quality and content of your videos! you have inspired me on many occasions. love your work and keep it up!
9:07 i love how you are hiding and guys who don't know whats going on just waiting till the potential explosion :D
And dude, you are awesome! Keep making videos!
😂 Thanks
Learning about the rotodyne is amazing
If there is a vertical hole through the main hub, put it over a dowel or tube to test lift while it will be held in place. "Night Flyer" built a platform for helicopter beginners years ago and it worked really well.
I was just about to make this very same suggestion! good for testing lift force without worrying about it wobbling around. but only if you can drill a large enough hole at dead center.
Jet tip rotor helis were planned to be used by NASA to recover returning space capsules. The helicopters envisioned had something like 4 to 6 rotor blades with the jet turning engines on each tip. This was a 1980s idea when they were planing on to back to capsules because of the shuttle limitations.
I love your creativity this is great
Well done, lots of learning going on, thanks for sharing!
I love how it kind of sounds like the real thing!
Hello!
If you shape the rotor blades more like a regular propeller with a wide base and pointed tip. The speed is slower towards the center of the rotor blade so you can also adjust the pitch angle accordingly. You should gain greater lifting power and less weight.
... FliteTest fades ... You have much more !!
Thanks!
Yeah I was just about to comment this. Optimum AoA and airfoil shape will shift with distance from the hub. Once you know your target rpm a better blade profile could help a lot.
aircraft-design-software.experimentals.de/propeller/propeller-design-analysis.html
This is the only video in the channel where something new where actually being built. This is the exact territory where incremental results, small steps toward success would be interesting to see. Sadly it never took off.
Don't 4get balance,very important,good job
It's a marvelous idea. The disc that forms from the spin has an imbalance. You need to be able to thread an "axle" thru the the center.
How can someone this good looking be that smart??? Also yes, asymmetrical wings with higher angle of attack in the centre might be a good idea!
I think you're missing something that's used in almost all modern helicopters. If I remember correctly, the problem of a stable hover was solved in the early history of helicopters, via the "flapping" rotor. What that does is allow each airfoil on the rotor to move several degrees fore and aft, in relation to the other blades. So, if you hinge each of the foils, where it attaches to the hub, maybe it'll be more stable. It's completely self-regulated by centrifugal force. And, to be clear, those hinges would be parallel to the axis of rotation, not allowing the rotors to sag, but rather, allowing them to get a little ahead or behind the mean rotation. Hope that helps.
After a little research... The part I'm referring to is actually called the "offset lead/lag hinge." If you aren't employing variable pitch, I think the lead-lag hinge may be more important.
Great experiment
Try to keep the engines at 3/4 length...not the end so it has to cover less circumference and at the same time provide more torque
I definitely considered this! ☺️ Josh Bixler created something on Flite Test a while ago and put the motors about half way along the wings which I remember thinking was an excellent idea. I wanted to design mine more like the originals that inspired the project, however. 👍
I like the controlled factor
Putting the motors at 3/4 distance out will reduce the torque on the whole system (force x distance = torque). What James could think of is that the inner part of the rotating wing moves at a slower speed so he could remove the first inner 1/3rd of the wing completely to reduce weight? Use the saved weight to make a greater wing chord at the tips for extra lift Not sure how this will pan out but worth a try.
@@Project-Air I believe there is one design of a small craft of this type from the 1960's that had the engines on two short non-lifting supports that were mounted cross-wise on the rotor to the pair of lifting blades. (Engines acting as part of the fly-bar or something like that?) Much simpler, but same principle as having the motors mounted inboard on the rotor. Don't recall the name of it, but remember seeing pictures somewhere.
@@Project-Air Glad to see a young guy for a change who isn't into piercings-tatoo's and blue hair....( just joking). The "originals" you refer to all used jet power (pulse-ram) on the rotor tips, not propellers or ducted fans.
Research the German WWII era Nagler-Rolz prop-copter which you probably know.
Use a steel tube with a base plate screwed to the bench and mount a plastic tube on the helicopter that fits into the steel tube loosely. This way you dont have to worry about drifting of the helicopter and you can put a simple measuring device to detect the lifting force at a certain rotor RPM. Obviously incorporate some "security" so that the helicopter cant lift itself out of the tube.
There are foam RC wings available in the size you're using which will have much greater efficiency than the homemade wings/rotors.
Hat's off to you young man !!
Very interesting project !!!
Outstanding keep up the good work you Shown great promise
Try putting the battery packs (not the electronics) suspended underneath the rotor. You can get the power to the electronics on the hub using a pair of simple slip rings.
After reading some of the other posts it might make sense to try:
1: Use a varying lift / angle-of-attack rotor. Higher at the hub, lower near the tips.
2: Bring the EDF's into the 50% or 66% point on the rotor _OR_
3: Mount the EDF's on short arms at 90 degrees to the main rotor
4: No idea how adding some dihedral to the rotors would affect it. It would definitely complicate the rotor design! It would make sense if the dihedral was added where the motor pods are mounted.
Here is a tip, the "tipjets" are actually more effective closer to the root. It will spin the same speed with lower power.
Nice. Can't wait for part 2.
Use a bungee strap to anchor the craft to the centre of the workshop table and minimize damage. Lay tarp over the whole table and raised table edges to minimize damage (light weights to keep it taught (could be turned into a launch mechanism 😉)) .
Try giving the main rotors need both some dihedral and either some flex on the attachment to hub or a semirigid,
teeter-head system to account for the unequal lift. Some empennage for directional control and stability would help as well
Good luck in the next project man
I was thinking (always a dangerous thing) that an engine at 30% from center molded onto the wing would be an improvement. The tip forward speed would be more stable and engine would fight intake air less,.
This was intense. I had to put my phone across the room and hide behind a door just to watch it. Can't imagine what being in the room with it would be like. Great job!
😂
You had a mini! Nice
Dude ur channel is awsome!
Very Cool! Definitely need a triple-axis computer-controlled gyro to stabilize it.
Play around with the depron a bit. Bend it in every possible direction. It has a 'grain' and bends way more easily in one direction than others. Even flipping it over makes a big difference. Find the right way to bend it and you can form it by hand over a round dowel. Some sellotape on the leading edge pre bend can stop it breaking too. You can make a full 180 degree bend in this way. Super smooth, and sellotape can be removed if desired to save mass.
Video length - nice!
Use a counterclockwise propellers/
Or a gyroscope to help stability
The toy you used as a demo has that long shaft as weight to keep it stables so keep
That in mind also. Like the video keep experimenting
Great project
2 carbon tubes, more ribs, and monocoat for the skin. I've also noticed that these types of helicopters sometimes have a flap on the trailing edge possibly for AOA control.
Scary, but fantastic. Thank you!
The Wowwee Flytech Bladestar was a fun interpretation of this flying blade concept. I still have two that work.
Now I miss my machine shop! I will be watching! Hope you have some specs included! Good luck!
NASA had plans to use a large tip jet powered helicopter used to capture falling space capsules as they parachuted to earth an idea that NASA revisited in recent years but thankfully gave up on as so many variables need to line up perfectly and anyone whose ever served in the military can tell you that you just can’t rely on perfection happening 100 percent of the time.
I think it needs very secure almost like a weighted base to prevent oscillations, maybe move the batteries below for a lower center of gravity. Shorter wings might also be better?
I thought about clamping it down until getting up to speed but that might get a bit complex. The new landing/takeoff gear setup should help keep it fixed in one spot though without it wandering off!
In this design case, shorter wings will require more rpm and cause more vibration.
Nice work on this! I’d say you’ll need either some rotor dihedral or cyclic control to keep that thing from careening out of control. Love what you’ve done on it so far!
You are ready for a flight controller and some cyclic control. I wonder if fast servo's will be fast enough for direct control or will a mechanical swashplate or Hiller bar be required. Remember gyroscopic forces act 90 degrees of rotor rotation after the input. I love the fluid mechanics citations and math. People should know what you are doing and how you arrived at the design choices you made. Post more! Subscribed.
I would use stretched canvas and with more framing paying closer attention to the wing contour. The lift is by the outer half of the rotors. Just a thought but love the channel. 👍👏
Helis with only one blade are interesting too. Awesome job.
That may be a future project!
You're doing what I should have done at your age! Keep it up, that's an order!!
I suggest you use tubes that are more "weighted" that will stabilize the craft enough--to enable "lift"
The wobbling effect I feel is due to the"unequal balance" of the props v.s. the rods.
The rods are just not able to support such powerful props. You need "weighted material "
Heavier iron that will enable the proper stability in making a successful "takeoff "
Or think of using plastic tubing that arebigger...like the helicopters that lands on water.
They have such tubes (You can imorovise) in home depot type store😁BRILLIANT !! Best wishes! I can't wait to see it fly!
Very well done mate
Nice video brother! Great ingenuity as well. It seems as if you don't miss much! Stay awesome brother! 😎🙌
great content bro
Always remember centrifugal force is fictitious 👍
Lookup trying to make a collector ring for the electrical connections to keep the batteries and escs off the spinning mass
Exactly what I was thinking
you're so underrated.
for balance you can attach under the main rotor some ball ...but hat means you must increse the power to the wing :) to be able to takeoff with the added weight :)
interesting. can't wait to see this comes out. rooting for you!
Make a pitch curve and throttle curve separately. That way you can control the speed of the rotor and the pitch of the blades, independently on certain settings with your pitch curve. Idk, something to check out.
That was quite interesting! I wish my spare electronics box was as full as yours :). I think balsa rotors might be too easily damaged if something goes wrong while testing it, and they would take a lot more repair work if they did get damaged. Looking forward the next vid!
Yes I agree.- that's one reason I definitely didn't want to go down the balsa route initially 😂 Maybe a far improved mk 2 would benefit from balsa blades when there's less chance of binning it into the ground.
@@Project-Air Sounds like a plan, good luck!
Nice
Great video! I can't wait to see where this goes! Love your channel!
Tip for forming the rotors: peal the paper off of the inner surface of the foam, and pre-bend the leading edge over a closet rod or broom handle.
Yikes James, that reminded me of the chopper trap in Half Life 2! 🤣
good idea
You need the equivalent of dihedral. They made a counter rotation weight shift with the guy standing above the angled blades. If you use the fans on shorter arms at right angle to the blades you decrease the tip mass. Double Macrutchen.
Lose the skin on the underside of the wing, it will generate way more lift, with the downside of creating more drag, but for your use that will not matter. Keep up the good work.
Definitely needs some active control. Also, change your angle of attack across the wing, high aoa at the center hub, low aoa at the tips.
My first thought was some form of gyroscope to dampen the landing gear wobble. Also, maybe check out the Focke Wulfe Triebflugel - probably worth a look. Looks great - can’t wait to see where this is going!
Very cool, looking forward to seeing more.
You need a controllable directional counter-torque mechanism, and cyclic and collective pitch modulation, along with symmetrical main rotor blades, and a main rotor system tachometer.
Not knowing how this really works I'm wondering, what would be the ideal weight ratio between the wings and the hub? Is it important that the hub is heavier to keep the wings rotating around it and stop the helicopter going off in a random direction? On a real helicopter I would expect the weight and aerodynamics of what the rotors are carrying (ie. the fuselage and tail) to have a significant influence on its stability. Are you able to compensate for the missing fuselage or does it in fact not matter?
Likely no stability unless the sling load is heavier than the rotor. Balance is essential of course, but you need that mass to establish the center of rotation.
this action is why engines on air planes are close to the center as possible !
Oh wow, definitely a thumbs up!! Your lack of balance disturbs me)) How do you not foresee this with you experience in our hobby.
Ok, been 2 weeks, your public awaits. Gotta see the mono-masterpiece.
Joseph Hudson soon ;)
Awesome!!!
I am picking that if an extra propeller was added, might give the machine a bit more lift
Can’t wait to see it fly
If you had issues with it walking, I feel like you should have put blocks next to the gear so it could only go up
Great videos and I can’t wait to see what you’re going to come up with next keep up the amazing work and great inventions
Watching the list right now but hoping to see more on this or similar design
As I think, on the ground the blades are rotating, but in the air the landing gear will rotate also. You need a small tail rotor. Or you can add another counter rotating jettip rotor on the same axis.
I wonder if it would be more stable with three or maybe even four rotor blades.
This might sound daft, but I'm making this speculation based on two-bladed vs three bladed fidget spinners!
I noticed that there is far more wobble with the two bladed types, tri-spinners rotating much more smoothly.
I think it would be wise to anchor the landing skids down with weights then placed on two bathroom scales.
A. It will stay in place if balanced well enough.
B. You can measure thrust at various speeds.
Wow, what a great video. Please continue with your very interesting videos. My pensioner brain can still take in what you're trying. looking forward to next video
I bet if you were to use the fans at the center of the hub to blow through the wings and right angle out the tips it would work take off and have better acceleration. I am actually working on a similar project as well. Also you could try adding rockets to the tips if you want it to really go fast! Lol
May want to tether it for initial lift tests. That will prevent it from moving too far before meaningful lift data are gathered.
Very interesting, if a bit terrifying!
This is some real Garry's Mod type shit right here
Use servo to the flaps and add a flight controller for stabilization. Flight controller will continuously adjust the pitch of every wing. AND try to keep the heavy item like battery at the bottom of the frame to lower the centre of gravity.
Suggestion: you need some sort of weight underneath in order to balance any effects caused by rotating the blades. Only try outdoors on large flying-field.
I don't know anything about this stuff, but just in case : seeing how hard it is to actually get it up to speed without it "walking" away, maybe you could try to hold it on the ground and only release it when it's going fast enough ? Like rockets in a sense !
I would think that would be a much more ideal system of launching the thing! 😁 Will investigate some options on the next vid.
Add more pitch to the blades for lift. Or put servos to in it to allow blade pitch. Or make the blades a smig stiffer with less flex
You could use the lighter foam board by marking where you want the curve for the leading edge (i'm presuming this is this difficulty you encountered!?) and make score lines on the inside of the sheet every 5mm or so! Also by adding a thin (1 - 2 mm) strip of carbon fibre along the leading edge would increase the strength but not add that much extra weight 😎
Blade pitch, rotor angle👍🚁
I would angle the thrusters at a 15° angle into the propeller and place them closer for less loss of energy
at high speed all that force will rip it apart
Adding a stronger spine in a leaf spring fashion using sharp angled thin V or U shaped brackets might do it
Good luck 👍