3D Printed 5" CineWhoop with Overlapping Propellers - Venn Drone PART 2

[@FlauxFpV]

Nice You Added All Around PropGaurds, Looks A Totally Different From The Previous Model You Created. Progression Brother, You Rock!

[@RCwithAdam1]

Thanks for noticing! 👌

[@WindCatcherRC]

Another cool video. Thanks for all of your hard work. "Creators got to create" That sounds like it should be on a t-shirt.

[@RCwithAdam1]

Thanks Lee! 😁

[@AdventureFPV]

This project looks like loads of fun, I love all the crazy stuff and test you do. Keep up the good work.

[@RCwithAdam1]

Thanks, will do!

[@billykuan]

Dude the world is watching and waiting for you to finish that Zenith 750 that you have in your garage. What happened, the series has been very informative.

[@RCwithAdam1]

Hey, Billy. Thanks for your interest. Got burned out, moved, busy with other work, and stuff. It's still on my list, but probably won't happen anytime soon.

[@jumpstartfpv]

Great work! Loved it

[@RCwithAdam1]

Thank you!

[@55amps]

Quadmovr has something similar. that sound I know .

[@eprohoda]

my der~ Yo! what a amazing ~ 😍

[@RCwithAdam1]

Thanks!

[@Kabab]

Just saw this part two. The sound is not an issue other than it sounding scary (use quad blades and give it a throttle cut to improve loudness a bit). It'll tune fine as well. What may not be immediately obvious is that you don't really want a cinewhoop performing like a 5"....so not really meaningful to compare against a 5". You really need a platform that moves slowly with excellent control. Even with the coaxial overlap, what you have there is probably significantly more efficient than any ducted 3" could ever be. Like I described in the last video however, the main issue here is that it's gonna hover around sort of slippery in the air. It'll start sliding quickly at very shallow angles which generally is annoying when trying to get a steady slow shot. Also, yeah the guards super duper suck. Nothing new there. You can improve guard performance by making the lateral holes even more such that the air can release easier. Maybe just two levels of a flat print with standoffs between. Plain standoffs will have more freedom for air. One other issue which is obvious but also not really something that can change much. The weight distribution is good but the CG is pretty much as bad as it gets. Overall control is gonna suffer but it also has a 5" drivetrain so that could make up the difference.

[@RCwithAdam1]

Interesting points. Yes I wonder if four- or more-bladed props would help with the sliding issue as well as the sound.

[@CLEATUSMCGILLICUDDY]

yo my dude, maybe for your prop guards try to cut out a pattern of as many polygons as you can from them(lattice polygon style?), think of the shape of a honeycomb. its the strongest structural shape mother nature has created and also will provide the least wind resistance crammed with impact protection i did it on a DJI FPV 5" then put sections of one of my carbon fiber arrows in between the wings and you can crash that shit going 60+ and they wont break.

[@UnfairFrame653]

I like this idea but i think you get less efficiency than a 4 inch with this design and weight. still looks cool tho. also how’s the „cheap“ x class quad project going?

[@RCwithAdam1]

Agreed. A clean 4" would sound a lot nicer, too. Thanks for asking! I'm still working on that design--integrating carbon fiber tubes and 3D printed parts.

[@Surferant666]

Put the green props on the other side of the motor

[@RCwithAdam1]

I'm not sure what you mean

[@Surferant666]

@@RCwithAdam1 one set on top one set underneath

[@rocketshipsandrobotsinterg2184]

I wonder what is actually in a flight controller ? What do those microscopic gyros and acceleromters even look like ? All i get online are articles saying a " flight controller does it with propellers and thin electrical wires . These parts are controlled by an rc tranciever using batteries and radio signals . " Like really ? If they don't know they should just say so .

[@yannickg6904]

Any difference in flight characteristics if you flew with the overlapping props in the other axis? With the camera pointing on the side of the current frame? Any clear advantages to running it this way?

[@RCwithAdam1]

I not sure what you mean. Do you mean like if I had stretched the frame in the other direction?

[@yannickg6904]

Having the props overlap along the pitch axis, instead of roll. If that makes it any clearer.

[@yannickg6904]

@@RCwithAdam1 After considering it a bit more, the quad might become too unstable in pitch. Not enough distance between front and rear props.

[@RCwithAdam1]

@@yannickg6904 all the props still overlap, just not as much and the two diagonal ones not at all.

[@yannickg6904]

@@RCwithAdam1 Thanks for the feedback, interesting concept.

[@flipthebird6355]

uhhhh, first?

[@RCwithAdam1]

⭐

[@mastermaker8782]

Hey adam I m Maithilya from India Can u pls giveaway any of your old (used) Transmitter and receiver I m a great follower of rc hobby from a long period of time But i can't afford those parts which are quite expensive I hope you think about this Thanks

[@stuartkeithguitars4251]

Haha....take it from a guy that made composite aircraft props for 20 years for everything that flies. You're doing it wrong. Those flows being chopped....there's no chance of being quiet and I could guess efficiency losses of up to 30%. Could be more. That sound makes me laugh. You could maybe cant them at an angle so the flows don't touch. You'd loose lift efficiency but perhaps gain maneuvering speeds. Fun stuff. The guard could be far more aerodynamic. The spars on those could be shaped much cleaners. Non laminar flow everywhere on that. You lose another 10% on the guard. That airflow is super screwy. A bunch of that buffeting goes away when the spars are shaped more like airfoils pointed leading edge up. Okay....and the props are cheap. The better shaped they are at the leading edge and tips, the quieter they'll be.

[@sarasu5614]

Use emu flight .best for whoops...

[@RCwithAdam1]

Thanks for the tip