Flight time and efficiency
- Thread starter jandjfrench
- Start date
Not plastic.
PatR
Premium Pilot
DCH,
You’re as old as I am. Pleased to see you’ve managed to survive the transition from rotary phones too[emoji106]
You’re as old as I am. Pleased to see you’ve managed to survive the transition from rotary phones too[emoji106]
Ok, Ok, Ok guys........my bad 
My assumption was that thinner air would allow for "easier" flying, less resistance
I failed to take into account the extra power required to lift the same weight thru thinner air, duhhh!!!
Lucky I'm not an aeronautical engineer!!!
LAX smog was bad to be sure.
Try Bombay(Mumbai) or Bahrain in the 70's and 80's
Strip clubs...where!!!???
I do remember a really good one in Vancouver...but I digress!!
I am relieved...I stand relieved.
My assumption was that thinner air would allow for "easier" flying, less resistance
I failed to take into account the extra power required to lift the same weight thru thinner air, duhhh!!!
Lucky I'm not an aeronautical engineer!!!
LAX smog was bad to be sure.
Try Bombay(Mumbai) or Bahrain in the 70's and 80's
Strip clubs...where!!!???
I do remember a really good one in Vancouver...but I digress!!
I am relieved...I stand relieved.
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2017
- Messages
- 4,258
- Reaction score
- 2,025
Hey I use to live in in a small town north of Ft.Sill, you could pick up the phone and listen in on conversations. And guess what gender was always on the phone? Their names were Mrs. Giftagab and Mrs.Spreadaroomer.
PatR
Premium Pilot
That’s where we held union (no pun intended) meetings. There was this chi-chi bar in Norwalk...
PatR
Premium Pilot
Okay, I'm an apostate. I got to thinking (always dangerous) and considered the goal; change in altitude while maintaining latitude and longitude. My hanging calibration method appeared to exacerbate the problem of the rearward CoG by having the props add an additional rearward force when flying. I found a rigid piece of corrugated cardboard large enough to sit on the prop buttons and verified that it was as level as the table on which the H sat. I was intending to measure the rearward lean while the H was hanging but then realized that the weight of the cardboard would contribute to the aft CoG. So I gave up on that. I then estimated as closely as I could how far the front skids were off the table. I set the H on the table and propped up the rear skids with magazine pages to approximate the amount of rearward tilt and di the accelerometer calibration. Hopefully, this will help. I'm beginning to see their wisdom when someone said "Just go out and fly!
I did locate the Vi.i UK version of the Manual and the calibration procedure is ambiguous as to whether the H should be hovering or not.' It can be interpreted either way. They do specify no wind which seems to argue for the hovering but some other factor may be involved.
PatR
Premium Pilot
The term is “over thinking”. Just set the H on a flat surface and run the calibration. The cal processes establish zero points, which is what is needed to generate imbalance offsets while in flight.
An out of balance condition will always be out of balance. Accelerometers cannot correct an imbalance, they can only compensate for an imbalance. When in flight a multirotor is always out of balance as the air moving over, under, through, and around the aircraft is not the same speed and direction in all places, so the accelerometers provide the FC with the data needed to make instant corrections, which happen continuously throughout the flight.
If a weight imbalance is within the systems correction tolerance the aircraft will be stabilized in flight. If a weight imbalance is too great it won’t be stable because the system would not have enough power available to deal with it.
Bear in mind that with small “consumer” drones the tolerance level is small. They weren’t designed to be extensively modified to adapt different payloads or addition of devices that have a significant impact on all up weight or CG. They are quite limited and those limits must be accepted and respected. There is no magic wand that can be waved to provide them any significant increase in flight time.
However, you do have the ability to throw lots of time and money away trying to solve a “problem” with only one solution, with that solution being purchase of a more capable, more expensive machine. When people figure that out they will spend a lot less in “fixing” problems and have more money left over to step up to more capable machines.
An out of balance condition will always be out of balance. Accelerometers cannot correct an imbalance, they can only compensate for an imbalance. When in flight a multirotor is always out of balance as the air moving over, under, through, and around the aircraft is not the same speed and direction in all places, so the accelerometers provide the FC with the data needed to make instant corrections, which happen continuously throughout the flight.
If a weight imbalance is within the systems correction tolerance the aircraft will be stabilized in flight. If a weight imbalance is too great it won’t be stable because the system would not have enough power available to deal with it.
Bear in mind that with small “consumer” drones the tolerance level is small. They weren’t designed to be extensively modified to adapt different payloads or addition of devices that have a significant impact on all up weight or CG. They are quite limited and those limits must be accepted and respected. There is no magic wand that can be waved to provide them any significant increase in flight time.
However, you do have the ability to throw lots of time and money away trying to solve a “problem” with only one solution, with that solution being purchase of a more capable, more expensive machine. When people figure that out they will spend a lot less in “fixing” problems and have more money left over to step up to more capable machines.
