This is my favourite content, hands down. I love experimenting and pushing things forward. Seems like all people are worried about these days is can you smash something into concrete at 100 mph, regardless of whether it flies like dog water. I have no interest in that whatsoever. Thank you for taking time to make these videos, you're obviously an incredibly busy person. 💪🏻
You're at the forefront of the hobby Bob, we all appreciate the massive amount of work you put in to advance it forward. I remember coming up with ultralight quad theories as a teenager, waiting patiently as the years ticked by and there were incremental improvements in all aspects - you can only imagine how excited I was when you began releasing your work on the Toothpick. Thanks for making that dream a reality!
@@BloodyJMF I'm getting close to considering an HD toothpick deal soon I hope. The components are getting really good. These dampers will definitely be involved with that one. I just wish the aio boards weren't so darn expensive these days.
@@Kabab I'm kinda lucky we bought them in packs of fourty from JHE back when. Since we never really managed to break stuff we still have them together with all the replacement arms xD
I’m taking a break from FPV right now but man this excited me. Innovation has kinda been stagnant lately, or at least stagnant in the departments I find interesting so this was sick!
Unfortunately a lot of that has to do with how the world has just halted for the past 3 years. At this point I wouldn't even say it's a result of COVID. I would say it's more so as a result of both of our idiotic governments. Unfortunately small businesses end general developments suffer as a result
@Kabab not to mention studies that are confirming cognitive issues are more than common after a Covid infection. Some level of brain damage comes along with every
Also on a break and being gaslighted from this! Got to the point where I was burning flight controllers out once a week bc of bad gyro QA. Not sustainable
@@Kabab hey buddy, i spent a couple decades building digital models of acoustic musical instruments. i've designed micro frames like the deculture fuxxor but you know everybody wanna be famous. ..understanding waveguides, take some of your carbon and cut it into strips or use plates and measure the impulse response over distance. the reason is, very simple models of acoustic instruments focusing on only the lower partials are "often correct enough," so if you design a frame by having solid data about the impulse response of your material so you can design at least the first order responsivity of the dimensions, you can at least improve upon the most elementary criteria. but seriously, you go about it all wrong like everyone else. if you want to minimise vibration, don't clamp it on with a steel U bolt... use dental floss. if there's no mass, there's no vibration. glue and dental floss will actually make an awesome lightweight frame and it has all the tensile strength you could want. yeah i wish some people had spent time listening to me instead of trying to be the next instant celeb. i tell people useful stuff. like if you need to code a cepstrum from your fourier analysis, just run another fft on your mag10'ed mag bins :)
😂 I always use BB. I just don't put a whole lot of effort into dissecting it because it reminds me of my organic chemistry lab exams where we get a similar graph and need to explain which molecule we're looking at which was so annoying....also because you can go so deep into it and I'd rather focus on high level ways to get things working right without fuss. I use your presents in BF all the time. Sometimes they match right and it's better. 👍
@@Kabab yeah it is just a good tool. Don't be shy. Embrace the obsession. My take is there are lots of frames out there that work well for vibration across all the quad classes. If we narrow to 5" class, that probably has the most: Apex, Martian II, Trans Tek Laser, Source One, etc... The gist I'm gathering is you want less weight and that is then where the vibrations creep in? OR I think you just have some engineer in you, because this video is like the engineering method 101: design, build, test, measure, modify, repeat. Tools like finite element analysis can shorten the cycle, but can take the fun out of it when the hobby is the method, not doing the finite analalsys in front of a PC; which then also needs real-world validate (is a part of design step). Mark Spatz, P.E. (licensed) (in good company here 😎)
@@uavtech I definitely prefer and enjoy the build-test approach. Moreso because I learn a lot more about other things than just what I'm trying to focus on. FEA is helpful but is a very sterilized approach which doesn't always lead to the right result. That and I'm definitely looking for a way to drop weight. 20g less with comparable or better vibration management is gold to me.
@@uavtech Really is amazing how well the source one v3 performs stock and its even better if you move to 6mm arms its dead quiet in the bb. I've got some far more expensive frames that resonate all the way up to 300Hz.
We promise to floss and appreciate lower production videos as long as you keep the awesome updates coming. Love your exploration and persistent trial and error approach sir.
Bob is one of those few guys who pushes the industry forward, he figures something out, then the rest of community catch him up after 1-2 years. From my shallow experience what I found out was - for high performance 5 inchers sometimes it's better to reduce the filter (faze) delay but get some more noise, than get the absolutely clean gyro traces after filtering. PIDs should act on the gyro signal which is closest to the present time. It's good to have frame resonance higher than 200hz, then to cut it out with either static or dynamic notch. Sorry for my generalizations, that's related to my build.
He does it again folks! Again and again and again and again! The man, the myth, the MF Legend!!! No one is like you in this hobby, especially after all these years. Cheers to you my friend. 🎉🎉
Cool video, a lot of really interesting concepts in there. From my experience and simulations I can't really find a way forward with rubber damping parts except for lightweight components with gyros that need vibration isolation for higher frequencies. If you try to soft mount heavy parts (like go pro or battery) you have two heavy bodies that can move relative to each other with low resonant frequency... Catastrophe! Anything like rubber that is springy as well as damping will create new resonances as well as soaking up energy. The heavier the sprung mass and the softer the rubber the lower the new resonance and the bigger the problem it causes. Soft ruber is good for absorbing vibrations but also causes lower frequency vibes. If we want to "soft mount" heavy parts like Go Pro or Battery we need to use very stiff ruber to avoid creating low frequency resonance. Unfortunately stiff rubber doesn't really absorb vibration! Damping grease has zero spring so doesn't create a new resonance which is why it consistently works. Looking forward to seeing what comes next, keep at it.
You rock man. We need more innovation to come back in this hobby. I loved they hayday of seeing different solutions and frame design. Keep chugging away man.
Fascinating stuff indeed, Bob! Fascinating testing! 😃 But you were spot on when you mentioned that the plate with more mass vibrates less. As more mass, more energy you'd need to make it move at all. Anyway, stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
You randomly showed up on my feed. This is the first video I have seen of yours and I've actually re watched five times since. Thanks for pushing the industry forward and I am now subscribed.
I’ve always wanted to attach the FC and camera to the battery, the least vibrating mass on the craft, and then isolate the motors, by putting hem on the other side of the battery mass. Pretty much strap the camera and FC to the battery, and then strap that to the frame/motors. Sticking it to the top plate is something I’ve always thought made sense as well. Great to see you do so much research in all these different avenues of possibilities. Thank you for sharing ythis. It’s so educational in so many dimensions. Yes! Faster videos, less production value is better if you can share our findings faster. Great video! You have one of the best presentation skills in FPV. Quick, concise, relevant, good pace, actual knowledge, etc.
@@Kabab I guess one can make a simple test by printing some lipo guard, sticking it on top of the battery and just duct taping the FC to it. Not production ready solution of course, but should be enough to estimate if this particular spot gives better results.
Thanks k you for the work you do. Please take the time to upload your findings to UA-cam, I think it is really beneficial for all the flyers who see you videos and are also experimenting themselves
mounting the fc near the main mass of the quad seems such a good idea, mass is a crucial element in vibrations absorption so we should indeed play with it
i made my own camera mount which mechanically decouple the camera. simple as that. no jello. no ND nonsense. no shaking. perfect footage on EVERY quad with every different action cam. DJI, insta36 or gopro. from 3" all the way up to 6" works. i am trying to convince people for 2 years to try my mount for free. most refuse and say i need change PIDs. or must use ND filters. or other BS. at this point i gave up. my footage is perfect. always. while others still struggle. happy to see you also working on that.
@@Kabab which i can totally appreciate as cinematic pilot. and thats the ONLY way NDs should be used for. but lets be honest 90% say it helps with jello which is right but only like 50% and its a patch for an entirely different problem. anyway as i said i am happy to see others trying to deal with the actual vibration problem instead of just use other tools to cover it. good job
I’m simply interested in what ideas you are playing around with. A basic one take vlog style with you and the prototypes , cad, etc and little to no editing would do it for me.
I’m a machinist for 3 lumber mills and I learned a hard lesson quickly. Rarely do you solve a problem with brute force. We had the arms that lift up the boards. Thy are cycled with air cylinders. Theses arena where made from steel tube. Thy kept breaking them. So I made some out of solid plate and now the problem moved to the cylinder mounts and started ripping them apart. So I made heat treated mounts. Then we started loosing cylinders so we went up in rod size. Then the entire frame started cracking and puking out of the concrete. The solution was making arms out of solid UHMW and we have never had a problem since. Heavy objects don’t want to move and stopping them is even harder. So dropping weight and moving to a forgiving material solved it. I have seen this trend with frames getting stiffer and stiffer. The stiffer something is the more effective it is going to transfer vibrations. Think a pre cooked vs a cooked noodle. But this is a rabbit hole that is very easy to go down when you think we need more strength and more and more. When like you said mass does not want to move so bolt the FC to the biggest mass you have and isolate it from the rest of the frame. I’m surprised dampening motor mounts have not been really developed.
In this specific case, it's not quite consistent with your findings with your application. I have tried to make arms from HDPE and a number of other materials as well as sandwiched materials and many other options just to run into low frequency wobbles and resonance which is the very worst kind of vibration for this application. I do hear you completely however and will try something else you may be intrigued to see in the future.
Someone really gets engineering when they say, "...generate heat from vibrations." Armed with engineering knowledge and experience, you open up solutions that are fantastically innovative, like braided wire for dampening, and in my field, eccentrically-braced frames which bend steel beams to generate heat during an earthquake. Like brakes on a car to dissipate energy, it's all about energy transfer and ultimately intentional heat generation. Friction, elastomeric materials, plastic deformation of ductile materials, even fluid turbulence all do the same thing at the end of the day.
Excellent video my man! The smoothest quad I’ve ever flown to date has been my current catalyst machine works BangGod. Tbh I’ve flown many different quads and if they all have the same motors and props and 6s power, they all fly so similar once tuned correctly. I stick with the banggod because it’s the first quad I’ve had that is damn near indestructible.
It seems that you should try those new low-noise helical props. Since they reduce air turbulence (and vibration) making them more efficient and quieter.
I literally put a video up on that this morning. All those claims are false by MIT unfortunately but the overall prop design that was made may not be a total waste. See the video I put up this morning
@@Kabab I watched it. That kind of propeller design is a whole new area to experiment with and make videos. About frames: Have you looked into making frames with a biomimicry structural design? They are of course difficult to design and produce, but I think that method would solve your vibration issues, as well as make them lighter. Another drawback is that you'd have to add plastic skins over them to reduce drag. (I looked through most of your video thumbnails, and I didn't see any.)
@@Kabab Reckon you are doing your fair share to make a big difference too. Not to mention improving FPV pilots orsl hygiene 😬 I hope BlackOut reads this encouraging message.
100% Silicone calk/sealant sandwiched between frame components does wonders to reduce the noise floor. Because it's a mild adhesive, it seems to really unify the frame pieces. It's better than greasing it because it sets up and doesn't constantly ooze out and attract dirt.
Yeah that's an option but it suffers from the same issue as anything else between carbon. You bolt it together to try and keep it strong which negates anything between mostly
I use Kyosho Zeal for all of my quads flight controllers, Spektrum AS3X receivers, and helicopter gyro mounting with no hardware, it's the cleanest and best solution that I've found to this date for minimizing vibrations.
Inspiring video! How about designing a frame which would have a room/compartment in the centre to mount the battery? The FC would be installed in its own carbon cage (to protect it from crashes), which would be fixed directly to the battery, independently of the battery-frame mounting. This way there would be a physical isolation of the FC from the frame with the battery (being the heaviest component of the quad) acting as the vibration absorber, separating/isolating the motors/frame from the FC..
That would be really nice but we're working with a weight restriction here. It costs a lot in weight to make different components inside. Especially for the battery. It's also very difficult because no battery is the same size and they change size over their lifespan too
In long range shooting, people tune their barrels to reduce vibration by having a mass near the end of the barrel that they can adjust the position of. Maybe having a small and movable weight on each arms can help reduce vibrations when you adjust their positions?
That's a very very interesting idea but it would directly impact flight performance too. I actually do believe it would work however. I just never thought about it.
@@Kabab yeah that too, i forgot to mention. You probably know him already. He's based here in the UK. Got his own frame range, and goes in pretty hard scientifically. And no I'm not biased as i don't own any of his frames. Just saying incase you haven't heard of him. 😉
@@k1ortia yes I know of Chris. His work is good however he tends to negate the real world often and believes he can simulate everything. He also seems to think he knows everything there is to know so it's pretty difficult to work with him. A problem which I too have had issues with in the past but life has kicked me in the butt enough to let go of all that. Maybe in time he'll come around too.
@@Kabab Funny you should say that, as iv often thought the same to. It's as iv everything is purely simulation based as apposed to real life testing. I'm glad you've put some new content out though as iv not seen anything for a while, so i shall be watching and continue to watch the future videos..😊
Interesting! I had tons of oscillations in my last kwad to the point where I now sell it. Would be great to see an overall performance improvement. Keep up the good work!
Food for thought for you. The greater surface area that dampening material is able act with the more effective it will be. I suggest three or four milimeter neoprene foam.
Steel cabels are often used as springs for vibration damping Cradles for science equipment during transportation.
Рік тому+1
Lets say instead of suspending the fuselage section on the arm section with cables we just have a soft material in-between, it can be whatever tpu, rubber, polyurethane try a set of different stiffnesses. this could be attempted on a lot of different frames by just sticking a battery pad between the arm section and the middle plate. It's similar to chris rossers dampening grease idea but less messy.
yeah that works except that you also bolt the thing together which negates anything put between the carbon. We need the actual material that's damping to also be durable enough to hold the craft together.
The whole idea is to decouple the vibration from the motors. The more material the vibrations need to travel through, the more damping you will see, hence why moving the FC to the top plate has more of an effect because the vibes have essentially more distance to cover before reaching the FC. Think of all the mounting points and the material between them as conduits for conducting vibrations. The further your mounts are away from the source of the vibes, the more of a damping effect you will see. Configure the build like a maze where the vibes have the longest path to travel before reaching the FC.
That's where the H frame theoretically makes sense. However I think you'll loose a lot of stiffness and overall rigidity in the whole structure that it creates new problems like lower freq vibrations and more critical resonance modes. So trying to balance that trade-off, you kind of end up with the standard X frame. Just my assumption. We'll see how your test works out
@@ariafpv It's less about X or H shape and more about the interfaces between parts IMO. I'd first focus on building a rigid structure for the arms and motors to have a solid foundation. From there you work backwards and come up with a clever way to decouple that from whatever part your FC is mounted to. The FC mount doesn't need to be strong in itself, it just needs to hold in it's place.
@@KevPV yes kind of what I meant. With X style I was just refering to a standard layout creating a rigid core in the center (opposed to the H frame he showed). Doesn't need to be the usual 4 interlocking arms. As you said the goal is to only have the FC be "decoupled" from the rest
It would be interesting to see the effects of two pusher propellers and motors (motors and propellers below arm)in various configurations with two standard propellers and motors (motors and props above arm). Two pushers directly across from each other in position 1 & 2 or two in position 1 & 3, or 2 & 4. Maybe I'm just crazy.
I reduce the vibrations in a slightly different way. I modified the betaflight configurator so that I can see the unfiltered vibrations on the motor as it spins from the configurator. The quadcopter is anchored not very hard, but enough not to fly away on soft material. I rotate the motor to a certain speed, record the maximum vibration amplitude and stop the motor. After that, I add a little adhesive tape to the propeller and act according to the method for worse or better. Thus, it turns out to reduce vibrations several times even on new motors and propellants. On my old gopro 3, this reduces the effect of jelly to almost zero.
Jello isn't the issue here. It's the vibrations getting to the gyro. What you do is dynamic balancing and the best way however it's very time consuming and doesn't last once you damage a blade a little or swap blades or even just unscrew and tighten a blade.
@@Kabab I tried today to change the flight controller to the top plate for the sake of interest. Without rubber dampers on the top plate but with dampers on the flight controller. According to the logs - it got a little worse. So apparently there is no difference in person closer or farther from the battery.
After years of carefully tuning to get rid of vibration and then constantly failing, I came to the realization that most of my vibrations come down to temperature. Not only do the resonance frequencies of the materials (carbon/rubber/gel) change, but also the characteristics of the electronics. Most FC use simple RC oscillators which aren't temperature stable, so they drift. So tuning filters for specific frequencies is completely pointless when you are flying in a wide temperature range. Not only that, if you look at datasheets of carefully profiled Gyros you'll find parameters like "Sensitivity percantage change per Kelvin", "Sensitivity percentage change per Volt" (at specific temperature), "Zero-rate offset over temperature change" and "Zero-rate offset drift per Volt" (at specific temperature). So in my opinion testing of frame vibrations only makes sense if you perfectly temperature control at least the electronics. A common practice to achieve that is to encapsulate the electronics and heat them to a fixed temperature. I don't think anyone would go that far for an otherwise simple hobby though.
Absolutely 100% correct. This is also part of the reason why I need a damping system but just works sort of no matter what. If it is as simple as just strapping the flight controller to the top plate with all the weight on it, that would really be a miracle. Also, if you're able to lower your filters or just generally give the filters an easier time, they will be more capable in a wider range of applications. This would include wider temperature fluctuations. If we can turn off our filters, there would be no more tuning. Everything would just work right with a general tune because the system knows exactly what's going on with the craft
Vibration isolation and vibration damping are two separate items. I would consider the rubber devices you have there as isolators. They may provide some damping, but their primary purpose is to provide isolation between the two ends of the isolator. It is also important to consider the frequency range of the isolator and how the mass and stiffness of the structure interact with the isolator. I think this is great and we are only scratching the surface here!
We've been clawing at the surface for over a decade now. There's no surefire way to get any sort of hardware damping consistently. Vibration isolators don't work for anything above 3" it seems. I'm guessing the amplitudes are too high when the prop size gets bigger.
@@Kabab I agree, this problem is not easy. I would like to see more of a focus on the frequencies that mater to the FC and what it’s just ignoring. From my understanding, we want to focus on the low frequency flight maneuvers and prop wash frequencies. When the vibration gets to the FC(gyro) it should be cleaned up from motor noise, frame resonances, etc. Most isolators aren’t going to do that well, the simple rubber ones are going to isolate at higher frequencies and maybe not in the correct axis, and if they do isolate at the proper frequencies they are likely to remove the important information as well. Setting up an isolator test stand might be something to consider.. set your quad on the bench and have a beat up prop and slowly ramp up the RPM and record BB… Try it hard mounted and then with the isolators… try to get enough data for a transmissibility curve… but just trying whatever isolator is available off of Amazon makes it tough. Should we be looking at the other end of the problem maybe? Engine isolation? Certainly the approach for cars and real airplanes…
@@REDhlg There is one way we could do this that could work out best. Two gyros. One hard mounted, one soft. Subtract anything that changes from the hard mount to the soft mount. Everything that's the same overall amplitude and movement is real movement that the FC needs to know about. Everything else is garbage.
In precision shooting competition, barrel harmonics is a big issue and there are several ways to deal with them. The simplest is using a heavy barrel (just like thicker drone arms), this only moves harmonics to a higher frequency, you still have to tune your handloads to match the barrel or use a barrel tuner (movable weight). Another way to bypass harmonics is to have the muzzle of the barrel be constrained, this usualy means clamping the tip of the barrel to the stock, in drone terms this is like having a large structure of thinner struts instead of thicker one peice arms. Now to realy remove harmonics, deaden the barrel, you have to convert the energy, there are a few ways to do this. The simplest is to remove direct load paths, this means barrels with dimples, outside threading and axial holes arround the barrel, in drone terms this would mean the arms would have holes and zigzag edges in so that the forces have to go around corners (aka stress risers). The other way is dissimilar materials, this is like an aluminium or carbon fibre barrel with a stainless steel core, since the materials have different stiffness, much energy is lost transfering the vibrations. This is why carbon fibre is inherently a good damper since it is a matrix of epoxy resin and carbon filament, this is also how cars remove body vibrations by bonding a layer of urethane to the metal pannels.
@@paint4pain of these options, the different materials could be the best one for us except that in our case, we don't see waves of vibrations as much as we do overall twisting or wiggling of components. Waves are approachable with different materials and we still get some of that but the main issue is the odd twists and wiggles. One of the main benefits of the H frame design which attracted me to it is that the frame will essentially have no pitch action vibration wise because there's nothing to wiggle. At least not with the energy given. Yaw won't be a big deal and is seldom a problem, roll is the only issue I need to resolve. The body twisting. That's the only notable mode that's gonna kill it. I have some tricks I'm gonna try....... we'll see
Smoothest drone i ever built was a tpu toad 3d printed frame with priline tpu which is more stiff, i heated standoffs and pushed them into the tpu for deck plate mounts, then i glued carbon fiber plates to the petg printed deck plates and mounted a pod on top so camera wasnt looking at front of frame, thing is amazing
I once bought by accident a bag of rubber washers used in FPV. Since I had 100s, I just started putting them between the standoffs and the top plates on all my quads, because I keep hearing about resonance running through quad on videos, seemed like a damping opportunity. I can say, I rarely see jello, and I tune really well, so maybe that goes together, but it hasn't hurt anything either.
It can actually hurt a lot. It's difficult to tell without testing it. Could help too. Definitely very hard to say it always helps. Especially if they're rubber with rebound. Also, they're definitely making the frame weaker. Gives them a stress point
Physics applied, torque and pull of each motors on the frame and static momentum created by the weight of all the stuff attached to the frame ( the sum of all forces involved must be zero ) the center of gravity of the drone must on equal distance to each motor, may be of help use soft springs for vibration dampening.
Maybe build a pwm motor controller that provides stepped voltage range at frequencies that are resonate? Series it with every motor like a individual motor controller. You may loose its power range and throttle will feel "steppy" but you then can add more voltage ramps that bypass frequencies that cause vibration.
@@Kabab resonance frequency is what I feel I know pretty well. Build rifles for a living and also ISCET 1-6 cert. Mitigating vibration through damping is a harder approach. I recommend tackling it at the source... the motors.
You might be onto something with that cable. I work for a major car manufacturer and when we're trying to eliminate vibrations, we add big hunks of steel to the problem areas to make it go away. Crude, but effective. If you ever get underneath a Genesis G90, you'll see what I mean.
Look up steel cable camera vibration isolation. It's used a lot. It's used in many industries because of it's damping properties. A great side effect from a super strong cable.
@@Kabab I'm familiar with that and understood your approach, but I was thinking adding weight to the areas you want to minimize vibration. Seems counterintuitive but it might work. Stick a stack of washers near the camera mount.
i used to solder the esc cables to the FC (with thicker cables), and just remove the mounts completely from the FC. The FC was completely suspended just by cables. that worked.
I keep meaning to try out an idea I had with basically getting spare arms trimming the end off and using no more nails double sided tape them along the entire legnth to the original arms. This tape is extremely strong and once fully bonded will be very hard to break but you could put something around the arm to act as a stop to limit how far the top arm can move during impacts etc to stop the core ripping apart. Maybe some loops of fibreglass tape loose enough to allow movement up until the point of ripping the tape construction.
I haven't seen things taped or otherwise attached with an adhesive to the arm to be useful. They may improve durability but I wouldn't expect it to be any help with vibrations
If you put a rubber between arms and frame and then screw it together with one long screw then vibrations are transmitted. Pushing together is dampened but pulling appart is limited by the screw. You have to put a rubber shim under the screw head to also dampen the pull forces.
Cool stuff! What if you took some of the rubber damper things and mount them on the arms, just like on the bottom or top but not sandwiched with anything 😮
You might want to consider playing with vibration damping sheet. For example, from McMaster: Vibration Damping Sheet 90% Vibration Reduced Part number 9709T71
how you played with SpeedyBee Master 5 HD Frame. The whole FC is mounted on TPU section in the middle of the body. BTW. I been experimenting for last 2 years with same issue you are describing. You will find that carbon tubes as arms cut down on vibrations significantly. Maybe combining speedybee concept with CF tubes would give us interesting results,
The speedybee system is not much better than the rubber grommets already built into the FC. It may help a bit more. Probably doesn't hurt since the stack is generally low weight and hard to oscillate. I may pick one up to see how it is
I finally figured how to put that tension in my frame with no added weight or parts. I have only my experience to go one but I am very confident that it works.
@Kabab Try this. Shorter stand-offs at front and rear ends. Makes a slight arch instead of a flat top. But that arch puts tension along the bottom plate and top. Changes the frequency. Just 1mm (maybe2) shorter adds alot tension. I haven't notice any durability issues. Been doing this for about 2 years and haven't told anyone til now. Curious to know if you try it, and your findings. I tried this for other reasons but quickly noticed a consistency to the quad, even when making some other drastic changes to frame parts and layouts. Converting a 5 inch to 6&7 inch without changing arms. Got great results consistently. I'm pretty sure the frame under tension had alot to do with it.
@@airfriedquadsbw that doesn't work the same because it's rigid tension. Sure it'll stiffen things up a bit but it won't dampen anything and will increase the higher frequency band. For damping you need non-rigid tension
@Kabab It stops the transfer. You don't get the whole frame resonating as a unit. Seems like each arm is more isolated and the frequencies don't find a way into the stack.
@@airfriedquadsbw I can assure you it does nothing but give you a bit more rigidity. It does not stop anything. It may push the entire resonance band a tiny bit higher is all. There is zero damping going on from a rigid tension system.
I’m thinking as far as motors vibration up and down… An h arm is going to result in twisting the center or bowing along the narrow dimension of the center plate. An x if you consider a diagonal has a chance to bow the frame along the longeer center plate axis and likely bow a lot more. I’m guessing that may be the arm difference. You may argue it would just be lower frequency bows but I think the amplitude would be more.
This is my favourite content, hands down. I love experimenting and pushing things forward. Seems like all people are worried about these days is can you smash something into concrete at 100 mph, regardless of whether it flies like dog water. I have no interest in that whatsoever. Thank you for taking time to make these videos, you're obviously an incredibly busy person. 💪🏻
You're at the forefront of the hobby Bob, we all appreciate the massive amount of work you put in to advance it forward. I remember coming up with ultralight quad theories as a teenager, waiting patiently as the years ticked by and there were incremental improvements in all aspects - you can only imagine how excited I was when you began releasing your work on the Toothpick.
Thanks for making that dream a reality!
I can only second that!. We bought a dozen toothpicks for our group and they are to this day our most flown rigs.
@@BloodyJMF I'm getting close to considering an HD toothpick deal soon I hope. The components are getting really good. These dampers will definitely be involved with that one. I just wish the aio boards weren't so darn expensive these days.
@@Kabab I'm kinda lucky we bought them in packs of fourty from JHE back when. Since we never really managed to break stuff we still have them together with all the replacement arms xD
And yet only has 47k followers
@@JbVest the best 47k followers out there.
I’m taking a break from FPV right now but man this excited me. Innovation has kinda been stagnant lately, or at least stagnant in the departments I find interesting so this was sick!
Unfortunately a lot of that has to do with how the world has just halted for the past 3 years. At this point I wouldn't even say it's a result of COVID. I would say it's more so as a result of both of our idiotic governments. Unfortunately small businesses end general developments suffer as a result
@Kabab not to mention studies that are confirming cognitive issues are more than common after a Covid infection. Some level of brain damage comes along with every
@KababFPV true glad you said what alot was thinking
Also on a break and being gaslighted from this! Got to the point where I was burning flight controllers out once a week bc of bad gyro QA. Not sustainable
@@Kabab hey buddy, i spent a couple decades building digital models of acoustic musical instruments. i've designed micro frames like the deculture fuxxor but you know everybody wanna be famous. ..understanding waveguides, take some of your carbon and cut it into strips or use plates and measure the impulse response over distance. the reason is, very simple models of acoustic instruments focusing on only the lower partials are "often correct enough," so if you design a frame by having solid data about the impulse response of your material so you can design at least the first order responsivity of the dimensions, you can at least improve upon the most elementary criteria.
but seriously, you go about it all wrong like everyone else. if you want to minimise vibration, don't clamp it on with a steel U bolt... use dental floss. if there's no mass, there's no vibration. glue and dental floss will actually make an awesome lightweight frame and it has all the tensile strength you could want.
yeah i wish some people had spent time listening to me instead of trying to be the next instant celeb. i tell people useful stuff. like if you need to code a cepstrum from your fourier analysis, just run another fft on your mag10'ed mag bins :)
Lots of blackbox. :-) Warms my heart. Love to see the engineering at work! Mark Rober approved!
😂 I always use BB. I just don't put a whole lot of effort into dissecting it because it reminds me of my organic chemistry lab exams where we get a similar graph and need to explain which molecule we're looking at which was so annoying....also because you can go so deep into it and I'd rather focus on high level ways to get things working right without fuss. I use your presents in BF all the time. Sometimes they match right and it's better. 👍
@@Kabab yeah it is just a good tool. Don't be shy. Embrace the obsession.
My take is there are lots of frames out there that work well for vibration across all the quad classes. If we narrow to 5" class, that probably has the most: Apex, Martian II, Trans Tek Laser, Source One, etc... The gist I'm gathering is you want less weight and that is then where the vibrations creep in?
OR
I think you just have some engineer in you, because this video is like the engineering method 101: design, build, test, measure, modify, repeat. Tools like finite element analysis can shorten the cycle, but can take the fun out of it when the hobby is the method, not doing the finite analalsys in front of a PC; which then also needs real-world validate (is a part of design step).
Mark Spatz, P.E. (licensed)
(in good company here 😎)
@@uavtech I definitely prefer and enjoy the build-test approach. Moreso because I learn a lot more about other things than just what I'm trying to focus on. FEA is helpful but is a very sterilized approach which doesn't always lead to the right result. That and I'm definitely looking for a way to drop weight. 20g less with comparable or better vibration management is gold to me.
@@Kabab 100%
Enjoying your work!
@@uavtech Really is amazing how well the source one v3 performs stock and its even better if you move to 6mm arms its dead quiet in the bb. I've got some far more expensive frames that resonate all the way up to 300Hz.
Pushing the hobby forward all the time!
We promise to floss and appreciate lower production videos as long as you keep the awesome updates coming. Love your exploration and persistent trial and error approach sir.
Bob is one of those few guys who pushes the industry forward, he figures something out, then the rest of community catch him up after 1-2 years.
From my shallow experience what I found out was - for high performance 5 inchers sometimes it's better to reduce the filter (faze) delay but get some more noise, than get the absolutely clean gyro traces after filtering. PIDs should act on the gyro signal which is closest to the present time.
It's good to have frame resonance higher than 200hz, then to cut it out with either static or dynamic notch.
Sorry for my generalizations, that's related to my build.
He does it again folks! Again and again and again and again! The man, the myth, the MF Legend!!! No one is like you in this hobby, especially after all these years. Cheers to you my friend. 🎉🎉
Amazing stuff! Length is inconsequential, don't sweat the edits. Really looking forward to more of this content.
Cool video, a lot of really interesting concepts in there. From my experience and simulations I can't really find a way forward with rubber damping parts except for lightweight components with gyros that need vibration isolation for higher frequencies. If you try to soft mount heavy parts (like go pro or battery) you have two heavy bodies that can move relative to each other with low resonant frequency... Catastrophe!
Anything like rubber that is springy as well as damping will create new resonances as well as soaking up energy. The heavier the sprung mass and the softer the rubber the lower the new resonance and the bigger the problem it causes. Soft ruber is good for absorbing vibrations but also causes lower frequency vibes.
If we want to "soft mount" heavy parts like Go Pro or Battery we need to use very stiff ruber to avoid creating low frequency resonance. Unfortunately stiff rubber doesn't really absorb vibration!
Damping grease has zero spring so doesn't create a new resonance which is why it consistently works. Looking forward to seeing what comes next, keep at it.
You rock man. We need more innovation to come back in this hobby. I loved they hayday of seeing different solutions and frame design. Keep chugging away man.
So glad you are testing things out and sharing in video with us here. SO AWESOME!!!
Fascinating stuff indeed, Bob! Fascinating testing! 😃
But you were spot on when you mentioned that the plate with more mass vibrates less. As more mass, more energy you'd need to make it move at all.
Anyway, stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
You randomly showed up on my feed. This is the first video I have seen of yours and I've actually re watched five times since. Thanks for pushing the industry forward and I am now subscribed.
That’s great food for though. Year after year you’re pushing stuff and concepts forward. You deserve huge thanks for that ❤
Thank you for sharing this meticulous yet open ended insight 🙏🏻
It’s a pleasure to see you back!
I think you should call that new frame Mr. Floss ;)
Very cool seeing all the testing and frames you are producing to test!
I’ve always wanted to attach the FC and camera to the battery, the least vibrating mass on the craft, and then isolate the motors, by putting hem on the other side of the battery mass. Pretty much strap the camera and FC to the battery, and then strap that to the frame/motors. Sticking it to the top plate is something I’ve always thought made sense as well. Great to see you do so much research in all these different avenues of possibilities. Thank you for sharing ythis. It’s so educational in so many dimensions. Yes! Faster videos, less production value is better if you can share our findings faster. Great video! You have one of the best presentation skills in FPV. Quick, concise, relevant, good pace, actual knowledge, etc.
I'm hoping it's really as simple as moving through FC to the top plate and we instantly all get ~20% damping right off the bat
@@Kabab I guess one can make a simple test by printing some lipo guard, sticking it on top of the battery and just duct taping the FC to it. Not production ready solution of course, but should be enough to estimate if this particular spot gives better results.
Thanks k you for the work you do. Please take the time to upload your findings to UA-cam, I think it is really beneficial for all the flyers who see you videos and are also experimenting themselves
mounting the fc near the main mass of the quad seems such a good idea, mass is a crucial element in vibrations absorption so we should indeed play with it
Welcome back
i made my own camera mount which mechanically decouple the camera. simple as that. no jello. no ND nonsense. no shaking. perfect footage on EVERY quad with every different action cam. DJI, insta36 or gopro. from 3" all the way up to 6" works. i am trying to convince people for 2 years to try my mount for free. most refuse and say i need change PIDs. or must use ND filters. or other BS. at this point i gave up. my footage is perfect. always. while others still struggle. happy to see you also working on that.
I don't use an ND for vibrations. I use it for the actual ND effect to get motion blur
@@Kabab which i can totally appreciate as cinematic pilot. and thats the ONLY way NDs should be used for. but lets be honest 90% say it helps with jello which is right but only like 50% and its a patch for an entirely different problem. anyway as i said i am happy to see others trying to deal with the actual vibration problem instead of just use other tools to cover it. good job
I’m simply interested in what ideas you are playing around with. A basic one take vlog style with you and the prototypes , cad, etc and little to no editing would do it for me.
That's where I'm heading it's just that from CAD to frame to fly is like, weeks in between....still gonna give it a shot with the next one
Glad to see new content from you. I really enjoy your videos, the new ideas, the successes, the failures. I floss more often too :D
Just starting to watch, Bob, but I just wanted to say... This is the way.
I’m a machinist for 3 lumber mills and I learned a hard lesson quickly. Rarely do you solve a problem with brute force. We had the arms that lift up the boards. Thy are cycled with air cylinders. Theses arena where made from steel tube. Thy kept breaking them. So I made some out of solid plate and now the problem moved to the cylinder mounts and started ripping them apart. So I made heat treated mounts. Then we started loosing cylinders so we went up in rod size. Then the entire frame started cracking and puking out of the concrete. The solution was making arms out of solid UHMW and we have never had a problem since. Heavy objects don’t want to move and stopping them is even harder. So dropping weight and moving to a forgiving material solved it. I have seen this trend with frames getting stiffer and stiffer. The stiffer something is the more effective it is going to transfer vibrations. Think a pre cooked vs a cooked noodle. But this is a rabbit hole that is very easy to go down when you think we need more strength and more and more. When like you said mass does not want to move so bolt the FC to the biggest mass you have and isolate it from the rest of the frame. I’m surprised dampening motor mounts have not been really developed.
In this specific case, it's not quite consistent with your findings with your application. I have tried to make arms from HDPE and a number of other materials as well as sandwiched materials and many other options just to run into low frequency wobbles and resonance which is the very worst kind of vibration for this application. I do hear you completely however and will try something else you may be intrigued to see in the future.
Very interesting I can't wait to see the results and graphs on the next video.
You just reminded me to floss, I skipped that this morning, good content Bob!
I'm glad the FPV community has Bob and Joshua
Someone really gets engineering when they say, "...generate heat from vibrations." Armed with engineering knowledge and experience, you open up solutions that are fantastically innovative, like braided wire for dampening, and in my field, eccentrically-braced frames which bend steel beams to generate heat during an earthquake. Like brakes on a car to dissipate energy, it's all about energy transfer and ultimately intentional heat generation. Friction, elastomeric materials, plastic deformation of ductile materials, even fluid turbulence all do the same thing at the end of the day.
Amazing presentation. Can’t wait to see this project grow.
Nice video, i loved all the data and perfect explanation. Im not into drones but i followed along easily
Bro is simultaneously an engineer and a doctor. Nuts.
You have no idea how good my day became just for getting a video notification.
very interesting video! good to see someone using the data to innovate
Excellent video my man!
The smoothest quad I’ve ever flown to date has been my current catalyst machine works BangGod. Tbh I’ve flown many different quads and if they all have the same motors and props and 6s power, they all fly so similar once tuned correctly. I stick with the banggod because it’s the first quad I’ve had that is damn near indestructible.
Helll yea brotha hope all is well miss ya man great info as always !!! Mandalooooo to the mooonnn
Really interesting ideas. Keep them coming 👍
I have no clue what most of the things you’re talking about but I’m just getting into FPV drones and I’ve been binge watching your videos 🫡
Yeah this video is a little more advanced but you'll understand it after you build maybe your third quad. It'll all become obvious
It seems that you should try those new low-noise helical props. Since they reduce air turbulence (and vibration) making them more efficient and quieter.
I literally put a video up on that this morning. All those claims are false by MIT unfortunately but the overall prop design that was made may not be a total waste. See the video I put up this morning
@@Kabab Oh okay. Thanks.
@@Kabab I watched it. That kind of propeller design is a whole new area to experiment with and make videos.
About frames:
Have you looked into making frames with a biomimicry structural design? They are of course difficult to design and produce, but I think that method would solve your vibration issues, as well as make them lighter. Another drawback is that you'd have to add plastic skins over them to reduce drag.
(I looked through most of your video thumbnails, and I didn't see any.)
Thanks for sharing Bob.
In honour of your latest design, I'm going to take out my old BlackOut Mini-H quad for a fly :)
The single greatest contribution to the industry imo. Black out mini H. Just so ubiquitous with the early industry and classic.
@@Kabab Reckon you are doing your fair share to make a big difference too.
Not to mention improving FPV pilots orsl hygiene 😬
I hope BlackOut reads this encouraging message.
100% Silicone calk/sealant sandwiched between frame components does wonders to reduce the noise floor. Because it's a mild adhesive, it seems to really unify the frame pieces. It's better than greasing it because it sets up and doesn't constantly ooze out and attract dirt.
Yeah that's an option but it suffers from the same issue as anything else between carbon. You bolt it together to try and keep it strong which negates anything between mostly
Interesting video! Can’t wait for the next one!
The King is back. Thx for all the research and testing.. Very curious what the results will be in the end.
Great exploration! Thank you for your time!
I use Kyosho Zeal for all of my quads flight controllers, Spektrum AS3X receivers, and helicopter gyro mounting with no hardware, it's the cleanest and best solution that I've found to this date for minimizing vibrations.
Something like that is always helpful but the FC is so low inertia it can only resist higher frequencies
Inspiring video! How about designing a frame which would have a room/compartment in the centre to mount the battery? The FC would be installed in its own carbon cage (to protect it from crashes), which would be fixed directly to the battery, independently of the battery-frame mounting. This way there would be a physical isolation of the FC from the frame with the battery (being the heaviest component of the quad) acting as the vibration absorber, separating/isolating the motors/frame from the FC..
That would be really nice but we're working with a weight restriction here. It costs a lot in weight to make different components inside. Especially for the battery. It's also very difficult because no battery is the same size and they change size over their lifespan too
Good to see you back with a video. Great stuff.
This makes me want to go to a park and fly through the wooded area ❤
Great research, looking forward where it will get you to
A great video, and well worth watching. You have a new subscriber, keep up the good work! :)
babe wake up kabab uploaded
In long range shooting, people tune their barrels to reduce vibration by having a mass near the end of the barrel that they can adjust the position of. Maybe having a small and movable weight on each arms can help reduce vibrations when you adjust their positions?
That's a very very interesting idea but it would directly impact flight performance too. I actually do believe it would work however. I just never thought about it.
Chris Rosser is the man when it comes to frame resonance
..😉
Sure, resonance. What about the rest of the vibrations?
@@Kabab yeah that too, i forgot to mention. You probably know him already. He's based here in the UK. Got his own frame range, and goes in pretty hard scientifically. And no I'm not biased as i don't own any of his frames. Just saying incase you haven't heard of him. 😉
@@k1ortia yes I know of Chris. His work is good however he tends to negate the real world often and believes he can simulate everything. He also seems to think he knows everything there is to know so it's pretty difficult to work with him. A problem which I too have had issues with in the past but life has kicked me in the butt enough to let go of all that. Maybe in time he'll come around too.
@@Kabab Funny you should say that, as iv often thought the same to. It's as iv everything is purely simulation based as apposed to real life testing. I'm glad you've put some new content out though as iv not seen anything for a while, so i shall be watching and continue to watch the future videos..😊
Interesting! I had tons of oscillations in my last kwad to the point where I now sell it. Would be great to see an overall performance improvement. Keep up the good work!
Some damping grease may help that craft from an early death.
@@Kabab I guess I should try 🤔
Food for thought for you. The greater surface area that dampening material is able act with the more effective it will be. I suggest three or four milimeter neoprene foam.
Yeah that's why I'm considering doubling up on dampers just to test but I could never run with that because of the added weight.
Soft copper tubes absord resonance very well.
For sure. Copper is light too.
Interesting stuff Kabab
Steel cabels are often used as springs for vibration damping
Cradles for science equipment during transportation.
Lets say instead of suspending the fuselage section on the arm section with cables we just have a soft material in-between, it can be whatever tpu, rubber, polyurethane try a set of different stiffnesses. this could be attempted on a lot of different frames by just sticking a battery pad between the arm section and the middle plate. It's similar to chris rossers dampening grease idea but less messy.
yeah that works except that you also bolt the thing together which negates anything put between the carbon. We need the actual material that's damping to also be durable enough to hold the craft together.
Wow, subscribed. This is such a helpful video
The whole idea is to decouple the vibration from the motors. The more material the vibrations need to travel through, the more damping you will see, hence why moving the FC to the top plate has more of an effect because the vibes have essentially more distance to cover before reaching the FC. Think of all the mounting points and the material between them as conduits for conducting vibrations. The further your mounts are away from the source of the vibes, the more of a damping effect you will see. Configure the build like a maze where the vibes have the longest path to travel before reaching the FC.
That's what I'm hoping is happening...we'll see
This is also what I discovered while prototyping, interested in the results between the different position on the H frame because of the shorter arms
That's where the H frame theoretically makes sense. However I think you'll loose a lot of stiffness and overall rigidity in the whole structure that it creates new problems like lower freq vibrations and more critical resonance modes. So trying to balance that trade-off, you kind of end up with the standard X frame. Just my assumption. We'll see how your test works out
@@ariafpv It's less about X or H shape and more about the interfaces between parts IMO. I'd first focus on building a rigid structure for the arms and motors to have a solid foundation. From there you work backwards and come up with a clever way to decouple that from whatever part your FC is mounted to. The FC mount doesn't need to be strong in itself, it just needs to hold in it's place.
@@KevPV yes kind of what I meant. With X style I was just refering to a standard layout creating a rigid core in the center (opposed to the H frame he showed). Doesn't need to be the usual 4 interlocking arms. As you said the goal is to only have the FC be "decoupled" from the rest
return of he bro science king
😂
Thanks to your insistment I started to water floss my tooth. I never could stand the filament, hopefully water is good enough.
Whatever you use is the best thing. Floss is the best but a water flosser is absolutely fantastic if that's all you'll use regularly
Awesome work ninja. Thank you for sharing
Hi Bob, WoW! I have missed your videos,
10:48 oooooh pretty! Yeah, that’s fantastic for anything running filters - it’ll decompose really easily under an FFT transform!
That's my expectation
innovating innovators that innovate! 😃
It would be interesting to see the effects of two pusher propellers and motors (motors and propellers below arm)in various configurations with two standard propellers and motors (motors and props above arm). Two pushers directly across from each other in position 1 & 2 or two in position 1 & 3, or 2 & 4. Maybe I'm just crazy.
Better late than never, love the April fool's commitment
I reduce the vibrations in a slightly different way. I modified the betaflight configurator so that I can see the unfiltered vibrations on the motor as it spins from the configurator. The quadcopter is anchored not very hard, but enough not to fly away on soft material. I rotate the motor to a certain speed, record the maximum vibration amplitude and stop the motor. After that, I add a little adhesive tape to the propeller and act according to the method for worse or better. Thus, it turns out to reduce vibrations several times even on new motors and propellants. On my old gopro 3, this reduces the effect of jelly to almost zero.
Jello isn't the issue here. It's the vibrations getting to the gyro. What you do is dynamic balancing and the best way however it's very time consuming and doesn't last once you damage a blade a little or swap blades or even just unscrew and tighten a blade.
@@Kabab I tried today to change the flight controller to the top plate for the sake of interest. Without rubber dampers on the top plate but with dampers on the flight controller. According to the logs - it got a little worse. So apparently there is no difference in person closer or farther from the battery.
@@ekap123321 definitely good input. Thanks for testing.
teaser at the end? wow!
After years of carefully tuning to get rid of vibration and then constantly failing, I came to the realization that most of my vibrations come down to temperature. Not only do the resonance frequencies of the materials (carbon/rubber/gel) change, but also the characteristics of the electronics. Most FC use simple RC oscillators which aren't temperature stable, so they drift. So tuning filters for specific frequencies is completely pointless when you are flying in a wide temperature range. Not only that, if you look at datasheets of carefully profiled Gyros you'll find parameters like "Sensitivity percantage change per Kelvin", "Sensitivity percentage change per Volt" (at specific temperature), "Zero-rate offset over temperature change" and "Zero-rate offset drift per Volt" (at specific temperature). So in my opinion testing of frame vibrations only makes sense if you perfectly temperature control at least the electronics. A common practice to achieve that is to encapsulate the electronics and heat them to a fixed temperature. I don't think anyone would go that far for an otherwise simple hobby though.
Absolutely 100% correct. This is also part of the reason why I need a damping system but just works sort of no matter what. If it is as simple as just strapping the flight controller to the top plate with all the weight on it, that would really be a miracle. Also, if you're able to lower your filters or just generally give the filters an easier time, they will be more capable in a wider range of applications. This would include wider temperature fluctuations. If we can turn off our filters, there would be no more tuning. Everything would just work right with a general tune because the system knows exactly what's going on with the craft
Vibration isolation and vibration damping are two separate items. I would consider the rubber devices you have there as isolators. They may provide some damping, but their primary purpose is to provide isolation between the two ends of the isolator. It is also important to consider the frequency range of the isolator and how the mass and stiffness of the structure interact with the isolator. I think this is great and we are only scratching the surface here!
We've been clawing at the surface for over a decade now. There's no surefire way to get any sort of hardware damping consistently. Vibration isolators don't work for anything above 3" it seems. I'm guessing the amplitudes are too high when the prop size gets bigger.
@@Kabab I agree, this problem is not easy. I would like to see more of a focus on the frequencies that mater to the FC and what it’s just ignoring. From my understanding, we want to focus on the low frequency flight maneuvers and prop wash frequencies. When the vibration gets to the FC(gyro) it should be cleaned up from motor noise, frame resonances, etc. Most isolators aren’t going to do that well, the simple rubber ones are going to isolate at higher frequencies and maybe not in the correct axis, and if they do isolate at the proper frequencies they are likely to remove the important information as well. Setting up an isolator test stand might be something to consider.. set your quad on the bench and have a beat up prop and slowly ramp up the RPM and record BB… Try it hard mounted and then with the isolators… try to get enough data for a transmissibility curve… but just trying whatever isolator is available off of Amazon makes it tough. Should we be looking at the other end of the problem maybe? Engine isolation? Certainly the approach for cars and real airplanes…
@@REDhlg There is one way we could do this that could work out best. Two gyros. One hard mounted, one soft. Subtract anything that changes from the hard mount to the soft mount. Everything that's the same overall amplitude and movement is real movement that the FC needs to know about. Everything else is garbage.
In precision shooting competition, barrel harmonics is a big issue and there are several ways to deal with them. The simplest is using a heavy barrel (just like thicker drone arms), this only moves harmonics to a higher frequency, you still have to tune your handloads to match the barrel or use a barrel tuner (movable weight).
Another way to bypass harmonics is to have the muzzle of the barrel be constrained, this usualy means clamping the tip of the barrel to the stock, in drone terms this is like having a large structure of thinner struts instead of thicker one peice arms.
Now to realy remove harmonics, deaden the barrel, you have to convert the energy, there are a few ways to do this. The simplest is to remove direct load paths, this means barrels with dimples, outside threading and axial holes arround the barrel, in drone terms this would mean the arms would have holes and zigzag edges in so that the forces have to go around corners (aka stress risers).
The other way is dissimilar materials, this is like an aluminium or carbon fibre barrel with a stainless steel core, since the materials have different stiffness, much energy is lost transfering the vibrations. This is why carbon fibre is inherently a good damper since it is a matrix of epoxy resin and carbon filament, this is also how cars remove body vibrations by bonding a layer of urethane to the metal pannels.
@@paint4pain of these options, the different materials could be the best one for us except that in our case, we don't see waves of vibrations as much as we do overall twisting or wiggling of components. Waves are approachable with different materials and we still get some of that but the main issue is the odd twists and wiggles.
One of the main benefits of the H frame design which attracted me to it is that the frame will essentially have no pitch action vibration wise because there's nothing to wiggle. At least not with the energy given. Yaw won't be a big deal and is seldom a problem, roll is the only issue I need to resolve. The body twisting. That's the only notable mode that's gonna kill it. I have some tricks I'm gonna try....... we'll see
An old engineer told me; ‘to remove all vibration, one must remove all mass… however this is physically impossible.’
Great video man
Keep us updated!
Smoothest drone i ever built was a tpu toad 3d printed frame with priline tpu which is more stiff, i heated standoffs and pushed them into the tpu for deck plate mounts, then i glued carbon fiber plates to the petg printed deck plates and mounted a pod on top so camera wasnt looking at front of frame, thing is amazing
Most editing Bob has ever done
Dude, seriously! And when I started this video this morning I told myself I'm just gonna talk and not edit. Holy hell where is the Edit GPT function!?
Love this man
I once bought by accident a bag of rubber washers used in FPV. Since I had 100s, I just started putting them between the standoffs and the top plates on all my quads, because I keep hearing about resonance running through quad on videos, seemed like a damping opportunity.
I can say, I rarely see jello, and I tune really well, so maybe that goes together, but it hasn't hurt anything either.
It can actually hurt a lot. It's difficult to tell without testing it. Could help too. Definitely very hard to say it always helps. Especially if they're rubber with rebound. Also, they're definitely making the frame weaker. Gives them a stress point
Physics applied, torque and pull of each motors on the frame and static momentum created by the weight of all the stuff attached to the frame ( the sum of all forces involved must be zero ) the center of gravity of the drone must on equal distance to each motor, may be of help use soft springs for vibration dampening.
Maybe build a pwm motor controller that provides stepped voltage range at frequencies that are resonate? Series it with every motor like a individual motor controller. You may loose its power range and throttle will feel "steppy" but you then can add more voltage ramps that bypass frequencies that cause vibration.
Sounds like a bandaid on top of a bandaid. I hope to only be one bandaid deep by the time I'm done 😅
@@Kabab resonance frequency is what I feel I know pretty well. Build rifles for a living and also ISCET 1-6 cert. Mitigating vibration through damping is a harder approach. I recommend tackling it at the source... the motors.
@@EagleEyeShooting what you described is similar to how rpm filtering works. It just doesn't reduce output in doing it.
You might be onto something with that cable. I work for a major car manufacturer and when we're trying to eliminate vibrations, we add big hunks of steel to the problem areas to make it go away. Crude, but effective. If you ever get underneath a Genesis G90, you'll see what I mean.
Look up steel cable camera vibration isolation. It's used a lot. It's used in many industries because of it's damping properties. A great side effect from a super strong cable.
@@Kabab I'm familiar with that and understood your approach, but I was thinking adding weight to the areas you want to minimize vibration. Seems counterintuitive but it might work. Stick a stack of washers near the camera mount.
@@DeezLBC ah yes. That is something that would work great but you're also just adding dead weight which would be frustrating in something that flies.
i used to solder the esc cables to the FC (with thicker cables), and just remove the mounts completely from the FC. The FC was completely suspended just by cables. that worked.
That's actually a really good way to go if you can get it to stay consistently. I do this often to test things to see if vibrations are an issue.
I keep meaning to try out an idea I had with basically getting spare arms trimming the end off and using no more nails double sided tape them along the entire legnth to the original arms.
This tape is extremely strong and once fully bonded will be very hard to break but you could put something around the arm to act as a stop to limit how far the top arm can move during impacts etc to stop the core ripping apart. Maybe some loops of fibreglass tape loose enough to allow movement up until the point of ripping the tape construction.
I haven't seen things taped or otherwise attached with an adhesive to the arm to be useful. They may improve durability but I wouldn't expect it to be any help with vibrations
If you put a rubber between arms and frame and then screw it together with one long screw then vibrations are transmitted. Pushing together is dampened but pulling appart is limited by the screw. You have to put a rubber shim under the screw head to also dampen the pull forces.
A rubber cylinder with 2 not rigit connected threads should also work.
That starts getting pretty complicated and is a slippery slope if you think about it
lol years ago I just foam taped my flight controller to the battery. Problem solved ;)
Cool stuff!
What if you took some of the rubber damper things and mount them on the arms, just like on the bottom or top but not sandwiched with anything 😮
Show us the way of the void 🎉
You might want to consider playing with vibration damping sheet. For example, from McMaster: Vibration Damping Sheet 90% Vibration Reduced
Part number 9709T71
Unfortunately those don't work for us. We've tried.
Flossing, boss!
how you played with SpeedyBee Master 5 HD Frame. The whole FC is mounted on TPU section in the middle of the body.
BTW. I been experimenting for last 2 years with same issue you are describing.
You will find that carbon tubes as arms cut down on vibrations significantly. Maybe combining speedybee concept with CF tubes would give us interesting results,
The speedybee system is not much better than the rubber grommets already built into the FC. It may help a bit more. Probably doesn't hurt since the stack is generally low weight and hard to oscillate. I may pick one up to see how it is
This is gold
This is the WAY!!!
Keep up the good work! :)
I finally figured how to put that tension in my frame with no added weight or parts. I have only my experience to go one but I am very confident that it works.
You could use dental floss like I showed on my instagram. It weighs less than a gram...just not such a looker
@Kabab Try this. Shorter stand-offs at front and rear ends. Makes a slight arch instead of a flat top. But that arch puts tension along the bottom plate and top. Changes the frequency. Just 1mm (maybe2) shorter adds alot tension. I haven't notice any durability issues. Been doing this for about 2 years and haven't told anyone til now. Curious to know if you try it, and your findings. I tried this for other reasons but quickly noticed a consistency to the quad, even when making some other drastic changes to frame parts and layouts. Converting a 5 inch to 6&7 inch without changing arms. Got great results consistently. I'm pretty sure the frame under tension had alot to do with it.
@@airfriedquadsbw that doesn't work the same because it's rigid tension. Sure it'll stiffen things up a bit but it won't dampen anything and will increase the higher frequency band. For damping you need non-rigid tension
@Kabab It stops the transfer. You don't get the whole frame resonating as a unit. Seems like each arm is more isolated and the frequencies don't find a way into the stack.
@@airfriedquadsbw I can assure you it does nothing but give you a bit more rigidity. It does not stop anything. It may push the entire resonance band a tiny bit higher is all. There is zero damping going on from a rigid tension system.
I’m thinking as far as motors vibration up and down…
An h arm is going to result in twisting the center or bowing along the narrow dimension of the center plate.
An x if you consider a diagonal has a chance to bow the frame along the longeer center plate axis and likely bow a lot more.
I’m guessing that may be the arm difference.
You may argue it would just be lower frequency bows but I think the amplitude would be more.
Yep we're gonna find out
You need to tune the steel cables, like, a guitar / piano etc to dampen the frequency in a steel cable might work 👍🏻
Right. That's why I gave up. Too much work