Autopilot wing

[Ialwayslaugh]

For a while now, I have been planning to make an autopilot wing. I decided to go with the FT spear and thought that I would use a Pixhawk 4 flight controller and pair it with a Raspberry pi 3 and program a few things into the Pixhawk and execute the programs and also have live telemetry using MAVlink. If there are any experienced users that have done something similar and can help me with a few tips on this topic and help me choose software (Ardupilot, Mission planner, etc...) to use best for this project, please let me know. : )

 

[LitterBug]

You can do all this much cheaper with a Matek F405-wing FC running ArduPilot. I have a full telemetry setup over f.port to a Taranis X9D+ and just use Bluetooth to communicate with Mission Planner when on the ground. I could easily switch to standard telemetry radios instead of the Bluetooth dongle. The nice thing about using one of the Matek FCs is they have OSD onboard, so it is easier to set up FPV.

Not sure what your plan is for the PI3. I have my share of RPis, but haven't done anything with them in the air yet. I have thought about using one for radio Survey work with a SDR dongle, but not for control.

Cheers!
LitterBug

 

[Ialwayslaugh]

You can do all this much cheaper with a Matek F405-wing FC running ArduPilot. I have a full telemetry setup over f.port to a Taranis X9D+ and just use Bluetooth to communicate with Mission Planner when on the ground. I could easily switch to standard telemetry radios instead of the Bluetooth dongle. The nice thing about using one of the Matek FCs is they have OSD onboard, so it is easier to set up FPV.

Not sure what your plan is for the PI3. I have my share of RPis, but haven't done anything with them in the air yet. I have thought about using one for radio Survey work with a SDR dongle, but not for control.

Cheers!
LitterBug

Hey there,

Thank you for the reply, I really appreciate it. while I agree that the Matek F405-wing is a lot cheaper and does have a lot of functionalities, I am not sure if I can connect the pi to the FC. cause I was looking to use this setup in the future for some projects that require the pi3.

 

[clolsonus]

Ardupilot or pixhawk are going to be (by far) the easier path towards full autonomous capability. Unless you have really specific reasons not to do that, I would point you in that direction. The people I hang out with lean more towards px4/qgroundcontrol, but it's super cool to consider running ardupilot on the really inexpensive flight controller hardware now.

I'm a little crazy (but not as crazy as the guy that shows up in a nearby lake and swims every morning at 6am) so I designed my own fully autonomous system based on a teensy-3.2 (or teensy-4.0 now) and a beaglebone which is similar to a raspberry pi (runs linux, etc.) I've been wrenching on this system since 2005 or so, we run a high quality EKF developed at the university of Minnesota that mathematically blends gps and imu to accurately estimate roll, pitch, true heading (and location, velocity.)

My core teensy code has all the sensor reading, EKF, control allocation, simple rate damping. The beaglebone runs the higher level stuff, speed/altitude/heading hold, route management, logging, communication. Much of the beaglebone code is written in python as an attempt to be open and accessible to more people. The teensy side is written all in arduino style C++. My thinking is I have 2 simpler pieces that plug together versus one really complicated massive do-everything thing like px4. The ardupilot and px4 software stacks have become so incredibly complex over the years. My system is probably complicated too, but I've tried focus on simplicity. I see this kind of like keeping an airplane design light weight ... you really have to think about it at every step of the design and build to actually come out light in the end. Same with software development ... complexity creeps up on you and compounds if you aren't super careful.

Anyway, I don't want to side track your thread with my stuff, but happy to talk more about it if you are interested.

 

[LitterBug]

Hey there,

Thank you for the reply, I really appreciate it. while I agree that the Matek F405-wing is a lot cheaper and does have a lot of functionalities, I am not sure if I can connect the pi to the FC. cause I was looking to use this setup in the future for some projects that require the pi3.

There are plenty of serial ports on the Matek board. I am only guessing that is what you need since there isn't much detail provided as to what the Pi3 will be doing. If you could give a little more detail, we could give better informed answers. You can run mavlink protocol on any of the serial ports, so it should be possible. I could even test connectivity with my gear here if you want.

https://ardupilot.org/dev/docs/raspberry-pi-via-mavlink.html

Cheers!
LitterBug

 

[Ialwayslaugh]

There are plenty of serial ports on the Matek board. I am only guessing that is what you need since there isn't much detail provided as to what the Pi3 will be doing. If you could give a little more detail, we could give better informed answers. You can run mavlink protocol on any of the serial ports, so it should be possible. I could even test connectivity with my gear here if you want.

https://ardupilot.org/dev/docs/raspberry-pi-via-mavlink.html

Cheers!
LitterBug

By using the pi3 I was talking about how I can use it to implement live changes, for example, if the plane does x then the pi would make the necessary changes and make it do y. That is what I meant, sorry for not being descriptive

 

[LitterBug]

By using the pi3 I was talking about how I can use it to implement live changes, for example, if the plane does x then the pi would make the necessary changes and make it do y. That is what I meant, sorry for not being descriptive

That is still VERY vague. That description is exactly what the flight controller does too.

 

[makattack]

I agree with LitterBug... you kind of need to specify what it is you're thinking of doing. Even without going into too much detail, an example might be:

"The RPi will be connected to a camera and will be processing images. If it sees an image, it will adjust the flight plan or parameters, such as altitude to increase until the obstacle is not detected."

There are a number of ways you might do that, but I think that using a Pixhawk vs a Matek controller won't really simplify that for you, so you might as well go inexpensive, especially for a first UAAV build.

 

[Ialwayslaugh]

I agree with LitterBug... you kind of need to specify what it is you're thinking of doing. Even without going into too much detail, an example might be:

"The RPi will be connected to a camera and will be processing images. If it sees an image, it will adjust the flight plan or parameters, such as altitude to increase until the obstacle is not detected."

There are a number of ways you might do that, but I think that using a Pixhawk vs a Matek controller won't really simplify that for you, so you might as well go inexpensive, especially for a first UAAV build.

Hey there, I will try my best to explain the this.
An example I can give is, if there is a change in speed due to wind, the plane can correct itself back to the set speed by adjusting the throttle until it is at what I set the speed too. And it should be capable of doing this while it completing its flight path that I set up on mission planner or inav. And if this step goes well, in the future, I can then add a camera and still have the above process going on while the camera can detect a tree or a pole and avoid the obstacle and then go back to completing the rest of the flight plan without veering off-course. I also saw that you mentioned that since this is my first autopilot project, I should go with more inexpensive parts, if that is the case, can you please recommend something better or more inexpensive for my project? I hope this clarifies what I was planning to do.

 

[JasonK]

Hey there, I will try my best to explain the this.
An example I can give is, if there is a change in speed due to wind, the plane can correct itself back to the set speed by adjusting the throttle until it is at what I set the speed too. And it should be capable of doing this while it completing its flight path that I set up on mission planner or inav. And if this step goes well, in the future, I can then add a camera and still have the above process going on while the camera can detect a tree or a pole and avoid the obstacle and then go back to completing the rest of the flight plan without veering off-course. I also saw that you mentioned that since this is my first autopilot project, I should go with more inexpensive parts, if that is the case, can you please recommend something better or more inexpensive for my project? I hope this clarifies what I was planning to do.

not counting the image processing/avoidance parts of it... everything you describe there will run on a fairly standard F7 flight controller chip running inav, ardupilot, or one of the other auto pilot based firm wares.

 

[Ialwayslaugh]

not counting the image processing/avoidance parts of it... everything you describe there will run on a fairly standard F7 flight controller chip running inav, ardupilot, or one of the other auto pilot based firm wares.

Thank you for replying, can you please recommend/link one these fc’s that you find will work best with this project? Apart from the image detection of course

 

[JasonK]

Thank you for replying, can you please recommend/link one these fc’s that you find will work best with this project? Apart from the image detection of course

it looks like @LitterBug gave you a functional model already (I believe I have that exact one).

googling "f7 flight controller wing" can get you lots of hits on a F7 based flight controller designed for a wing. I haven't personally used any of them, so I can't give you a specific recommendation.

 

[LitterBug]

The Matek F405-wing or F765-wing would do just fine. Either can do the automatic speed control. You are going to want to have an airspeed sensor to make sure you do not fall below stall speed if you have a tail wind for example. Sense and avoid would be on the pi while the flight controller can handle the basic flying and stabilization.

 

[LitterBug]

Price for performance, flexibility, and functionality, the Matek F405-wing and F765-wing can't be beat. There is a newer H7 based Matek h743-wing about to hit the stores too.

 

[Ialwayslaugh]

The Matek F405-wing or F765-wing would do just fine. Either can do the automatic speed control. You are going to want to have an airspeed sensor to make sure you do not fall below stall speed if you have a tail wind for example. Sense and avoid would be on the pi while the flight controller can handle the basic flying and stabilization.

Thank you for helping!

 

[Ialwayslaugh]

You can do all this much cheaper with a Matek F405-wing FC running ArduPilot. I have a full telemetry setup over f.port to a Taranis X9D+ and just use Bluetooth to communicate with Mission Planner when on the ground. I could easily switch to standard telemetry radios instead of the Bluetooth dongle. The nice thing about using one of the Matek FCs is they have OSD onboard, so it is easier to set up FPV.

Not sure what your plan is for the PI3. I have my share of RPis, but haven't done anything with them in the air yet. I have thought about using one for radio Survey work with a SDR dongle, but not for control.

Cheers!
LitterBug

Hey, I just had a question, doesn't a Bluetooth connection only has 50m of range. So if the plane in not within 50m, will I not receive live telemetry to my ground station? Also can I use something like this on the H743 flight controller? https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07Y4P3MN9/?tag=lstir-20

 

[LitterBug]

Yeah, I have several sets of the 3dr radios. That is typically what people use with ArduPilot. I have been foregoing that for frsky s.port and f.port telemetry lately, and just using Bluetooth for doing config on the ground.

 

[Ialwayslaugh]

Yeah, I have several sets of the 3dr radios. That is typically what people use with ArduPilot. I have been foregoing that for frsky s.port and f.port telemetry lately, and just using Bluetooth for doing config on the ground.

oh, but can I use that telemetry radio i linked?

 

[LitterBug]

oh, but can I use that telemetry radio i linked?

Yeah, those are 3DR compatible.