{"id":173,"date":"2025-02-05T13:45:15","date_gmt":"2025-02-05T18:45:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wp.stgeorges.bc.ca\/vincentz\/?p=173"},"modified":"2025-03-25T16:30:45","modified_gmt":"2025-03-25T20:30:45","slug":"sigma-drone-finale","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wp.stgeorges.bc.ca\/vincentz\/2025\/02\/05\/sigma-drone-finale\/","title":{"rendered":"Drone project finale"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
Vincent Zhao 2\/10\/2025<\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

One last time, we look back at the initial problem statement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We set out to design a human operable vehicle, capable of traversing a 10 kilometer round trip through titan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
\n

The hover drone prototype is designed to test the feasibility of aerial mobility relevant to Titan-like conditions. Specifically, this prototype shall be used to evaluate a drone\u2019s efficient lift-off, sustaining controlled flight, and making a 10 km round trip, bound to constraints similar to the low gravity and dense atmosphere of Titan. It shall also assess stability in simulated wind conditions and energy efficiency for longer distance travel.<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

This test was designed to evaluate the energy efficiency of our prototype drone during two types of flight paths: a straight-line path and a path with multiple turns simulating navigation over Titan\u2019s rugged and mountainy terrain. These tests aim to provide insights into how our full-scale vehicle might perform under similar conditions. For more details on the design and concept, refer to the planning post<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n

Final solution<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Our testing process was significantly compromised due to physical errors in building our drone. Initially, we had a well-structured plan: we would individually purchase drone parts, 3D print the frame of a CAD-designed FPV drone, and solder\/glue the everything to the frame. However, before winter break, we realized that the printed frame was too small and incompatible with our motor parts. Additionally, our limited experience with soldering and circuitry made the assembly process far more difficult than anticipated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To address this, our building leader, Joe, took the drone home over the break to work on it. Unfortunately, one of the circuits got fried during the process, leading him to reconstruct the frame using hot-glued popsicle sticks as a last-minute solution. Despite our best efforts, upon returning from break, we continued to face technical difficulties. The motors never fully calibrated, causing severe imbalance, and the drone was ultimately unable to achieve stable flight. After numerous failed attempts, we made the difficult decision to scrap our original drone and instead conduct tests using a fellow robotics teacher’s working drone with a similar weight. The measuring was made even easier as he had DJI drone goggles, which allowed us to actively see the voltage per cell in the display.<\/p>\n<\/div>

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/span>
\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Procedure<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Materials<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
    \n
  • Small drone (250 g).<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • DJI goggles<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Pre-measured field (100 m).<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Drone controller.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

    Preparation<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
      \n
    1. Drone Setup:<\/strong>\n
        \n
      • After getting these materials, we read the initial voltage and record the value<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Mark Testing Area:<\/strong>\n
          \n
        • We decided to fly the drone length-wise across the main senior school field, which is around 100m.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
          \n\n\n\n

          Test 1: Straight Flight Path<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
            \n
          1. Use the drone controller to fly the drone in a straight line along the path and back<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          2. Maintain a steady height and as straight a flight as possible.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          3. Land the drone at the endpoint and measure the remaining battery voltage.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          4. Initial voltage, and final voltage.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
            \n\n\n\n

            Test 2: Maneuverable Flight Path<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
              \n
            1. Guide the drone along a random maneuverable flight path, with multiple zig zags and turns with two AA batteries strapped onto the top to simulate realistic conditions<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            2. Land the drone at the endpoint and measure the remaining battery voltage.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
              <\/div>\n\n\n\n

              Data Collection<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

              <\/p>\n\n\n\n

              \n

              For our data collection, we focused on measuring voltage per cell (V\/PC) for battery use. We conducted two types of tests:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                \n
              1. NL (No Load) Straight Flight:<\/strong> The drone was flown in a straight line without additional weight, simulating a simple, controlled flight.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              2. L Zag (Loaded Zigzag) Flight:<\/strong> To better simulate real conditions on Titan, we taped on two extra 31g batteries to simulate the weight of a human passenger and flew the drone in a zigzag pattern to try and replicate the need to navigate around potential obstacles in Titan’s unknown and mountain filled terrain.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

                The following table presents the recorded voltage per cell at the start and end of each test, along with the overall voltage drop:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

                Test type<\/td>V\/PC at start<\/td>V\/PC at end<\/td>Voltage Decrease<\/td><\/tr>
                NL Straight<\/td>4.16<\/td>3.91<\/td>0.25<\/td><\/tr>
                NL Straight<\/td>4.08<\/td>3.86<\/td>0.22<\/td><\/tr>
                NL Straight<\/td>3.78<\/td>3.7<\/td>0.08<\/td><\/tr>
                L Zag<\/td>3.91<\/td>3.6<\/td>0.31<\/td><\/tr>
                L Zag<\/td>3.65<\/td>3.45<\/td>0.2<\/td><\/tr>
                L Zag<\/td>3.55<\/td>3.37<\/td>0.18<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                The test itself preformed as we intended it to. Although we changed up the procedure during the day of the test due to unexpected setbacks and using an external prototype, there was still an ample amount of data gathered for evaluation. The only issue is that there was not enough proper coordination for us to have specific control variables. For example we only had a No load straight and Load zigzag tests, when we could have included no load zigzag and load straight. However, we were on time constraints and the two tests we conducted are enough to simulate a control variable, and a realistic flight conditions variable as we flew the drone there and back three times for each test.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                Data Analysis<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                \n

                <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                For the six individual tests we flew, we recorded the starting and final values before and after the round trip. Our data shows that the battery voltage drop per cell (V\/PC) decreases slightly from one test to the next. This trend might be due to the fact that in each test the drone begins its flight from a resting position on the field. Because the drone is initially landed, the energy consumed to lift off. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                <\/p>\n\n\n\n

                <\/p>\n<\/div>

                \"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

                Defining Efficiency<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                \n
                \n

                In our tests, we define the energy efficiency of the drone in terms of the battery\u2019s voltage drop per cell per meter flown. We assumed that the voltage drop (\u0394V) is a direct indicator of the energy consumed by the drone during the test. Therefore, efficiency is expressed as:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                \"equation\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                Where \u0394V is the Voltage Per Cell (volts), and D is the total flight distance in meters<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                This allows us to measure volts per meter. A lower value indicates more effieicncy<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                Calculating Voltage drop<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

                We conducted two sets of tests:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  \n
                1. No Load (NL) Straight Flight:<\/strong>
                  The voltage per cell (V\/PC) was measured before and after flying a 110 m straight-line course.
                  The recorded voltage drops were:\n