I see this was about a year ago.. looking in video feed I don't see any follow up. I was interested in this drone/frame but with your words on filling the holes and such I was hoping you had a follow up with details on the final results. Any chance that could be coming soon?
@@ChrisRosser I’m looking into building an X-8 cinematic rig and I’m curious about the harmonic characteristics of solid CF arms vs carbon tube vs carbon square tube and which is least resonant. Love your channel and will be watching all your videos! Thanks for all the work!’
Just wondering do you post your materials settings that you use for the carbon fiber in the simulations (or resources on how to set them up myself)? I'm designing my own frame now but I'm somewhat confused on how to set up the material settings for carbon fiber.
I wonder when the cinema-drone-market is ready for custom made, non flat, tailored layup laminates that make it possible to have the motor raised without flipping the arm laminates on there side
In my experience as a cinelifter designer, builder, and pilot I find that usually low frequency spikes like that are due to camera payload oscillation. Did you rule this out in your investigation, or is it really the frame? It seems like there is a 74Hz harmonic on the yaw axis as you've shown, but how would that cause such a proportionally larger spike on the roll axis at ~70Hz? Usually when I have a frame or payload resonance, there is a favored direction, pitch, roll, or yaw, and the source oscillation can affect the other axis as well causing secondary oscillations. But from what I have experienced, those secondary (or indirect) oscillations are smaller than the one that is causing the ruckus in the first place. So I'm not sold on the idea that the yaw wonkiness is causing the roll axis harmonic spike. Bonus info: to reduce effect of camera payload resonance, you need as little filtering as possible to reduce phase delay so the controller can react in time so that there is less chance of the drone becoming "in sync" with the payload excitation frequency. You can use notch filters, but they really hurt flight performance. So the only best option is to have a frame that is extremely rigid in the directions that matter so that vibrations are pushed to the highest of frequencies so that the least amount of filtering is necessary. Then you can push your PD gains up to the point that low frequency spike doesn't peak too much. The higher PD gains are, the more excitable the drone is to payload oscillation so if you have a heavily filtered drone with high PD gains you are going to have bad payload oscillations. So it is better to have lower PD gains, but less filtering, which in the end gives you a locked in drone still (due to reduced phase delay of the PID loop), but without the LF oscillations.
Such good info dude. I mentioned this to Chris after talking to you about it. As you say part of the solution is making the frame more ridgid so the arms are still a step in the right direction. I will test various degrees of filtering and see what happens!
In my simulation the stiffness of the camera mount was modelled so if payload resonance was in play at 74Hz you would have seen it in the harmonic analysis. It does occur at higher frequencies in the model but not at 74Hz. My simulation approach is still in development for these larger drones but I did my absolute best to model the payload as well as the frame, motors etc.
Wow just wow! How you can get all this information from a cad & blackbox data is amazing. Watching your videos got me curious about Betaflight black box and I finally decided to set it up after being in this hobby for years.But I'm still learning on how to look & read the data! I just built my first seven inch build. And I changed the old MAYTEKF405 to a better Iflight Succex F7 Twin gyro stack that has on board 32mb flash black box. I'm hoping to get a better tune out of the F7. But as you know 7 inch quads are more difficult to tune than a 5 inch build. I need a Chris Rosser..lol But I have learn a little bit from watching your videos on how to look at the data! Great job Mate! Keep up the great work! Your bringing a important element to this hobby we never had before!
I have bigger craft then this little thing 13” and 14” props. and my raw noise ain’t like that. And guess what props can be balanced then there’s no need for all this. Props props props props. Build balance tune fly. It seem that you may be just opening an other endless rabbit hole
And recently there have some 8x motors, like cinelifter, those two up and down motors set at the same arm. how they affect the airflow, are they have a better benefit than a single motor at an arm?
Would it be beneficial then to run the fc off a dedicated power source? I’m sure this thing could carry an extra 500mah 2S pack. Or would the electrical noise also travel up the esc signal wires?
In the X811 all the noisy part's are in a dedicated place underneath the flight controller and below mainframe parts. The only thing in between the top plate and the centre plate is the flight controller and Vista. Tuning with this setup is a breeze.
Great video as always... do you think there would be a significant increase in performance if frame designers could adopt engineered carbon parts over parts cut from sheets ? Price being the obvious hurdle.
Thanks for your comment. These types of cinelifter drones are extremely popular for film and television work. They are probably used in many of your favorite shows. As a result they are very much worth analyzing. Adding a protective cage around the camera will not protect it in a crash (the g-forces alone will kill the camera) and adds too much weight for the type of shots this drone is designed to capture.
So, it's not me, but is there anything a Siccario owner could do that doesn't involve buying new arms? This process is helpful for future frame revisions, and I think all future drone frames will improve as a result of lessons learned through CR's videos, but what about those with the current frame revision?
Arm braces do help. I actually have it flying really well with the stock arms and braces - see footage on my channel. I just want the option to reduce filtering and improve performance.
Very nice analysis!also cored materials will be a huge benefit reinforcing also other axis.manufacturing getting more complicate and expensive though. Thank you
Just watched that now... and very intersting to see how to increase overall stiffness by 30% just by tweaking certain details. I'd really love to see an update here to see how your simulation-ideas turn out in reality! While watching the vid I also kept wondering if you couldn't add braces that are mounted against the center of the frame to create somewhat of that triangular arm design you use for your frames? I think next to prop wash handling and max D-Term for Cinequads vibrations have a third issue: A vibrating base of the camera will cause Jello in the image which is quite a challenge to handle when filming. So the quieter mount the camera, the easier it is to create good footage. It's always pretty interesting to see how significant improvements are, if you introduce a new and improved way to look at things. In production the introduction of lean management often cut costs down by 50% in the first run. And in the checkweigher world the introduction of modal analysis in addition to powerful filter settings basically allowed you to double precision or increase output 5x and more, using the same measurement technology.
Great video as always! I wonder will the vibration performance improve even further by adding another arm brace linking both rear arms? This way the movement of all 4 arms should be linked and possibly improve the vibration performance. Anyways, can't wait to watch the follow up video!
iFlight just released their own octocopter cinelifter - the Taurus X8 - for just $1,600. While I have no need for a cinelifter, I do have to marvel at getting an octocopter with 8" props, dual 80A ESCs, eight 2806.5 motors, and an INCLUDED 4400mah 6S battery for that price. Might be fun to acro :) With your custom tune recommendations, of course!
@@DesignTuneOperate Is this not good footage? th-cam.com/video/UTOcVtNEoHU/w-d-xo.html (asking seriously - I'm not a professional videographer and that looks nice to me - certainly better than I could do)
@@TheDiegoAranda That footage looks great thanks for sharing : ) The drone seems to cope much better with the smaller black magic camera. Because of the high mount design the bigger cameras don't seem to do well on it.
Hey Chris - I would take the stress and strain of the default carbon fiber in Solidworks with a grain of salt. The default solidworks carbon fiber material characteristics doesn't account for the anisotropic laminate behavior that carbon produces in the out of plane axis - as a result the strain and stress could actually be much worse than what is depicted.
@@Louishouiller Im sure pla braces would help, but i just design the bracing into the frame as i dont trust PLA, have seen too many parts fail after ageing /sunlight exposure, once you have a carbon arm holding the arms together it makes a great handle as well.... once you go large motors(like 9"+) or x8 i feel you need a third brace on the back to close out that square otherwise you can still get some yaw resonance which Chris showed here that still persisted even with the arm2arm brace....
You are just getting more understandable with each new video. That noise about 2:40 - are you saying it doesn’t matter because it can be filtered out with a low pass filter? If so I get that for the flight controller but surely it affects the video footage?
@@ChrisRosser Ahh I should have searched! I've just watched both, very interesting indeed. I think I'll stick with my apex and maybe grab one of your AOS 5 frames :D
@@ChrisRosser Hi Chris, sorry to hijack this video with unrelated stuff again but I noticed a pretty high profile pilot flying with no vibration damping on their stack. Everything was hard bolted to the frame using metal standoffs. They said that a lot of people believe the quad flies better that way. Would love to see a video on analysis of various stack soft mounting solutions and your thoughts on hard mounting (which just sounds mad to me).
@@FadeFPV Hard mounting? Everything that's old is new again I guess. I'd need to see a log to judge the effect on PID and filter settings. I'll remain extremely sceptical until then. Unless they are running incredibly agressive PID and filter settings there is little chance of a significant improvement.
This frame design looks smart for first look, because the camera is closer to the center, but you loose a lot on the filters side. It would be nice to compare this to a "traditional" design like taurus x8 or tube armed frames.
I just attended the church of Chris Rosser and I'm a believer.
I see this was about a year ago.. looking in video feed I don't see any follow up. I was interested in this drone/frame but with your words on filling the holes and such I was hoping you had a follow up with details on the final results. Any chance that could be coming soon?
This was a great video! Thanks for all the work. I curious if you favor carbon tube arms or solid square arms?
It's a great question. As the quad gets bigger I think carbon tubes become more attractive.
@@ChrisRosser I’m looking into building an X-8 cinematic rig and I’m curious about the harmonic characteristics of solid CF arms vs carbon tube vs carbon square tube and which is least resonant. Love your channel and will be watching all your videos! Thanks for all the work!’
That's what I like most about science: Being able to predict things and then prove or disprove them in real life.
Just wondering do you post your materials settings that you use for the carbon fiber in the simulations (or resources on how to set them up myself)? I'm designing my own frame now but I'm somewhat confused on how to set up the material settings for carbon fiber.
Amazing !
So detailled and yet perfectly understandable for non tech-saavy like me.
Thanks for this great job Chris 👍🏼
Glad you enjoyed it!
i would love to see something about whoops
Dumb question: Is the arm movement at 7:55 exaggerated? If not, how are the props not hitting the canopy etc?
Yes it's greatly exaggerated so its easy to see.
I wonder when the cinema-drone-market is ready for custom made, non flat, tailored layup laminates that make it possible to have the motor raised without flipping the arm laminates on there side
Amazing! Your knowledge is not common in the community... what kind of engineer are you? Thanks for sharing!!
I'm an aerothermal engineer. Thermodynamics, fluid mechanics and simulation is my jam.
Would be great for you to test the new SapX9 9" X8 frame. 20mm thick low drag arms. Gyro-scaled noise charts look way cleaner than these here.
Can you link to this frame I can't find it?!
Sub’d and awaiting your results!
Thanks and welcome aboard!
Can't wait for frame to arrive to reap the rewards of all this frame tuning work of yours!
I hope you enjoy it. I think mine flies better than the Apex I had.
which frame? you mean like a new cinelifter based on siccario?
@@definingslawek4731 My 5" freestyle quad the AOS 5 (aos-rc.com)
In my experience as a cinelifter designer, builder, and pilot I find that usually low frequency spikes like that are due to camera payload oscillation. Did you rule this out in your investigation, or is it really the frame? It seems like there is a 74Hz harmonic on the yaw axis as you've shown, but how would that cause such a proportionally larger spike on the roll axis at ~70Hz? Usually when I have a frame or payload resonance, there is a favored direction, pitch, roll, or yaw, and the source oscillation can affect the other axis as well causing secondary oscillations. But from what I have experienced, those secondary (or indirect) oscillations are smaller than the one that is causing the ruckus in the first place. So I'm not sold on the idea that the yaw wonkiness is causing the roll axis harmonic spike.
Bonus info: to reduce effect of camera payload resonance, you need as little filtering as possible to reduce phase delay so the controller can react in time so that there is less chance of the drone becoming "in sync" with the payload excitation frequency. You can use notch filters, but they really hurt flight performance. So the only best option is to have a frame that is extremely rigid in the directions that matter so that vibrations are pushed to the highest of frequencies so that the least amount of filtering is necessary. Then you can push your PD gains up to the point that low frequency spike doesn't peak too much. The higher PD gains are, the more excitable the drone is to payload oscillation so if you have a heavily filtered drone with high PD gains you are going to have bad payload oscillations. So it is better to have lower PD gains, but less filtering, which in the end gives you a locked in drone still (due to reduced phase delay of the PID loop), but without the LF oscillations.
Such good info dude. I mentioned this to Chris after talking to you about it. As you say part of the solution is making the frame more ridgid so the arms are still a step in the right direction. I will test various degrees of filtering and see what happens!
In my simulation the stiffness of the camera mount was modelled so if payload resonance was in play at 74Hz you would have seen it in the harmonic analysis. It does occur at higher frequencies in the model but not at 74Hz. My simulation approach is still in development for these larger drones but I did my absolute best to model the payload as well as the frame, motors etc.
Clever Sausage!
Wow just wow! How you can get all this information from a cad & blackbox data is amazing. Watching your videos got me curious about Betaflight black box and I finally decided to set it up after being in this hobby for years.But I'm still learning on how to look & read the data! I just built my first seven inch build. And I changed the old MAYTEKF405 to a better Iflight Succex F7 Twin gyro stack that has on board 32mb flash black box. I'm hoping to get a better tune out of the F7. But as you know 7 inch quads are more difficult to tune than a 5 inch build. I need a Chris Rosser..lol But I have learn a little bit from watching your videos on how to look at the data! Great job Mate! Keep up the great work! Your bringing a important element to this hobby we never had before!
I have bigger craft then this little thing 13” and 14” props. and my raw noise ain’t like that. And guess what props can be balanced then there’s no need for all this. Props props props props. Build balance tune fly. It seem that you may be just opening an other endless rabbit hole
Excellent analysis Chris. Very feasible.
Surprised you don't see more yaw noise if the body shakes side to side like that.
And recently there have some 8x motors, like cinelifter, those two up and down motors set at the same arm. how they affect the airflow, are they have a better benefit than a single motor at an arm?
Fantastic analysis! Very interesting
Thank you kindly!
Biggest issues on these is ESC/motor electrical noise getting to the gyro. Since most run 2x 4-in-1 ESCs, it seems to be tough to avoid.
Would it be beneficial then to run the fc off a dedicated power source? I’m sure this thing could carry an extra 500mah 2S pack.
Or would the electrical noise also travel up the esc signal wires?
In the X811 all the noisy part's are in a dedicated place underneath the flight controller and below mainframe parts.
The only thing in between the top plate and the centre plate is the flight controller and Vista.
Tuning with this setup is a breeze.
On this rig I actually turned the FC round 90 degrees and the noisey axis didn't move with the FC so it is certainly a physical issue
@@DesignTuneOperate good check!
Great video as always... do you think there would be a significant increase in performance if frame designers could adopt engineered carbon parts over parts cut from sheets ? Price being the obvious hurdle.
Yes some increase in performance but the cost would be much more proportionally.
Yeah well why dont we use carbon tubes/pipes, Should be much more stiffer?
It comes down to manufacturing cost and complexity. I think for really large drones it might make good sense.
It's not worth analyzing because he is flying with an expensive camera without protective cage around it
Thanks for your comment. These types of cinelifter drones are extremely popular for film and television work. They are probably used in many of your favorite shows. As a result they are very much worth analyzing. Adding a protective cage around the camera will not protect it in a crash (the g-forces alone will kill the camera) and adds too much weight for the type of shots this drone is designed to capture.
Great video. thanks.
You are welcome!
Good stuff! Looking forward to the follow up to see how the predictions hold up. Cheers!
You and me both!
So, it's not me, but is there anything a Siccario owner could do that doesn't involve buying new arms? This process is helpful for future frame revisions, and I think all future drone frames will improve as a result of lessons learned through CR's videos, but what about those with the current frame revision?
Arm braces do help. I actually have it flying really well with the stock arms and braces - see footage on my channel. I just want the option to reduce filtering and improve performance.
grate video thank u i want to buy ur frame the AOS 5 but budget was low on money anyways ill get it next time
Thanks for your support!
The video thumbnail is so bad. Great work aside that! Keep doing what you are great at.
Have you seen my other thumbnails? This one is a work of art by comparison! 😋
Concise informative and enjoyable as always
Much appreciated!
Very nice analysis!also cored materials will be a huge benefit reinforcing also other axis.manufacturing getting more complicate and expensive though.
Thank you
You are welcome! I think simplicity not manufacturing is a key consideration.
So far non have found a core material that can handle the shear forces in the middle of the arms.
Just watched that now... and very intersting to see how to increase overall stiffness by 30% just by tweaking certain details. I'd really love to see an update here to see how your simulation-ideas turn out in reality! While watching the vid I also kept wondering if you couldn't add braces that are mounted against the center of the frame to create somewhat of that triangular arm design you use for your frames?
I think next to prop wash handling and max D-Term for Cinequads vibrations have a third issue: A vibrating base of the camera will cause Jello in the image which is quite a challenge to handle when filming. So the quieter mount the camera, the easier it is to create good footage.
It's always pretty interesting to see how significant improvements are, if you introduce a new and improved way to look at things. In production the introduction of lean management often cut costs down by 50% in the first run. And in the checkweigher world the introduction of modal analysis in addition to powerful filter settings basically allowed you to double precision or increase output 5x and more, using the same measurement technology.
Great video as always! I wonder will the vibration performance improve even further by adding another arm brace linking both rear arms? This way the movement of all 4 arms should be linked and possibly improve the vibration performance.
Anyways, can't wait to watch the follow up video!
Can you try to make a video about cinelifter camera mounting systems. That would be awesome and a topic nobody is talking about.
great content!
I'd love to see an analysis of the armattan tadpole 3 and tadpole HD
Can you do the same for Shendrones Thicc please
iFlight just released their own octocopter cinelifter - the Taurus X8 - for just $1,600. While I have no need for a cinelifter, I do have to marvel at getting an octocopter with 8" props, dual 80A ESCs, eight 2806.5 motors, and an INCLUDED 4400mah 6S battery for that price. Might be fun to acro :) With your custom tune recommendations, of course!
Building your own would be cheaper, have better performance with larger 2812 motors and have better satisfaction
It would be interesting to know what the cost would be to build one yourself...
I am yet to see any good footage at all from the Taurus X8
@@DesignTuneOperate Is this not good footage? th-cam.com/video/UTOcVtNEoHU/w-d-xo.html (asking seriously - I'm not a professional videographer and that looks nice to me - certainly better than I could do)
@@TheDiegoAranda That footage looks great thanks for sharing : ) The drone seems to cope much better with the smaller black magic camera. Because of the high mount design the bigger cameras don't seem to do well on it.
👍👀🇭🇷
was waiting for this one!
Hope you enjoyed it!
This is amazing Chris! Keep this up!
Hey Chris - I would take the stress and strain of the default carbon fiber in Solidworks with a grain of salt. The default solidworks carbon fiber material characteristics doesn't account for the anisotropic laminate behavior that carbon produces in the out of plane axis - as a result the strain and stress could actually be much worse than what is depicted.
Hi Zach. I'm not using solidworks at all. I've created my own anisotropic models for the materials.
@@ChrisRosser Awesome!!! Fantastic to hear. Do you use anisotropic behavior or quasi-isotropic behavior?
@@zachcarrizales5038 Fully anisotropic. The 6x6 compliance matrix.
@@ChrisRosser Wooooohoooooo!!!!!!
Good work dude, looking forward to the next frame arriving!
Glad that you two got connected! Good stuff.
@@drduc848 Here is hoping for some minimum filter Siccario action
yep vertical carbon arms need bracing inbetween as the yaw flex is huge due to lamination direction, crazy vertical stiffness though
why wouldn't PLA arm braces work?
@@Louishouiller Im sure pla braces would help, but i just design the bracing into the frame as i dont trust PLA, have seen too many parts fail after ageing /sunlight exposure, once you have a carbon arm holding the arms together it makes a great handle as well.... once you go large motors(like 9"+) or x8 i feel you need a third brace on the back to close out that square otherwise you can still get some yaw resonance which Chris showed here that still persisted even with the arm2arm brace....
You are just getting more understandable with each new video.
That noise about 2:40 - are you saying it doesn’t matter because it can be filtered out with a low pass filter? If so I get that for the flight controller but surely it affects the video footage?
The frequency is high enough that I would not typically expect it to be visible in the camera footage.
@@ChrisRosser Thanks !
Hey Chris, great content! I love this stuff. Could you do a frame analysis of the vega gravity and impulse apex?
Apex has already been done 👍 The Vega gravity looks to be a traditional design so should be similar to the XL5 I looked at recently.
@@ChrisRosser Ahh I should have searched! I've just watched both, very interesting indeed. I think I'll stick with my apex and maybe grab one of your AOS 5 frames :D
@@ChrisRosser Hi Chris, sorry to hijack this video with unrelated stuff again but I noticed a pretty high profile pilot flying with no vibration damping on their stack. Everything was hard bolted to the frame using metal standoffs. They said that a lot of people believe the quad flies better that way. Would love to see a video on analysis of various stack soft mounting solutions and your thoughts on hard mounting (which just sounds mad to me).
@@FadeFPV Hard mounting? Everything that's old is new again I guess. I'd need to see a log to judge the effect on PID and filter settings. I'll remain extremely sceptical until then.
Unless they are running incredibly agressive PID and filter settings there is little chance of a significant improvement.
This frame design looks smart for first look, because the camera is closer to the center, but you loose a lot on the filters side. It would be nice to compare this to a "traditional" design like taurus x8 or tube armed frames.