9 ms·

Show HN: I made a 3D printed VTOL drone

• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• truetraveller 1y ago
  Top speed?
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Not tested! But minimum I would say 70 mph. If designing for speed, I'd be looking at a cruise motor and prop that maximizes the thrust output rather than cruise efficiency edit: at least 70 mph
    • the__alchemist 1y ago
      Probably significantly higher even? A normal quad will hit 100Mph +.
      • tsungxu 1y ago
        Could be right! Really depends because the quad motors on freestyle say have massive throttle upside they can tap but it increases power draw and reduces flight time by multiples.
        • the__alchemist 1y ago
          Yea def! You could also get into questions of cruise speed with level altitude vs in a dive etc, and you burn through batteries fast when max-performing quads!
          • tsungxu 1y ago
            Exactly! Didn't even mention cruise vs dive. But the latest WR for a quad doing 347mph I think, is just insane, even if drawing multi hundred amps for a few seconds only.
            • aspenmayer 1y ago
              Oh wow, that’s even higher than this one I saw from last year @ 298 MPH for a quadcopter, but I’m not sure if this is the same criteria for the WR or build limitations etc? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wThmg8Ezm9w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wThmg8Ezm9w
              • tsungxu 1y ago
                I saw that one too which was also incredible. This latest record was from a few days ago https://youtu.be/8p5eZ4ZRkfY?si=hSxTh5BeSyEwzpy8 https://youtu.be/8p5eZ4ZRkfY?si=hSxTh5BeSyEwzpy8
                • aspenmayer 1y ago
                  Simply amazing! Do you know what the limitations for WR builds are at this level? I am guessing there is some kind of advancement on the prop/rotor(?) side of things but I would assume that those are off the shelf, like many of the parts used in quadcopter builds? I guess what I’m asking if it’s primarily a design challenge, a production challenge, a logistics challenge or all of the above? I don’t mean to minimize any aspect of the process or anyone’s work, quite the opposite. It’s a neat challenge and different teams take different approaches with some overlapping design features to my untrained eye.
• bufferoverflow 1y ago
  It's an impressive achievement for an amateur. He has separate motors for vertical and horizontal flights, which simplifies the design, but creates a rather bad inefficiency, the vertical motors create lots of drag during the horizontal flight. Maybe it's not a big deal, I'm not sure. Making motors rotate would add weight for sure, thus reducing the range.
  • the__alchemist 1y ago
    Adding a tiltrotor mechanism is surely not worth the added complexity and weight, in this case. You're right though on the added weight and drag from having separate motors and props.
    • tsungxu 1y ago
      And also iteration cycles slow down, adds cost to development and qualification if making them in-house for larger prototypes.
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    It's actually not a terrible inefficiency. With this config, the cruise motors and prop are optimally sized for cruise - which gives non trivial gains to both eta for propulsive motor efficiency and prop efficiency. Vs a tiltrotor/wing/body in which the cruise motor has to do double duty as lifting motors. Given it takes anywhere from ~4-7x more power to hover (depending on disc loading) than to cruise, you can see how the motors are not in an optimal throttle/rpm band in this case. Archer's CTO Munoz has actually said this publicly.
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    And the weight (and drag) penalty is ~5% given the actuators and subassemblies for tilting don't come for free either. This is also the most the penalty will ever be as electric motors continue increasing in specific power, and quite rapidly this century so far.
  • xnx 1y ago
    Very similar design already used by Wing. I'm guessing they did a fair bit of analysis and modeling of the cost, range, complexity, safety, etc. etc. tradeoffs before settling on what they're using currently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_Aviation#/media/File:Wing_delivery_Vuosaari_3.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_Aviation#/media/File:Wing...
• georgel 1y ago
  Very awesome! Have you tried to see how much payload it could hold in addition to the drone's own weight?
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Thanks, I've not! But given the battery mass fraction is 53% for this build, rule of thumb is about 30% of a VTOL's weight for battery if you want to include payload. So I could just use a smaller 6S battery. Or I could probably add another ~0.5 lbs or a little more without issue. The lifting motors hover at 45% ish throttle so there is some headroom for more payload without reducing battery mass fraction.
• asadm 1y ago
  Pretty impressive! what's the BOM here. That battery seems expensive (most expensive part?)
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Thanks! Yes ~$700 without battery and I scored the Amprius pack on special for $700 but it is currently $1300.
    • ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 1y ago
      So, ~$2000 USD? Why not just say that?
      • tsungxu 1y ago
        Variability of price for the Amprius pack, anything from $700-$1350 at four price points.
        • ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 1y ago
          Yeah, can just take the max, like you did with the range calc.
  • Sohcahtoa82 1y ago
    > That battery seems expensive (most expensive part?) At first, I was like "Nah, just looks like my RC car battery", but then I Googled it...and it's a whopping $1,305 [0]. I looked closer at the specs and they're insane for a battery as small as it is. They have double the energy density as measured by both volume and mass compared to my RC car batteries [1]. [0] https://www.upgradeenergytech.com/product-page/gold-v1-6s2p-21600mah-amprius-sa08 https://www.upgradeenergytech.com/product-page/gold-v1-6s2p-... [1] https://www.amazon.com/Zeee-Connector-Vehicles-Helicopter-Airplane/dp/B0BX5MFFX7/ https://www.amazon.com/Zeee-Connector-Vehicles-Helicopter-Ai...
    • tsungxu 1y ago
• the__alchemist 1y ago
  I'm curious how this compares to foam-frame designs. Being able to customize it is obviously a big advantage, as is the non-solid-infill of 3d-printed parts. I think for stiffness, 3d-printed frames don't work well for quadcopters compared to carbon fiber, but they sound like a nice alternative to foam for fixed-wing. I think the stiffness concern comes up in quads mainly when they do high-performance maneuvers that aren't a concern for the takeoff and landing this device does in that mode. (e.g. high accelerations/manevers of racing-style drones) If anyone wants to try this: The parts he uses are all standard Chinese-made COTS you can buy on amazon and similar. The ArduPilot firmware he uses is very flexible and robust, but setting it up is one of the worst UXs I've experienced. Commercial UASs almost universally use PX4 instead.
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Yes I used single wall foaming PLA which is much less impact resistant and more brittle vs any foam, even cheap foamcore and especially EPP or EPO. This has definitely been an issue with crashing and rebuilding. But my first and only other VTOL build was foamcore Readyboard and that took a 12 ft drop onto asphalt with only a slight compression in the fuselage. Never replaced it. I would add dovetails or other clips for printed sections if I did another printed build. Yes avionics and propulsion parts are COTS for speed, the Amprius pack is US manufactured but others are all made in China. I'm starting to see some more Ardupilot used commercially too but yes the UX is janky and unintuitive.
    • the__alchemist 1y ago
      Hopefully now that it's in a polished state, you don't need to worry as much about impact resistance as you did when designing/tuning.
      • tsungxu 1y ago
        Thanks, I did crash it again, and that's why it was half assembled on the wall at the end. But yeah foaming PLA is extremely soft, almost feels like tough, thin paper.
• snapetom 1y ago
  As someone who has always been curious about building one but haven’t dove into it, I’d love detailed plans and a beginner-oriented tutorial. I’d be happy to donate/patreon to an effort.
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Appreciate that! It's just a lot more effort making long videos with the voiceover/clips/etc.
• firesteelrain 1y ago
  [flagged]
  • ponector 1y ago
    Ukraine has dozens of drone producers, many are capable of producing 10k+ per month. This one is quite expensive (2000$) and more is for home-grown terrorist (like 3d-printed firearms)
    • tonyhart7 1y ago
      "like 3d-printed firearms" is this even a thing lol??? I thought manufacturer already have a safety in place like printer that refuse to print money for that
      • cooper_ganglia 1y ago
        I would hope printer manufacturers would not ban you from printing certain items! I would never buy from any 3D printer company that did that.
        • tonyhart7 1y ago
          Yeah but for certain countries or places, its necessary noo??
      • aspenmayer 1y ago
        Yes, this is a thing. Supposedly such a thing was used in a recent attack. 3D printers are not able to determine intended operation of their printed output from their print job inputs, whereas counterfeit money has no legitimate purpose, so anything that looks “close enough” for an automated system to detect is probably close enough to fool a human if passed to them as if it were the real thing. I think preventing counterfeit money is a broad enough social good/benefit that a broad cross section of industry, government, and private individuals and groups have decided to work together to make it harder to produce. I don’t see who is harmed by this, besides people trying to print their own currencies for their own purposes, some of whom aren’t trying to make counterfeit copies of actually-existing currencies, but I think they are already going to have to worry about the counterfeit problems themselves if their currency is used outside of controlled conditions by trusted parties.
• tonyhart7 1y ago
  damn, I would like built this too hope I can build mine 3d printer lab first
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    You should do it!
• aaroninsf 1y ago
  Congratulations this is really fantastic and quite inspiring!
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Thank you!
• protocolture 1y ago
  Have you released the BOM/STLs anywhere?
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
    • gaudystead 1y ago
      Would love it if you do! Also, you might get additional ideas if you post to the 3D printing subreddit as well. Either way, nice work!
      • deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
• ImageDeeply 1y ago
  Very cool. Very impressive. I hope it inspires other to build things they're passionate about. "You can just do things. And learn things." No need to wait for permission, or classwork (much less a degree), or a guide/teacher.
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Thanks and yes I'm glad you say that. Would love to see it. It's hard to convey how much faster and better your work will be if you are actually passionate about it.
• normie3000 1y ago
  This is incredibly impressive. I'd love to hear more about what relevant skills & knowledge you started with, and how you worked out what you'd need to know to complete the project. How much customisation did you need to make to Ardupilot? Is your drone's control unique, or somehow standardised?
  • stavros 1y ago
    It doesn't look like it required any AP customization, AP will do VTOL out of the box.
    • tsungxu 1y ago
      Yes, one of the challenges though is airframe structural integrity when building it yourself. Need to have good enough understanding of multicopter and fixed wing plane design
  • hadlock 1y ago
    Ardupilot is very, very mature software. A lot of the drone video coming out of Ukraine, the HUD overlay is likely from Ardupilot. If you can think of it, Arduipilot supports it. Airplanes, helicopter, VTOL, speedboat, even sailboats.
    • tonyarkles 1y ago
      As someone who works with ArduPilot professionally, I have very mixed feelings about it. It’s mature, definitely. It supports all kinds of vehicles, like you say. It’s beautifully modular and supports a crapload of flight control and sensor hardware. And there are definitely pieces of it that are aggravating and exceptionally janky. The HUD overlay you’re referring to is technically Mission Planner (GCS software), not ArduPilot (flight control software). Mission Planner and ArduPilot both talk Mavlink, and they’re both developed by the same community. MP is flexible. You can set it up to do almost anything you’d ever want. It’s also terrible and exceptionally janky… but extremely powerful. And they’re both free. I think the problem with both of them is that they’re good enough that there isn’t likely to be a huge critical mass developing a better alternative. On the GCS side there is also QGroundControl and APM Planner 2 (which was a fork or reimplementation of Mission Planner). Both of them have their own upsides and downsides, but neither one of them is as mature or as powerful/flexible as Mission Planner. PX4 on the flight controller side is popular commercially because it’s BSD-licensed instead of GPL, but the net result is that it has nowhere near as many features as ArduPilot because companies build proprietary features and don’t push them back upstream. This stuff is definitely in the worse-is-better domain. ArduPilot is free, ArduPilot is amazing and ArduPilot sucks. :) Anyway, off to bed. I’m in a long test campaign right now and we’ve got to be up at 0430 to fly the ArduPilot-based aircraft again before the weather goes sideways.
• 3x3m3 1y ago
  How far can it be remote controlled?
  • stavros 1y ago
    If you use ELRS, probably 100ish km.
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Yes it really depends on the transmitter protocol. I was using SBUS, simple, cheap, familiar from my previous project. But limited to < 1 mile or so I believe, but ELRS and other protocols allow tens of miles or more.
    • Karliss 1y ago
      Isn't SBUS receiver<->autopilot electrical/data protocol instead of transmitter<->receiver radio protocol?
      • tsungxu 1y ago
        Yes, you're right, I meant ACCST not SBUS
• mlsu 1y ago
  This is the first I've heard of foaming PLA, definitely have to check that out. Did you do the whole airplane with a small printer like the A1 / A1 mini? I would love to print airfoils but I'm struggling to imagine a way to link individual prints together in a way that preserves stiffness. My 100cm wing would need 10x (10x10cm) printed parts somehow attached to one another. Until I figure this out it's foamboard building for the type of airplanes I want to build (glider)
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    A1, 256 x 256 mm lets me print these wings in four sections (including a double walled thin section for the boom mounts). With a high AR glider you'd probably need a few more. Carbon fiber spars + CA glue will do the trick for attaching them
    • tonyarkles 1y ago
      Yeah I printed one of the Titan Dynamics airframes (before they closed up at access for the hobby market) on a Prusa MK3S using foaming PLA and CF spars. The fuselage came out in three prints, the wings as one print each, and then the two wing tip extensions got combined into one print. It would definitely have been tight on an A1 mini but the full size A1 would work great for sure.
      • tsungxu 1y ago
        I actually managed to batch print the wing sections which you can see in the video in the rebuild chapter. That works really well for wing sections because each takes up a minimal bed area
        • tonyarkles 1y ago
          Definitely! I would have done the same but it was my first time working with the Foaming PLA filament and didn’t want to waste too much of it if the print failed.
• michaelhoney 1y ago
  Awesome work OP, great to see your journey.
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Thank you!
• energywut 1y ago
  I have ~200 acres of land I fly a drone survey mission to map. Today, that piloting is done by dronelink and a DJI drone. The challenge is that it's about 3 hours of flight time, give or take, to cover the space, and a given battery is good for about 35 minutes of flight time. I have 4 batteries, which means I basically need to be refilling my batteries as quickly as I consume them in order to keep flying continuously (unfortunately, even with a quad-charger, I cannot fully sustain this.) I would LOVE to have a fixed wing drone that could fly over the area and snap close-to-nadir photos as it did so, but the complexity of building and programming a hand built drone seems so much higher than deploying an off the shelf DJI drone. Additionally, the land is steep, with a 1,000+ foot elevation difference, and rugged, and the neighboring land is airspace I cannot fly within, so I couldn't use it to perform my turns. Author, or others, any thoughts on whether it's worth pursuing a fixed wing aircraft to perform this mapping mission? Or is the best bang for my buck to just buy enough batteries to fly the mission continuously on an off the shelf quadcopter?
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Great question! I don't think there's any sub $5k VTOL you can just buy COTS that can get close to 3 hours of range. Also, nothing is as plug and play as DJI. If you're motivated enough to do a little DIY and learn how to use Ardupilot or PX4 (easier), you can buy a kit like the Heewing T2 VTOL and assemble yourself. But I don't think that will do more than two hours flight time, even with a similarly high energy density battery pack to what I used.
  • cyanydeez 1y ago
    I reviewed and purchased a smaller drone, from WHISPR. Through that, I looked at similar VTOL drones, which OP is demonstrating. In theory, they're cheap: https://www.uavmodel.com/products/makeflyeasy-hero-2180mm-uav-vtol https://www.uavmodel.com/products/makeflyeasy-hero-2180mm-ua... This one has a maximum climb rate of 3 degrees. Which means you'd need to plan a route that's continously climbing, and tacking back and forth to avoid going steeply. So you would probably combine flight planning using Mission Planning: https://ardupilot.org/planner/ https://ardupilot.org/planner/ and custom json tweaking following MavLink protocol: https://ardupilot.org/dev/docs/mavlink-routing-in-ardupilot.html https://ardupilot.org/dev/docs/mavlink-routing-in-ardupilot.... The open source flight controllers and systems are https://ardupilot.org/copter/docs/common-autopilots.html#open-hardware https://ardupilot.org/copter/docs/common-autopilots.html#ope... a good place to start. There's a few orgs building the full experience, but you'll of course pay for fully integrated, but still open source, hardware+software. The scenario you describe is exactly what a VTOL or normal play is for; quad copters simply do not cover enough ground. Also consider the camera. DJI typically ship with really low quality cameras, but https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1785754-REG/sony_ilx_lr1_industrial_camera.html https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1785754-REG/sony_ilx_... would get you a much higher pixel density so if you're more interested in the imaging, you can flight higher, near the licensed ceiling, completing more ground faster. I've also found AI models know how to calculate pixel densities, so it's pretty easy to mock out a flight plan even if you dont have the actual drone available.
• thedays 1y ago
  Nice work! This is very impressive and you’ve shown real resilience and perseverance to work through the challenges you encountered while building this.
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Thank you, appreciate that!
• cwmoore 1y ago
  “”” ‘A century ago, you needed at least a brother and a bicycle shop to pioneer flight. Today, you just need the right toolchain…’ Incredibly humbling! “”” The imagination to reality loop is most rapidly well-tuned for categories that exist.
• mystraline 1y ago
  Happen to have the BoM and the 3d parts available in a repo? Would love to try my hand at reproducing the work you did!
• Klaus_ 1y ago
  [dead]
• tamimio 1y ago
  I loved it! But I loved even more the idea of when a person has no prior experience or knowledge in something yet achieves great results in a short period of time. That build mindset is fascinating. The only issue is when applying for normal jobs, unless the interviewer can see through a person's passion, they usually assume you don’t have what it takes or won’t "raise the bar" for whatever they are after. That is, unless you lie or throw in all sorts of buzzwords to create a halo effect. I have a question, though: Any info about the flight stack? Was it Pixhawk/Ardu, iNav, or something else?
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Thanks! On the normal jobs point though, see Peter Ryseck's build which got him hired by Joby https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd2N_lyO_SQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd2N_lyO_SQ
• atemerev 1y ago
  Impressive! Can you share the design to the Ukrainians? [be careful, so it won't leak anywhere else]. 3 hours loitering can mean a lot on a battlefield.
• guiolmar 1y ago
  Nice work! It's incredible, it looks super robust.
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Thanks! Not robust exactly because the filament I used is has really poor impact and UV resistance. But that's the tradeoff with lightweighting
• throw14082020 1y ago
  Ardupilot is really cool, and a lot of people use Mission Planner with it. What do people think of Mission Planner, and are there any other software options people enjoy using? https://ardupilot.org/planner/ https://ardupilot.org/planner/ - the website seems down right now though.
  • aesbetic 1y ago
    Mission Planner is an alright GCS but awful for configuration. Use this instead https://github.com/ArduPilot/MethodicConfigurator https://github.com/ArduPilot/MethodicConfigurator. And if you're looking for other ground controls, you could try out QGroundControl or Mavproxy (terminal based).
    • tsungxu 1y ago
      This is neat! It seems like it could help with set up speed generally and also simplicity for beginners
• 93po 1y ago
  Love this! This is what HN is for.
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Thanks, really appreciate that
• jojohohanon 1y ago
  I’m curious about the control surfaces. Since you have the four quadcopter motors, you could potentially just induce all three of yaw pitch and roll by powering those up. I wonder if the reduction in weight from the now unneeded servos would pay for the extra battery drain.
  • kulhur 1y ago
    How would you get yaw?
    • jojohohanon 1y ago
      Same way you get it in a quadcopter. You increase rpm in the (say) clockwise rotating props and decrease it in the counter clockwise rotors. Net effect is yaw counter clockwise, but zero net change in lift.
  • tsungxu 1y ago
    Great question, but spinning lifting motors in cruise draws more power than it's worth for efficiency. There's ways to use differential thrust for multiple cruise motors to roll if not positioned at spanwise Cg (e.g. wing mounted like in a commercial jet), but again, usually not efficient. Servos are a small mass fraction relative to other components.
• rytis 1y ago
  For anyone not familiar with acronyms (like me), VTOL stands for "Vertical Take-Off and Landing".
  • rpigab 1y ago
    Funny nitpick, this definition applies to most drones, because most drones sold are x-copters and do not have wings, they always take-off and land vertically. This should be "a 3D printed winged VTOL drone"
    • tsungxu 1y ago
      Yeah it's a strange term because it probably originated relative to fixed wing planes. Ie a VTOL plane. But now multicopters are the predominant species so VTOL can sound redundant to most drone builders today.
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
• NoSalt 1y ago
  OP is now on the FBI watch list.
• ideashower 1y ago
  What's the weight on the batteries alone?
• joshua_yang 1y ago
  Can we have a followup video testing the 130 mile range, or optimizing it? I would like to see the limits this could push
• dsrtslnd23 1y ago
  what caught my eye are the SOTA battery cells used (Amprius SA08) - with pack costs of USD 1300. As you can see here: https://www.batemo.com/products/batemo-cell-explorer/?mode=normal https://www.batemo.com/products/batemo-cell-explorer/?mode=n... - this is by far the best gravimetric energy density on the market.
• deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
• xnx 1y ago
  Very impressive. How important are control surfaces with a multimotor design?