Pontoons or Flotation Devices for the Phantom

[Jebus]

El Rey... I'd be concerned that the zip ties would just tear through the styrofoam in the event of a decent crash. Just a thought...

 

[El Rey]

El Rey... I'd be concerned that the zip ties would just tear through the styrofoam in the event of a decent crash. Just a thought...

Yes you never know. It is sculpting foam though - not regular styrofoam. It's a lot stronger and more rigid without being noticeably heavier. And if it hit hard enough to rip through a zip tie, I suspect it would be at an angle, leaving me with the hope that the side that didn't take the main impact might have one or two ties still connected somewhat.

I don't need it to land on the water perfectly if it crashes - just bob there so I can rescue it.

Failing the foam, the Getterback comes into play.

Failing that, it's a couple, six, seven tequila shots and some AC/DC turned up loud.

 

[Jebus]

Failing that, it's a couple, six, seven tequila shots and some AC/DC turned up loud.

Good idea. I think I'll make room for a bottle in my case. You never know! haha

 

[El Rey]

FAIL.

With this shape of foam attached the Vision didn't even want to lift off.
I can only assume the foam is directly in the path of lift, or creating some
air paths that disrupt lift.

Will take a closer look at some other disc designs online, but probably will
try a tri-pronged design next - with the prongs running along the gaps between props.

 

[El Rey]

Here's round 2.

• Trying to leave the path below the props free
• Lighter than the first pass
• Enough surface area to provide flotation and a reasonable chance of a flat landing
• Not interfere with the camera FoV

Will test it tomorrow.

 

[OI Photography]

Wish me luck.

Indeed, and do be careful. Looks like it may have a significant negative impact on the downdraft (and therefore thrust) from the props.

Looks like it should certainly be enough to let it float though, with decent resistance to tipping over in the water

I was worried you might run in to that

The modified version you came up with now look like it'll work a lot better for that, but since you're venturing in to mostly-uncharted territory it'll just take testing, testing, and more testing.

Have you floated it in the bathtub to check basic buoyancy of the new footprint (foamprint..?)?

 

[PJA]

Here's round 2.

Will test it tomorrow.

Interesting design...

I would ditch the prop guards for the water flight... Might make it too top heavy and tip the Phantom either way...

Just my opinion, of course...

Good Luck...

 

[El Rey]

Wish me luck.

Indeed, and do be careful. Looks like it may have a significant negative impact on the downdraft (and therefore thrust) from the props.

Looks like it should certainly be enough to let it float though, with decent resistance to tipping over in the water

I was worried you might run in to that

The modified version you came up with now look like it'll work a lot better for that, but since you're venturing in to mostly-uncharted territory it'll just take testing, testing, and more testing.

Have you floated it in the bathtub to check basic buoyancy of the new footprint (foamprint..?)?

For some reason I completely missed your earlier post about downdraft. If I'd seen it earlier I would have tried something different earlier. Cheers for that.

I will be testing the float in the bath today before I take it out.

 

[El Rey]

Here's round 2.
Will test it tomorrow.

Interesting design...

I would ditch the prop guards for the water flight... Might make it too top heavy and tip the Phantom either way...

Just my opinion, of course...

Good Luck...

Thanks for the suggestion. If a test flight indicates some issues I'll whip the guards off.

 

[jwuman]

nice,,,i love it....

 

[syotr]

Looks better than the last design. I wonder if it will tip over forward easily considering the camera weight is closer to the front.
My other concern would be external wind (not prop wash.) Look forward to seeing your tests.

 

[havasuphoto]

I'm still amazed that no one has come up with an "easy" solution for the Phantoms. They've been out for about a year....and still no "Pontoons".....
Subscribed.

 

[El Rey]

Looks better than the last design. I wonder if it will tip over forward easily considering the camera weight is closer to the front.
My other concern would be external wind (not prop wash.) Look forward to seeing your tests.

Yes that's my concern too. Balancing the need to keep the camera FoV clear with a design that will not topple forward.
Those little protrusions in the front were an attempt to provide some minimal forward surface area.

Having said which...

FAIL

Did not float. Not enough surface area.

Back to the drawing board.

I'm avoiding the simple pontoons because I think that to work they'll
need to be long enough that they intrude into camera view.

 

[OI Photography]

Did not float. Not enough surface area.

I'm making a guess here without a strong knowledge of the physics of foam buoyancy, but could you maybe add thickness in place of the surface area lost? Also, are there any other types of foam that would have better weight/buoyancy or mass/buoyancy ratios?

You're definitely getting an A for determination and effort both, and I hope you can find a working solution.

 

[El Rey]

Did not float. Not enough surface area.

I'm making a guess here without a strong knowledge of the physics of foam buoyancy, but could you maybe add thickness in place of the surface area lost? Also, are there any other types of foam that would have better weight/buoyancy or mass/buoyancy ratios?

You're definitely getting an A for determination and effort both, and I hope you can find a working solution.

I have the same foam in double thickness, so that is one option - yes.

The other one I'm considering is something close to the last design but without some/all of the holes, and perhaps a bit larger.

Other types of foam - Also something to look into. I don't know the buoyancy properties of this one I'm using at the minute.

 

[radioguy]

Can I bump this up again and ask if anyone has some advice about adding flotation to the Phantom.

I just did this on my two Phantoms and Blade 350. Went over to Wal Mart, bought one "noodle" for $4.00, cut it up into 6 (more or less) equal pieces, and put them on the landing skids. I used some tie wraps to secure them to the body of the craft. They're not pretty, but they do make it easier to find the craft when it's flying, and help if I have a rocky landing.

Good luck!

 

[El Rey]

Below are what some other people and companies are doing - just with a brief search.

Based on how much interest there is, I think DJI should come out with a weatherproof, water-resistant product.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Waterpr ... -Airframe/

http://nootrix.com/2014/01/indestructible-drone/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SY48lfuhFs

http://www.quadh2o.com/

http://vimeo.com/37773332

http://www.aquacopters.com/?p=28

http://www.uavframe.com/en/11-uav-multi ... frame.html

http://www.damngeeky.com/2014/02/03/181 ... ctica.html

http://forumdrone.fr/gallery/image/197- ... aterproof/

http://diydrones.com/forum/topics/waterproof-quad

http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/new-fpv-frame-sarq

 

[El Rey]

The biggest tip I could give after my recent loss, is don't fly over water that you have no means of traveling on.

I would still fly my next one over water tomorrow, but there's no point (or large risk) in theoretical water proofing or buoyancy if your Vision lands in the middle of a large river - as mine did - and you're not in a boat, kayak etc.

At that point, I realized all my imaginings were only about theoretical water protection - not practical.

It had no flotation, but even if I'd put some on - I had no boat, and the river is a large, wide, well-travelled waterway with ferries going past all the time.

And the same applies to the Getterback I had on. It probably did it's job great, but at 50 metres distance looking at slightly choppy water, I couldn't see a thing.

 

[syotr]

The biggest tip I could give after my recent loss, is don't fly over water that you have no means of traveling on.

I would still fly my next one over water tomorrow, but there's no point (or large risk) in theoretical water proofing or buoyancy if your Vision lands in the middle of a large river - as mine did - and you're not in a boat, kayak etc.

At that point, I realized all my imaginings were only about theoretical water protection - not practical.

It had no flotation, but even if I'd put some on - I had no boat, and the river is a large, wide, well-travelled waterway with ferries going past all the time.

And the same applies to the Getterback I had on. It probably did it's job great, but at 50 metres distance looking at slightly choppy water, I couldn't see a thing.

I almost always have my kayak with me when flying over water. The exception was at the Gauley River where I had to hike 800 feet down a very steep mountain to get to the river. In that case there were rafters and other kayakers in the water who could have retrieved my Phantom for me. I do fly with floats attached when over water.

 

[Jermz]

I lik the floats, but not the short legs connected to the motor arms. Something lightweight and aero that connects to the existing legs would be cool.

The pontoons definitely seem to work. If you went with longer legs they'd probably need to angle out to the side a bit to keep it from being too top heavy. I'm not sure what, if anything, that would do to flight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk