Multi Rotor

An Easy Way To Select an Electric Outrunner
Motor Power System for an ARF, Kit or Plans Built

Glow Powered Prop Plane
(Heck of a title, eh?)
By Ken Myers, May 2011
Updated: September 2012 with all links checked
September 2011 Update: Revised and easier to use Excel workbook.
Spelling and grammatical errors corrected in text. The screen
captures of the spreadsheets have been updated to the latest version.
Note: There are MANY ways to choose an electric power system for
a glow conversion to electric power.
This is just ONE way to do it!
Converting a glow powered almost ready to fly (ARF), plans built

or kit built, prop propelled, model aircraft to an electric power system
may seem like a daunting task to someone with no electric power
system experience.
"How can the motor, and the other electric power system
components, the battery, electronic speed control (ESC) and
propeller, be selected by someone with little prior knowledge of
electric power systems?"
Why is picking an engine so 'easy' for a glow plane and a motor so

'hard' for an electric?
When suppliers of glow engine airframes recommend a certain
cubic inch (cu.in.) displacement 2-stroke or 4-stroke engine, it is not
just a power recommendation. They are not only recommending the
engine 'size', but they are also recommending the prop diameter and
pitch.
For any given glow engine, there are only a handful of prop sizes
(diameter and pitch) that will work well within the engine's power
range.
Prop Chart from www.flyurbana.com/media/Chart.PDF
A typical sport 1.20 4-stroke might use a 14x8, 15x6,

15x8, 16x6,16x8, 17x6, 18x5, or 18x6 prop. (See Prop Chart for
Four-Stroke Engines.) Various prop brands may 'work better' or
'worse' on a given engine, but the size (diameter and pitch) is quite
limited.
On the other hand, varying an electric motor's cell count within an
acceptable range, and varying the 'acceptable' level of input power, a
given electric motor may use many, many different props within its
acceptable power range.
A Scorpion SII-3020-890 (3846-890, 166g) motor, using a 3S LiPoly battery, is in its useful power range using a 10x5 prop through a
15x6 prop. There are roughly a dozen or more diameters and pitches
that fall within the useful power range when a 3S pack is used. The
motor is rated up to a 5S Li-Poly. Using a 4S or 5S pack adds a whole
array of different props to the mix resulting in well over 25 different
prop sizes that may be useful within the motor's power range. Using
"A123" 2300mAh LiFePO4 cells instead of Li-Poly cells adds even
more usable props to the mix!
To keep the process as simple as possible, a glow to electric Excel
workbook, with spreadsheets for Li-Poly and "A123" 2300mAh cells,
has been designed to use as a guide.
The technique presented here is based on limiting the prop
selection. First, the required power in (watts in) is determined. The
required power in is based on the supplier provided information for
the glow powered ARF, kit or plans. Next the prop size is determined
and the rest of the power system components are matched to the prop
power requirements.
Step 1: Estimate a Suggested Power In.
The Suggested Power In unit of measurement is watts in (watts =
volts times amps) as displayed by a power meter connected between
the battery and electronic speed control (ESC) at full throttle. It
isExtremely Important to verify that the current and power do not
exceed the capabilities of the motor, ESC and battery. Exceeding the
capabilities of any of the power system components will cause
catastrophic failure to one or more of the power system
components! A power meter is essential when working with

electric power systems!
The Example Model:
Balsa USA 1/4 Scale EAA Bipe

The spreadsheet is designed so that user inputs are placed in cells
with green backgrounds and results are presented in cells with red
backgrounds. The spreadsheet input cells are noted in parenthesis
after the Manufacturer or Supplier recommended maximums (Max.).
Name of Plane: 1/4 Scale EAA Bipe (B6)
Max. 2-stroke: 0.80 cu.in. (B7)
Max. 4-stroke: 1.20 cu.in. (B8)
Max. wt. 8 lb. (must be in pound) (B9)
Wing area: 1018 sq.in. (B10)
The Wing Cube Loading (WCL), presented in result cell (B13),

is 6.81oz./cu.ft.
Knowing what wing cube loading (WCL) is or how it works is not
important to the use of the spreadsheets.
More information on WCL.
Average and Median watts in/cu.ft.

There is a table on the spreadsheet, similar to the one shown
above, that shows the average and median watts in per cubic foot of
wing area. It also indicates the WCL Level number and typical types
of missions. The lower the WCL level number, the "easier" the plane
is to fly. The easier a plane is to fly, the more susceptible it becomes
to increasing wind speeds.
The example plane has a WCL of 6.81; Level 3 'typical park flyer'.
Even though the 'typical' mission is 'park flyer', the example plane is
too big and fast to actually fly in a park, but it will fly like a 'typical
park flyer', very easily.
The Suggested Power result is 975 watts in.

The weight range is the first motor characteristic determined.
The Lightest OUTRUNNER motor result is 390g.
The Heaviest OUTRUNNER motor result is 610g.
Step 2: Determine prop diameter

The electric prop diameter is based on a relationship to the 4stroke Standard Propeller diameter. To determine the prop diameter,
add 2 inches in diameter to the 4-stroke recommended Standard
Propeller.
The example model's recommended 4-stroke engine is a 1.20. The
chart shows a 16" diameter propeller as the Standard Propeller for
this engine. 16" + 2" = 18" (Input B20)
If only a 2-stroke displacement is given by the supplier, multiply it
by 1.5 for a 4-stroke equivalent displacement. It will be close enough.
Round to nearest actual 4-stroke displacement found in the chart.
No 4-stroke .30 is shown in the chart, but a 10" diameter prop
would be standard.
What if the suggested 4-stroke diameter doesn't allow enough
ground clearance?
If the plane has a tricycle landing gear configuration, or for some
other reason, a prop with the suggested diameter can't be used using
the 4-stroke method, add 2 inches of diameter to the suggested 2stroke glow engine prop diameter.

A typical tricycle landing gear, high-wing or shoulder-wing, glow
40 trainer might use a .40 or .45 2-stroke engine using a 10-inch
diameter prop. (see table) A 12-inch prop diameter should be
a usable.
Step 3: Determine prop pitch
This is the 'hardest' part of the whole process, and I can't help you
with it. Basically, you can't go wrong, as any of the suggested pitches
will provide the information required to find the correct motor, ESC
and battery combination. I use APC E thin electric props and base my
selection on the pitches they have available for the chosen diameter
and the plane's mission.
The pitch suggestion box (cells A37 through B40) shows

suggested pitches for the WCL levels after the prop diameter is input.
The prop diameter, for the example plane, is 18" and
was input previously in B20.
For Cub-like planes, biplanes and other civilian light aircraft with
a WCL level of 4, it might be better to use the WCL 1-3 pitches.
If more speed is desired of a WCL level 3 plane, a pitch may be
chosen either between the WCL 1-3 pitches and the WCL 4-7
pitchesor at the lower end of the WCL 4-7 pitches.
The example plane is a WCL Level 3.
Choosing the recommended middle pitch, 10", allows the static
current draw to be adjusted slightly down using the lower pitch or
slightly up using the higher pitch.
A 10" pitch was chosen for the example and input into B21.
The APC Web site was used to verify that there is an APC 18x10E
thin electric prop.
The final choice of which prop pitch to use may depend on the
availability of possible props and may require rounding.
A Word About Props
Not all props are created equal! Zinger props should be avoided.
They are relatively inefficient, compared to other brands, when used
in electric motor applications and draw too much current.
APC slow flier (SF) props and GWS RS props are not designed
for this purpose.
APC sport, pattern and thin electric (E) props are appropriate.
APC props are listed at www.apcprop.com/pindex.asp.
Master Airscrew wood props and G/F 3 series props also work
well in electric power applications, but NOT the Master Airscrew
electric props!
Once the prop diameter and pitch have been input, the resultant
Target RPM of 5500 and pitch speed of 52 mph are displayed. The
Pitch Speed to Stall Speed ratio of 3.31:1 is displayed. Anything
greater than 3:1 is quite good.
Pitch Speed Conformation:
Pitch Speed Table

For reference, the pitch speed table can be used to compare the
pitch speed to both average and median electric and glow powered
planes. The table indicates that a predicted pitch speed of 52 mph for
the example plane is a bit 'faster' than the typical Level 3 electric and
a bit 'slower' than the typical Level 3 glow plane.
Recap:
1. Motor needs to handle at least 975 watts in
2. Motor weight range between 325g - 610g
3. Chosen prop is an APC 18x10E
At this point, an important motor number is missing. It is the Kv
(RPM/volt) number. Don't worry if you don't know what it is or how
it affects a motor's operation. It just needs to be determined and used
for final motor selection.
More information on the motor constant Kv
Step 4: Determining which Kv (RPM/v) to use
Manufactures and suppliers provide one more important piece of
information about their motors. It is called the Kv (RPM/v). Kv is a
motor constant that is best thought of as RPM per volt out. It is not
the expected RPM per volt applied at the ESC!
The chosen prop combined with the number and chemistry of

the cells contained in the battery pack determines the
appropriate Kv.
The useful amp draw range is used to select the number of cells.
For Li-Poly cells, the useful amp draw range for most glow to
electric conversions is between 30 amps and 60 amps.
The spreadsheet Estimated Kv (RPM/v) provides a useful starting
point. Motors within a range of about 5% of the predicted estimate
should be considered. On the spreadsheet, the range is indicated in
yellow cells under the Estimated Kv. Kv numbers at the high end of
the range may have a higher than Anticipated Amp Draw. Kv
numbers at the lower end of the range may have a lower than
Anticipated Amp Draw.
For the example plane, 5-cell (5S) through 9-cell (9S) Li-Poly
packs should be considered.
In general, the lower the amp draw, the higher the system
efficiency is.
How to locate a motor - the hard part:
Where do you look if you don't know what you are looking
for?
A good place to start is a Web site called RCBOOK.
It does not have all the manufacturers and suppliers of electric
outrunner motors in its database, but it does have a lot of them.
Manufacturers' and suppliers' Web sites may also be used for specific
'brands.'
How to use RCBOOK to locate possible outrunner motors
1. From the RCBOOK index page, select Parts from the tabs across
the top of the screen.
2. From the left column menu, select Engine
3. Using the Engine filter on the right side of the engine screen, select
electric from the Power type drop down menu. Fill in the weight
range (390g - 610g) for the example plane. Select Apply and several
pages of possible motors are presented. Not all of the listed motors
will beoutrunners.
4. Finding possible outrunner motors:

Make a list noting the number of cells and Kv range. (Using the
workbook can be helpful! Select the spreadsheet in the workbook
named motor notes and do the note taking there.)
For the example plane:
5S Kv 360 - 400
6S Kv 300 - 330
7S Kv 250 - 280
8S Kv 220 - 245
9S Kv 195 - 215
Go through the returned results on RCBOOK looking
for outrunnersthat fit the various Kv ranges and note them. Don't
worry about the nomenclature of the various brands. The only
thing that is important is the weight, which was set by the Engine
filter and the Kv. The Kv for all brands is not always shown on the
info page. A click on the photo link for the motor may be necessary to
find the Kv.
Note the outrunner motors for each Kv range and their weight
(wt.) in grams. After the RCBOOK search, the motor notes
spreadsheet looks like this for the example plane:
While 28 possible motors for this plane is significant, it is a lot

less than hundreds of possible motors!!!
Next, use Google search to locate a supplier for the motor and
note the supplier's Web site address and price on the motor notes
spreadsheet. After the Google search the motor notes spreadsheet
looks like this. (Web addresses truncated in this screen capture.)
The motors may now be compared by Kv, weight, supplier and

price.
Outrunner Supplier Notes:
Hobby King and Hobby Partz have notoriously poor customer
service. Hobby King has quality control issues with some of their
products. NEVER order anything that is not in stock at Hobby
King!
Before making a final decision on a motor, consider the battery
and electronic speed control (ESC).
Batteries:
As I seldom use Li-Poly batteries, no particular brand is
recommended. Use the Approx. Li-Poly capacity as a guide. Round
up to the nearest available size. All of the batteries listed, based on
their capacity and expected amp draw, will fly a plane for
approximately 9 to 10 minutes. Capacities are based on those
recommended in Row 31 or the spreadsheet, Approx. Li-Poly
capacity.
A word about electronic speed controls:

You can't go wrong with Castle Creations (CC) ESCs. The
following CC ESCs are appropriate for the example plane based on
the recommended ESC amp draw in Row 33 of the spreadsheet.
The list prices are noted. They may be found at a discount online.
9S (Row 33 31.0 amps) Phoenix Ice HV 40 $129.95
8S (Row 33 39.8 amps) Phoenix Ice 50 (not lite version) $99.95
7S (Row 33 39.8 amps) Phoenix Ice 50 (not lite version) $99.95
6S (Row 33 46.4 amps) Phoenix Ice Lite 75 $119.95
5S (Row 33 55.7 amps) Phoenix Ice Lite 75 $119.95
Putting it all together:
All of the systems will work with the example plane when the
selected prop is an APC 18x10E thin electric. Here is a recap of what
is required for the battery, ESC and motor.
5S 5800mAh Li-Poly battery (5500mAh, 5600mAh and 5700mAh
are not as common), 70-amp ESC, 360Kv to 400Kv outrunner motor
weighing between 390g and 610g
6S 4900mAh or 5000mAh Li-Poly battery (4700mAh and 4800mAh

are not as common), 60-amp ESC, 300Kv to 330Kv outrunner motor
weighing between 390g and 610g
7S 4000mAh Li-Poly battery, 50-amp ESC, 250Kv to 280Kv
outrunner motor weighing between 390g and 610g
8S 3600mAh Li-Poly battery (3500mAh is not as common), 45-amp
ESC, 220Kv to 245Kv outrunner motor weighing between 390g and
610g
9S 3200mAh Li-Poly battery (3100mAh is not as common), 40-amp
ESC (most likely will need to be a high voltage (HV) type), 195Kv to
215Kv outrunner motor weighing between 390g and 610g
A word about using "A123" 2300mAh cells
The Excel Workbook also contains a spreadsheet for "A123"
2300mAh cells. The process for finding a motor and prop is the same
as when using Li-Poly cells.
"A123" 2300mAh cells work 'best' at about 35 amps for a 1P
(parallel) application and 70 amps for a 2P application. This limits the
quantity of cells that may be used in series with these cells.
With all of the same inputs as for the Li-Poly cells using the
example plane, the results for the number of cells, amps, etc. looks
like this.
9, 10 or 11 "A123" 2300mAh cells could be considered for use

with the example plane. The motor notes results look like this.
My purchased power system choice for my 1/4-scale BUSA EAA

Bipe; 9S "A123" 2300mAh battery pack, Castle Creations' Phoenix
Ice HV 60 and a Scorpion S-4035-250.
What to do if Microsoft Excel in not on the computer
For computers that do not have Microsoft Excel, the FREE Open
Office Suite may be used.
Wing Cube Loading (WCL) Information
What it is and how to use it
WING CUBE LOADING (WCL) by FRANCIS REYNOLDS
WING CUBE LOADING, by Roger Jaffe
3D Wing Loadings: a Better Way to Scale Models
WCL Calculator online at Electric Flight UK
Return to article
Generic Motor Naming
Unlike glow engines, there is no standard way of 'naming' an

electric motor. Using a generic name for all outrunner motors allows
for direct comparisons. The generic name for the outrunners used in
this article is the first two digits indicate the outside diameter in
millimeters (mm) with the next two digits noting the can length in
mm, then a dash followed by the Kv (RPM/v). A comma separates
the weight in grams from the rest of the motor description. The
Scorpion SII-3020-890, used to illustrate the versatility of an electric
outrunner motor, has a can diameter of 38mm, can length of 46mm,
Kv of 890 and weighs 166g. Its generic name is 3846-890.
More on "generic" motor naming here
Return to article
Electric Motor Kv or RPM/volt

By Ken Myers
Updated: November 2012
Ampeer Articles Regarding Motor Kv
Finding R and K, December 1989
Kv for Robbie 600, Aug. 1999
Motor Kv Question, January 2005
Measuring Kv Using the Drill Press Method, January 2009
It Is Not Just the Kv, May 2009
Ke variation, November 2010 (note: not a typing error; Ke is related to Kv)
Identifying the Usefulness of an Unknown Brushless Outrunner, October 2011
Kv is a motor constant and is directly related to Kt, the motor torque constant. Kv is most
often expressed as RPM/Volt or RPM/v. Kt is often expressed in the units inch ounces per amp.
Kv (expressed as RPM/v) * Kt = 1352. (Note: Some sources uses 1355 as the constant.)
The Kv motor constant is part of the motor's physical makeup. The voltage used to multiply
the Kv constant by, to determine the RPM, isNOT the input voltage at the motor, for a brushed
motor, or the input voltage at the Electronic Speed Control (ESC) for a brushless motor.
There is a voltage drop from the input voltage. It is caused by the resistance of the motor. For
brushless motors, there is an additional voltage drop caused by the resistance of the ESC.
The Math
Volts = I (current) * Resistance
The voltage out (Vout) equals the input voltage (Vin) minus the current times the resistance (the
voltage drop).
Vout = (Vin - (I * R))
Rm is a term that was used with brushed motors. It meant the motor resistance. The term
Rm, as used here, means the motor resistance plus the ESC resistance, so that it may apply
equally to brushed and brushless systems.
Measuring Motor Constants
Two data points are required to determine the Rm and Kv of a motor. The data points are
gathered using a power meter (aka watt meter) and tachometer. Either an optical tachometer or
phase tachometer will work. An accurate phase tachometer is much easier to use.
All measurements are taken at FULL THROTTLE! Do NOT use partial throttle readings! Data
should be gathered as quickly and accurately as possible. The motor should not be run for any
extended period of time, ever!
One of the earliest iterations of this method was presented in theDecember 1989 Ampeer.
Unfortunately, I didn't really understand the concept and math at the time, but THE electric
columnists, Bob Kopski and Mitch Poling, did.
Data Points 1
Select and mount as large a propeller as the supplier recommends for the motor with the number
of cells to be used. (For help in selecting the prop, review "Selecting the CORRECT Supplier
Recommended Props". You should try to get as close to the maximum current rating of the motor
as possible, without going over it. The readings should be as close as possible to the same instant
in time. Record the current, voltage, and RPM readings. They will be known as I1 (current), V1
(volts), and RPM1 (RPM).
Data Points 2
Next affix a very small propeller or even small, flat 'stick' just large enough to get a tachometer
reading. Servo arms have been used on small motors. With a phase tachometer, nothing needs to
be attached to the motor, as the phase tach will yield the no load RPM, which is even better.
Measure the light load or no load current, voltage, and RPM. They become I2 (current), V2
(volts), and RPM2 (RPM).
The math is completed using the Excel workbook spreadsheet titled Rm.
Kv & Rm Spreadsheet
The Io (no load current) is also a valuable constant. Measure the volts and amps using a
power meter with no propeller attached to the motor. For a no load test to calculate the Io, it is
best to use a battery or power supply that applies only about 80% of the voltage that the motor is
expected to run at. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO CONTROL THE VOLTAGE USING AN ESC!
Getting the measurement at 80% of the expected voltage is sometimes difficult to do. If that
cannot be done, just use the pack that has been used to do the Rm testing, but don't recharge it,
unless it is extremely low.
A major problem with many suppliers' is that they give an Io without noting the voltage. Io
varies somewhat with the volts applied. This causes a problem when the Io is used to estimate
'iron loss' in the power out formula.
Power Out Formula
Pout = (Iin - Io) * Kv (Vin - (In * Rm))
While called constants, the Rm and Io are not truly constant. They vary slightly with the
applied voltage.
Some Examples
It is important to note that the Rm derived in the following examples is NOT the Rm that is
often provided by the suppliers.
Cobra C2203/52, wt. 17.5g
I1 = 6.93, V1 = 7.4, RPM = 6740
I2 = 0.36, V2 = 8, RPM = 12,080*
*Adjusted to yield a Kv of 1540 - found in the Examples on the Rm sheet.
Results from spreadsheet:
Rm = 0.4363 ohms, Kv = 1540
Io was given as 0.36 amps at 8 volts
The maximum amp draw is given as 7 amps. 80% of the maximum is 5.6 amps. On the
Innov8tive Designs' prop test table the APC 7x5SF draws 5.6 amps.
The voltage drop at 5.6 amps with 7.4Vin.
7.4Vin - (0.4363ohms * 5.6 amps) = 4.96Vout
RPM at 5.6 amps = 4.96Vout * 1540Kv = 7638 RPM
The actual measured data for the APC 7x5SF is, 7.4Vin, 5.60 amps,7,620 RPM
The Vout is 67% of the Vin. That is not unusual for such a small motor (17.5g).
The Io is used to calculate the Pout in watts.
(5.6 amps - 0.36 amps) * (7.4 - (0.4363ohms * 5.6 amps)) = 26 wattsout
Efficiency = 26 watts out / (7.4v * 5.6 amps) watts in = 0.627 or 63%
Again, this is pretty typical efficiency for such a small motor.
Cobra C4130/14, wt. 400g
I1 = 58.26, V1 = 29.6, RPM = 10581
I2 = 1.46, V2 = 20, RPM = 8940*
*Adjusted to yield a Kv of 450 - found in the Examples on the Rm sheet.
Results from spreadsheet:
Rm = 0.1049 ohms, Kv = 450
Io was given as 1.46 amps at 20 volts
The maximum amp draw is given as 60 amps. 80% of the maximum is 48 amps. 46.04 amps is
used for the example as the measured APC 12x8E draws 46.04 amps at 29.6v.
The voltage drop at 46.04 amps with 29.6v in.
29.6Vin - (0.1049ohms * 46.04 amps) = 24.77Vout
RPM at 46.04 amps = 24.77Vout * 450Kv = 11,146 RPM
The actual measured data for the APC 12x12E is, 29.6Vin, 46.04 amps,11,063 RPM
The Vout is 83.7% of the Vin. That is not unusual for the larger motor (400g).
The Io is used to calculate the Pout in watts.
(46.04 amps - 1.46 amps) * (29.6 - (0.1049ohms * 46.04 amps)) = 1104 watts out
Efficiency = 1104 watts out / (29.6v * 46.04 amps) watts in = 0.81 or 81%
Again, this is pretty typical efficiency for this larger motor.
The examples chosen were not arbitrary. They demonstrate some general trends that can be
applied to all motors. 'Smaller, lighter' motors have a higher Rm than 'larger, heavier' motors and
therefore a higher voltage drop. In general, for the way that they are used, 'Smaller, lighter'
motors have a lower efficiency than 'larger, heavier' motors.
One thing that was not demonstrated by the examples is that the highest Kv motor in a series
will be the most efficient and have a lower Rm. Why? A higher Kv is created by using larger
diameter wire for the windings compared to a lower Kv version of the same series motor with the
same type of termination. Not all suppliers provided different Kv motors of the same 'size'.
The Cobra C2203/34, which is in the same series of motors as the first example, has a Rm of
0.2255ohms (about 1/2 the resistance of the /52) for a voltage drop of 1.55V at 6.89 amp yielding
5.85Vout. (Shown in the Examples on the Rm spreadsheet). At 6.89 amps the Vout is 79% of the
Vin and the efficiency is about 72.6%. The /52 is a 52-wind and /34 is a 34-wind. The fewer
winds of larger gauge wire on the /34 means that it has a lower resistance and higher Kv than
the /52.
One of the results of the previous testing method is the Kv.

Another way to derive the Kv is with a phase tachometer and voltage measurement. An
optical tachometer cannot be used for this measurement as the motor needs to be 'unloaded'.
The Emeter II with the RDU or MDU and the phase tach lead can be used or a device like
the AEO Tech KV Meter K0. The motor is run with no load, while the voltage and rpm are
recorded. While not the 'true' Kv, it is close enough. For this type of measurement, RPM / volts =
Kv.
i.e. 8940 RPM / 20V = 447Kv, which is close enough compared to the 450Kv in the previous
example
Kv is also known as the generator constant or dynamo constant. When any electric motor's
shaft is physically spun, it generates electricity. It doesn't matter whether it is a brushed or
brushless motor.
A typical hobby brushed motor can be spun by a drill press at a constant speed. By measuring
the DC voltage across the terminals, with brushes set to neutral timing, and knowing the RPM of
the drill press, the Kv can be calculated. i.e. 1560 RPM / 1.6v DC measured volts = 975 RPM per
volt. (To see how timing affects a motor, read Timing Test.)
A brushless motor isn't quite as simple to test. A bit of math is required.
A brushless motor has three possible lead combinations that need to be measured
using AC voltage.
First, determine the constant drill press RPM (1560 in this example).
Measure the AC voltage on each pair of leads. There are three possible combinations with a
brushless motor.
Lead combination A - 2.08
Lead combination B - 2.08
Lead combination C - 2.08
Note, most cheap brushless motors do not have all three lead combinations come out exactly the
same, but they do on the better quality motors. Use the average of the three voltage numbers if
the measurements are slightly different.
Find the V-peak by multiplying the average AC volts by 1.414 In this example 2.08 * 1.414 =
2.94v
Divide 1000 (a constant) by the RPM (1560 in this case) = 0.64
Ke = V-peak ((2.94) * (in this case 0.64))/1000 = 0.00188
Find the inverse of Ke (1/Ke) (1/0.00188 in this case) = 531
Divide the inverse of Ke by 0.95 = 559 RPM/v or the approximate Kv expressed as RPM/v
Brushless Kv formula using drill press
Kv = (1 / ((Vac * 1.414) * (1000 / drill press rpm)) / 1000) / 0.95
Kt = 1352.4 / Kv
The Kv Spreadsheet (sheet Kv) can do the math for you.

It should be noted that many manufacturers/suppliers, even the good ones, provide inaccurate
information about the motor's Kv, so if you can, measure it to be sure you have the motor you
want. Using this method, nothing really needs to be done to the motor to measure the Kv, so it
should be easily returnable if the Kv is not suitable, as the shaft will only have been chucked into
a drill press that is set up with a known RPM.
Advancing the timing on a brushed motor (using rotation of the brushes) or brushless motor
(via an ESC setting) changes the apparent Kv, increases the RPM and Io (no load amp draw),
increases the heat (wasted energy) more than neutral timing, but increases the power out.
Getting Started in Electric Flight

An Introduction and Some BASICS
By Ken Myers kmyersefo@theampeer.org
Updated: Oct., 2012
Warning! The many facets of Electrically Powered Flight ARE Addictive
Indoor - living room flyer
Backyard
Park Flyer - Scale
3D
Sport
Scale
Electric Ducted Fan (EDF)
Electric Helicopter
Old Timer
Thermal Sailplane
F5B
Race
Multi-motors
Foamie
QuadCopter controlled by iPhone or iPad

And MUCH, MUCH MORE!
Table of Contents
Wing Cube Loading Defines Aircraft Types and Missions
Recommended First Purchase - Power Meter
How to Use a Power Meter
Chargers
Li-Poly Batteries
How to read a Battery Label or Battery Specifications
Li-Poly Storage and Safe Handling
Other Flight Power Batteries
Li-Poly Batteries for use in Transmitter
Temperature Effects on Batteries

Connectors - Power Leads
The 4 Major Balance Plugs, Taps, Nodes or Node Connectors
Brushless Electronic Speed Controls (ESC) Basics
The Speed Control
The Lov Voltage Cutoff - LVC
The Battery Eliminator Circuit - BEC
Motors for Electric Flight
Kv or RPM/v
Timing and Apparent Kv
Power In versus Power Out
Prop Shaft Rotation
Props
Selecting the CORRECT Supplier Recommended Props
Power Chart
Tips for Being Successful with Electrically Powered Flight
Safety Precautions
Other Resources
Ken Myers' Modeling Background
Wing Cube Loading Defines Aircraft Types and Missions

Wing cube loading is a much better comparative number than the commonly used wing area
loading.
Wing Cube Loading Table

Online Sources for WCL
"Cubic Wing Loading: What it is and how to use it." Also known as - Wing Cube Loading by
Ken Myers
"MODEL DESIGN & TECHNICAL STUFF: WING CUBE LOADING (WCL)" by Frances
Reynolds, Model Builder - September 1989
"Aircraft Performance Parameters Revisited : WING CUBE LOADING", by Roger Jaffe, Model
Builder - June 1994
"3D Wing Loadings: a Better Way to Scale Models and Compare different size models easily",
by Larry Renger, Dec. 1997
Online WCL Calculator:
Electric Flight UK
Return to Table of Contents
Recommended First Purchase

The very first item to purchase when getting into electric power is a power meter. It is also
known as a wattmeter, watt meter and Whattmeter (Astro Flight brand and first in RC the
market). It is connected between the battery pack and electronic speed control (ESC) and usually
displays the volts at the input of the ESC, amps drawn by the power system, energy delivered
over time (Ah - amp hour or mAh - milliamp hour) and the watts input at the ESC.
Watts equals volts times amps. W=V*A
The purpose of the power meter is to provide the actual information about the power system
(battery, ESC, motor & prop). The information provided by the meter allows the user to adjust
the prop (load) so that all parts of the power system are within a safe operating range.
The meter is ALWAYS used at full throttle. Partial throttle readings mean nothing. A power
meter measures watts in (power in), not watts out (power out)!
The Power Meter by E-flite is NOT RECOMMENDED. It does not display all of the essential
information on one screen.
Online sources:
Progressive RC PowerLog 6S
This meter also includes an optical tachometer and has the ability to log data to a file on a
computer. It also has a 'Hold' button to keep the information onscreen.
Hyperion Emeter 2 (expensive, but HIGHLY recommended!!!)
P1 from Hobby Partz and similar meter at Hobby King
Watt's Up Meter
BP Hobbies has several choices
Other power meters can be found online at Tower Hobbies and additional sources.
How to Use a Power Meter
The Manual for the Watts Up meter may be applied to all types and is found on the PowerWerx
site.
Power Meter Videos:
Video 1
Video 2
Video 3
When I previewed this information at the December EFO meeting, everyone one nodded and
agreed that this is an essential first purchase. Get one ASAP!
Hint! If you do not have a power meter with a hold feature, video the data and then record the
data when playing back the video.
Chargers
A high power, balancing, multi-chemistry charger with discharge function is the 'best' choice.
It should charge and discharge Lithium Polymer (Li-Po/Li-Poly), Li-Ion (Li-Io), Lithium Iron
Phosphate (LiFe), NiCad, NiMH, and Pb (lead acid).
My chargers - FMAdirect Power Lab 8 (new) & CellPro 10S (well used!)
Progressive RC is a great source for decent chargers.
Another good charger is the TME (Tejera Microsystems Engineering) Xtrema. The Xtrema has a
built in wattmeter, so there is no need to purchase a separate wattmeter. TME also has a neat
adapter board for charging single Li-Poly cells.
12-volt DieHard Deep Cycle Marine/RV battery, battery case from NAPA, Walmart 12-volt
charger - also shown AF Whattmeter
Decent chargers require an external power source such as a Deep Cycle Marine/RV battery or
power supply - NOT a car battery! There are NO decent chargers with a built-in power supply.
They are too limited in power to be useful for most purposes.
It is very handy to have a charger that will discharge so that a storage charge can be put on
Li-Poly batteries when storing for extended periods of time. A storage charge is approximately
3.7v to 4v per cell with most chargers. When set to storage charge, many chargers automatically
charge to 3.85v per cell.
It is best not to plug a charger's input connector into a 12-volt socket in a vehicle. A vehicle
battery is not designed for that use. Li-Poly batteries should NEVER be charged in or on a
vehicle.
The photo shows a safe way to charge a Li-Poly battery with a car plug type connector. The
charging is done in the middle of a cement driveway, away from all combustibles. The adapter
hooked to the battery is from Radio Shack. The manual was removed before the actual charging
took place.
Li-Poly Batteries
Lithium Polymer batteries are the most common type of power battery in use today.
A single cell is not technically a battery, but they are used with some small electrics and
called a battery.
How to read a Battery Label or Battery Specifications
Li-Poly cells are said to have a nominal voltage 3.7v per cell. Actually, with a resting voltage
of about 3.7v per cell, they are almost empty.
11.1V is the nominal voltage of 3 Li-Poly cells assembled in series (aka 3S). The charged voltage
is 12.45v (4.15v per cell) to 12.6v (4.2v per cell) for a 3S pack depending on the charger.
2200mAh (milliamp hours) is the capacity (C) of this battery. 2200mAh is 2.2Ah (amp hours).
25C means that the supplier or manufacture implies that the longevity and performance of the
pack will not degrade quickly if the battery is DISCHARGED up to this C-rate. The maximum
amp draw for the battery is calculated using the capacity in Ah (amp hours) times the rate
multiplier. The rate multiplier is the number preceding the letter C. In this instance it is 25 (rate
multiplier) times 2.2Ah (C) or 55 amps. There is no industry standard regarding the C-rate and a
manufacturer or supplier may claim whatever they want as the C-rate.
Charge current
2C normal 4.4 amps (approximately 30 minutes to charge completely discharged pack)
4C fast 8.8 amps (approximately 15 minutes to charge completely discharged pack)
5C max 11 amps (approximately 12 minutes to charge completely discharged pack)
The burst amps really mean nothing.
Charging this battery at 5C requires a charger that can output a bit more than 12.6v at 11
amps. (12.6 * 11 = 138.6 watts) The charger needs to be rated for at least 155 watts or more for a
5C charge.
C-Rate in minutes
The chart shows approximately how long it will take to fill an empty pack or deplete a full
pack at the C-rate. High charge rate Li-Poly batteries, mated with a good charger, reduce the time
spent in the immediate area of a charger. When the charge time is shorter, there is less waiting
time for the battery to completely charge.
Li-Poly Storage and Safe Handling

Li-Poly batteries contain a lot of potential energy. They require special attention and care
when in use and in storage.
Good charging practices include
Using the balance connector for all charges, even when using power leads
Charging only out of the airframe
Charging only in an area free of combustibles
Remaining in the immediate area of a charging Li-Poly battery
Keeping the battery and charger under close observation

*High charge rate Li-Poly batteries make staying in the immediate area of a charging Li-Poly
battery much easier. The charge time is muc hshorter.
It is best to charge in a REAL Li-PoSack brand charging sack. Some off brands have been
known to burn! Really. Distributors of the REAL Li-PoSack can be found on their Web site.
The Li-PoSack Plus is a good storage vessel and can be used for storage and transportation. A
fireproof safe, ceramic dish with lid or ammo box make decent storage vessels.
My ammo box with charge leads going into the box and a hole for the balance connector.
Another storage and charge safety system is the LiPoLocker. The LiPoLocker.com Battery
Charging Security System Review can be found on RC Groups. It is another Li-Poly safe
charging and storage system.
Li-Poly packs puncture easily. Keep them away from sharp objects. Do not allow bolts,
screws or other sharp objects to protrude into the battery area of the aircraft. Protrusions will
puncture a Li-Poly in a crash. Be sure the battery is secured very well in the aircraft.
Dispose of punctured or puffed packs immediately.
Lithium Polymer disposal instructions from Common Sense RC

1) Discharge the battery to 0 volts.
2) Puncture each cell and immerse in saltwater for 24 hours.
3) Wrap the battery in a bag and place in an appropriate disposal canister.
4) The pack can now be thrown in the garbage - there are no special disposal requirements for
Li-poly batteries.
Put a storage charge on Li-Poly packs that will not be used for weeks or months and store in
a safe container away from all combustibles.
It is best to purchase Li-Poly packs just before they are to be put into service. They don't have
as long a 'shelf life' as other types of batteries.
To preserve long life for Li-Poly batteries, they should not be flown to the LVC of the ESC
or too deeply discharged. It is best to use the "80% of the capacity rule" to avoid premature
death of a Li-Poly pack.
Here are a few examples of the 80% of capacity rule:
Stated capacity 4500mAh * 0.8 = 3600mAh flight capacity
Learning the 80% Capacity Point of a Pack and Flying Style
Step 1: fly the aircraft in a normal manner for 3 minutes using timer
Step 2: Land, remove pack & charge pack. Note the Ah/mAh returned to the pack
If the mAh/Ah returned to pack is greater than the 80% capacity number, reduce the flight time.
Repeat Step 1.
or
If the mAh/Ah returned to pack is less than the 80% capacity number, increase the flight time.
Repeat Step 1
Repeat Steps 1 & 2 until the normal flight time for use of 80% of the capacity is established for
the plane, flying style and individual pilot throttle management.
What happens if it is slightly over the 80% point, say 82%?
Nothing, that is close enough.
The actual capacity and manufacturer or supplier's capacity may not be exactly the same.
Capacity changes over time. As a battery ages, the capacity decreases. It is important to be aware
of this factor.
Online Resources:
Understanding RC LiPo Batteries
Proper Li-Poly management
Other Flight Power Batteries
Some electric power modelers use power batteries made up of cells from A123 Systems, Inc.
The A123 cells are only available in 1100mAh and 2300mAh capacities. They have a nominal
cell voltage of 3.3v per cell and a charged voltage of 3.85v per cell. Most people who use them
'harvest' them from DEWALT Lithium battery packs for power tools. A123 cells are Lithium Iron
Phosphate (LiFePO4) chemistry. They are heavier than an equivalent Li-Poly cell, but much
lighter than NiCads or high-energy NiMH cells. Many people consider them much safer than LiPoly cells.
More Information on A123 cells
Li-Poly Batteries for use in Transmitter
While many modelers are using Li-Poly batteries in transmitters, it is BEST not to use them
for this purpose. Li-Poly batteries may require a voltage regulator and the battery must be
removed from the transmitter before charging them outside the transmitter. If the transmitter is
accidentally left on, the pack will be ruined because it will be too deeply discharged.
The Sanyo Eneloop low self-discharge (LSD) NiMH cells make excellent batteries for
transmitters. They come in a 2000mAh capacity. Once fully charged, they'll hold that charge for
weeks.
The cells can be purchased at COSTCO or pre-made packs for specific transmitters at No BS
Batteries.
Ray'O' Vac call their type of LSD NiMH a Hybrid.
Temperature Effects on Batteries
Batteries work best at room temperature. Operating batteries at a high temperature shortens
their useful life. At low temperatures, the performance of all battery chemistries drops
substantially. A battery may be capable of operating at cold temperatures, but it may not allow
charging under those conditions. The charge acceptance for most batteries at low temperatures is
extremely limited. Most batteries need to be brought up to temperatures above the freezing point
for charging. Even then, they will not charge well until they are at room temperature.
Battery Resources regarding temperature
Battery University.com
Electric Wingman: Lithium Polymer Battery Guide
Connectors
Power lead connectors from the battery to ESC

There are many types to choose from. An article by Stefan Vorkoetter gives the statistics and
reasons for using many of the connectors discussed here.
The most common power lead connector is the Deans Ultra, which is usually just called
Deans. There are Deans Micro Plugs as well.
Handy "Gripper" Covers for Deans Ultra Plugs from HDi
The Deans Ultras are similar to the XT plugs sold by Progressive RC, except that the XT is
ribbed for gripping. The Progressive plugs come in three sizes, T-plug, Mini T-plug and Micro.
These are NOT Deans plugs.
Anderson Power Poles (APP) aka Sermos
Crimper for APP connectors
The EC3 and its larger relative EC5 (EC3 shown)
BEC
The JST plug is used for small planes and low current applications. It is also often called the
BEC plug or P connector.
Bullet type
Bullet connectors are available in various sizes ranging from 2mm diameter and up. The
larger ones are used for larger amp loads. They are not really interchangeable by brand. They are
used most often for the motor to ESC connection, but they are occasionally used for the battery
to ESC connection.
There is often controversy raging on RC Groups as to what is the best connector. Here is a
current thread on that topic.
Multi power plug adapter from Progressive RC - $16.99

It is a good idea to have an adapter for the various power plugs. It will come in handy at the
field someday to help others or yourself when unexpected charger problems arise and you may
need to 'borrow' a charge or someone wants to 'borrow' some electrons from you.
The 4 Major Balance Plugs, Taps, Nodes or Node Connectors
Please NOTE: The following listing may no longer be current.
Polyquest (PQ) taps are used on: Enermax, E-tec, Extreme Power, Fliton, Hyperion, Impulse,
MaxAmps, Pache, Poly RC, Polyquest, True RC and Xcite battery packs.
Note that the PQ types use the same connector for several battery configurations and skips
pins that aren't required. 2S and 4S packs shown. The 3S also uses the same connector.
Thunder Power (TP) taps are used on: Apex, Danlions, EVO, Flight Power, Kong Power, MPX,
Outrage, Tark Power, Thunder Power and Vislero battery packs.
Align JST XH (AL) taps are used on: 3E Models, ABF, Air Thunder, Align, Common Sense RC
V2, DN Power, Dualsky, Dynam, E-flight, Electric Power, Electrifly, Energy EC, Esky, E-Watts,
Exceed RC Fusion, Fully Max, GE Power, Grayson Power, Hextronix, HI Model, Hobby City,
Hobby Loong, Hurricane Flight Systems, Imax, LOSI, Mega Power, Mystery, PowerSource,
Protec, Rhino, Tenergy (rev polarity), Tower Hobbies, Trinity, Turborix, Vampower (new),
Venom and WOW RC, X-Caliber and Zippy battery packs.
Kokam JST XE taps are used on: Apogee (but you need to remove lock), Core, Graupner,
Kokam, New / Neu Motors, Orion Avionics and Vampower (old) battery packs.
Suppliers of Chargers also supply adapter boards for various types balance connectors for use
with the chargers they sell. A look at the balance boards shows how the 4 major balance plugs are
configured and how many pins each connector has.
This is the adapter board for a CellPro 10S for the Kokam JST XE (top) and Align JST XH
(AL) (bottom) balance taps. Note that each connector size is only used once and has one more
connection than cells in the battery.
This is the adapter board for a CellPro 10S for the Thunder Power (TP) (bottom) and
Polyquest (PQ) (top) balance taps. Polyquest uses the same connector for 2S, 3S and 4S packs
and different connectors for 5S and 6S. Thunder Power uses the same connector for 2S and 3S
packs and then a different one for 4S and 5S packs and double connector for 6S packs.
More balance plug information
Brushless Electronic Speed Controls (ESC) Basics

Many of today's brushless ESCs have three distinct parts or circuits built into them.
The speed control - There are a lot of electronic 'things' happening, but basically it is an
electronic on/off switch that is turning on and off extremely rapidly. When it is On the voltage
and amperage are at maximum. When it is off, there is no voltage or current passing. The RPM is
controlled by how long the On cycle is on compared to how long the Off cycle is off.
The Low Voltage Cutoff (LVC) circuit was originally designed to stop or reduce power to the
motor to reserve battery power for the receiver and servos for a safe landing. It is even more
important today because it can save Li-Poly batteries from being ruined by being too deeply
discharged. Li-Poly batteries should never be flown to the point where the safety LVC circuit
kicks in. Always time electric flights with either the transmitter timer or a typical kitchen timer.
Kitchen timer that I use

The Battery Eliminator Circuit (BEC) is another circuit designed into an ESC that allows the
power battery to be used to power the receiver and servos. It is basically a step down voltage
regulator.
The two types of BEC circuits found in ESCs
Linear (most common, cheap): It works by converting the excess voltage into heat. The higher
the input voltage, the more heat generated in the BEC circuit. If there is too much heat, the BEC
will either 'fry', or shut down! With a 3S Li-Poly the linear BEC is only able to provide about
0.5A before it overheats. That's only good for about 3 standard servos and the receiver. Many
people overstress this type of BEC. Most ESC manufacturers don't recommend the use of a
linear BEC with a 4S Li-Poly battery.
The Castle Creations Thunderbird and Phoenix lines of ESCs contain linear BEC circuits.
Switching (best type, expensive): A switching regulator works by taking small chunks of energy
from the input voltage source, and moving them to the output. This is done with an electrical
switch and a controller. They regulate the rate at which the energy is transferred to the output.
That's why it is called a "switching regulator". A switching regulator can typically have and
efficiency of 85%. A switching regulator can easily power heavy loads from a high voltage
source.
The Castle Creations ICE line of ESCs contain switching BEC circuits.
Today's Brushless ESCs, with the onboard BEC disabled (easy to do), or Brushless ESCs that
do not have a built in BEC can also use NiCad or NiMH receiver packs, A123 Systems Li-Fe
receiver packs, and stand alone switching BECs like the Castle Creations BEC or BEC Pro.
Sources for more BEC Information
What is a BEC?
A beginner's guide to switching regulators
Lucien Miller, of Innov8tive Designs, provides information of the types of BEC units and which
type is appropriate for which application.
Motors for Electric Flight

Today, brushless inner runner motors are mainly used in electric ducted fan (EDF)
applications and helicopters.
Brushed motors are still used in specialized applications, especially very small planes.
One of the main characteristics of the brushless outrunner is that its magnets are housed in a
bell. The stator or armature is on the inside of the motor. That is just the opposite of a brushless
inner runner. The outrunner provides more torque than an inner runner and the outrunner can turn
prop sizes that the brushless inner runner would need a gear reducer to turn.
Outrunners are generally less efficient than inner runner types with a gear reducer, but they
are still efficient enough for general use. There are hundreds of different sizes of outrunners from
very tiny to massively huge.
Outrunner nomenclature is not standardized. Comparing one company's outrunner to another's

is often difficult. Some companies use the outside measurements to describe their motors.
Hobby King has a motor that it calls the TR 35-48-C 800kv weighing 163g. Hobby King uses
outside dimensions to designate its motors. The C dimension is about 35mm and B dimension
about 48mm. The stator dimensions are 28mm x 26mm. Dimension A is 4mm. Maximum current
is rated at 55 amps. Price $14.95
Scorpion has a motor that it calls the Scorpion SII-3020-780weighing 166g. Scorpion uses the
stator dimensions to designate its motor numbers. It has a Kv of 780 (about the same as the
Hobby King motor). The C dimension is 37.5mm and B dimension is 45.7mm. The stator
dimensions are 30mm x 20mm. Dimension A is 5mm. Scorpion does not give the useless
maximum current but does rate this motor at a continuous 40 amps with a continuous power
level of 800 watts in. Price $65.95
Hobby King would call the Scorpion motor a Turnigy 38-46 780Kv (they tend to put a dash
between the external dimensions, but not always) and Scorpion would describe the Hobby King
motor as a Scorpion 2826-800.
Hobby King does not note that the magnets are of the ceramic ferrite type. Scorpion does note
that its motors use the N-50EH type of rare-earth neodymium magnets.
The two motors are not the same, but with a similar weight and Kv, they might be expected to
perform close to the same level with the same battery, ESC and prop.
The Cermark NEO 25-780 has a similar 780Kv, but it only weighs 149g. Using its outside
measurements it would be called a 42-40 780Kv. It has a 5mm shaft. It is rated for a maximum of
460 watts in and 55 amps. While it does use neodymium magnets, it would require a larger
diameter prop with more pitch to achieve the same watts in as the other two motors. It is not
similar to either of the other two motors, and its performance will be quite different.
Motor weights do NOT include the weight of the prop adapters, motor mounts and their
related screws and usually not the connectors either.
Kv or RPM/v
Kv is a motor constant and is directly related to Kt, the motor torque constant. The specific
motor's design and construction determine this constant. The Kv motor constant has nothing to
do with the applied voltage. It is part of the motor's physical makeup. There are electrical and
mechanical losses in all motors. The voltage in RPM/v is the VOLTAGE OUT not the voltage
in.
The only time the input voltage and output voltage are about the same is when there is no load
applied to the motor.
The higher the voltage drop through the motor, the lower the RPM will be. The higher the
current is, the greater the voltage drop will be. The less efficient a motor is, the higher the
voltage drop will be.
More on Kv and how to measure it
Timing and Apparent Kv

Timing affects the apparent Kv. Advancing the timing on a brushless motor using the ESC
increases the RPM by forcing the motor to turn at a rate higher than the native or raw Kv. It also
increases the current draw and decreases the efficiency.
Power In versus Power Out

The power meter measures the power IN at the ESC. There are electrical losses in the ESC,
and there are electrical and mechanical losses in the motor. The majority of the losses are turned
into heat. The power out is considerably less than the power in.
If a power meter is showing 10.7v, 27.9 amps and 298.5 watts in, those numbers are input
measurements. The motor is not 'making' 298.5 watts! It is not MAKING anything! It is using
electrical energy and converting it to mechanical energy.
A useful drive system, using typical outrunners, will be somewhere between 70% and 80%
efficient. That means about 209 watts out (70%) to 239 watts out (80%) for the noted system
showing 298.5 watts in on the power meter.
How do you know the power out? You don't! There are ways to measure the output, but they
are too complicated for most modelers. Motor/prop/battery computer programs like Drive
Calculator can estimate the power out. Drive Calculator is a FREE program and runs on Mac,
Linux and Windows.
Power out may also be estimated using something known as prop constants and the measured
RPM.
It is not really necessary to know the watts out. When electric fliers and authors use the term
watts, they are referencing watts in.
Prop Shaft Rotation

It is easy to change the prop shaft rotation of a brushless motor. Switch the connection of any
two leads between the motor and the ESC. The color coatings on the leads from the motor to the
ESC mean nothing. Different brands use different colors on the motor leads to the ESC and also
different colors on the ESC to motor leads.
Props
The APC props, slow fly (SF), thin electric (E), sport and pattern have RPM limits. The
limits are listed on their Web site. They all have applications that work well with electric motors.
Master Airscrew standard wood props and G/F 3 series work well with electric motors. The
Master Airscrew electric props are not very efficient and should be avoided.
Zinger props are not useful for most electric applications, but make excellent prop blanks,
according to Keith Shaw, if you want to create your own props.
GWS has basically two lines of props, RS and DD/HD. The RS (reduction series) are used in
applications similar to the APC SF type props. The DD/HD (direct drive/hyper drive) props are
used in applications similar to the APC E, but have lower RPM limits than the APC E props.
Selecting the CORRECT Supplier Recommended Props

Many times a supplier will recommend props for a motor and battery combination. It can be
confusing.
The graphic was captured from the specifications for the E-flite Power 25 870Kv BL
Outrunner at Horizon Hobby. The props and battery packs (Cells) are listed from 'smallest' to
'largest'. What is NOT apparent is that the largest prop (14x7) is only the largest prop for the 3S
pack and the smallest prop (11x8) is the largest prop recommended for the 4S pack. It is not a
range at all, but a recommendation for each type of pack with this motor.
A much better way to list them would be

3S up to 14x7
4S up to 11x8
Not all props are created equal. That is another reason for having a power meter! One
manufacturer's 14x7 will not be placing the same load on the motor as another manufacturer's
14x7. It is entirely possible that one company's 14x7 will fall within the safe operating limits for
the power system while another company's will be outside the safe operating zone. Only flying
will prove which prop is best in a given application.
Power Levels for Various Types of Aircraft

This is Common Sense RC's table suggesting power levels based on Watts (watts in) per
pound for ready to fly aircraft weight. It is a reasonable guide.
Tips for Being Successful with Electrically Powered Flight

1.) Start out slowly and take the time to learn what you need to know
2.) Avoid impulse purchases - have a specific goal in mind
3.) Glow or gas conversions should be put off until you have acquired the knowledge to do so
4.) When choosing power systems, at first, follow the recommendations of the designers of plans
and kits and the recommendations of airframe manufacturers and suppliers
5.) Get the proper equipment to do it right the first time
6.) Ask reliable sources for input and guidance with a project, especially before an equipment
purchase - it is best and cheaper not to try to 'go it alone'
Safety Precautions
1.) Store Li-Poly batteries safely and away from combustibles.
2.) Remove the propeller or blades from the motor when working on the radio system and the
power battery must be plugged in.
3.) Plug in the power battery just prior to a flight.
4.) Unplug the power battery immediately after landing and returning the aircraft to the pit area.
5.) Be aware that once the power battery is plugged in, the motor may run.
6.) Arming switches and ESCs may or may not keep the motor from running once the power
battery is plugged in.
7.) Make or break arming switches, like those sold by Maxx Products International, LLC., are an
excellent type of safety "switch", especially for large scale aircraft.
Maxx Products Arming Switch

Other Resources:
Online forums: RC Groups, Watt Flyer, RC Universe and more - be aware that some of the
experts on the forums started flying electric RC last week. Most forums contain about 98%
'noise' and about 2% decent advice. There is useful advice to be found, but finding it can be quite
time consuming.
An excellent independent site is RC Model Reviews. The author has excellent knowledge and is
the most unbiased reviewer I've ever read. The reviews and information provided on the site are
not just for electric fliers.
Books: The majority of books about electric flight are 'old' and contain a lot of outdated
information.
Two books that are not outdated are RCadvisor Model Airplane Design Made
Easy and RCadvisor ModiFly.
Both are by Carlos Reyes. He also has an excellent Web site. Both books are available on the
Web site.
The EFO Web site and monthly Ampeer electric flight newsletter have a lot of reliable
information regarding electric flight topics.
I'm willing to answer, or try to find answers, for questions regarding electric flight
at kmyersefo@theampeer.org
Ken Myers' Modeling Background:
1958 Started CL (mostly Cox 0.49) & rubber powered free flight (Guillows, Sterling, Comet)
1960 Started RC with ground based Tx and escapements, small displacement glow & diesel
engines
1969 Started using Citizenship handheld TX with pulser and Rand actuators
1972 First proportional 2-ch Cox-Sanwa used with Cox 0.49/0.51, followed by Cox-Sanwa 4channel and Enya RC engines, then switched to Futaba as Cox-Sanwa (later marketed as
Airtronics) became harder to get
1980 Started AMA pattern flying and traveling to meets; Flew Novice, Sportsman then
Advanced
1982 First electric, Midwest Sweet Stik 40 with Astro Flight Ferrite 25 and 12 and 14 NiCads
1982 Met Keith Shaw (Mr. Electric) at IMAC meet, both flying glow aerobatic biplanes at time
1984 First 4-stroke, Enya .36 used on small pattern plane
1985 Started Mid-America Electric Flies as CD with Keith Shaw of the Ann Arbor Falcons
1987 Stopped flying glow engines (except when training at Midwest)
1988 Started Electric Flyers Only and Ampeer electric flight newsletter
1995 & 1996 CD of electric events at the Nats in Muncie & chairman of National Electric
Aircraft Council (NEAC)
1982 - 2005 used mostly Astro Flight cobalt brushed motors in most planes
1996 EFO site started online and the Ampeer goes online as well
2003 First brushless outrunner, AXI 2820/10, Castle Creations Phoenix 45
2006 First Li-Poly battery, 4S1P True RC 4000mAh used in Sportsman Aviation Sport Stik First Li-Poly charger Astro Flight 109
2006 First used E-moli and "A123" 2300mAh cells
2009 First scratch built Foamboard plane, Modifly from Rcadvisor's Modifly by Carlos Reyes last Li-Poly purchased, only one left in use, rest were given away
2009 Mid-Am celebrates its 25th year
Over the years Ken Myers has authored articles for "Model Airplanes News", "Sailplane and
Electric Modeler", "Electric Flight UK" and other magazines.
Ken Myers, President Electric Flyers Only (decades), Editor Ampeerelectric flight newsletter
(decades), Vice-president Midwest RC Society (decades), Editor Midwest Monitor newsletter,
President and founder of the Union Lake Flying Organization (now United Flying Organization
in Heartland, MI), Contest director (UFO pattern meets 1980-1986, electric meet Mid-Am since
1985), AMA NEAC (National Electric Aircraft Council) SIG chairman 1995 & 1996, Head flight
instructor Midwest since 2008, AMA Leader Member (decades)
Major accomplishment in electric flight, learning from and reporting on Keith Shaw's
phenomenal Scale electrics.
Main interest - sport and sport scale electrically powered fixed wing aircraft.
The First Bit

Hello all, we are back again for another exciting installment of (cue drum roll) The Inside Story. I want to
start by thanking everyone for their encouragement and support for the column. Many of you who emailed
me wanted to know more about actuators, in particular how to drive them, so this article contains a miniarticle on just that. It is hard to write articles covering such a large field without feeling that you will
frustrate the reader by not telling the whole story all at once. Please bear with us as we will try to cover
plenty of the basics as quickly as possible but in the mean time always feel welcome to log on to the
EZone's excellent discussion forums. Also in this issue is an excellent feature article by Joachim
Bergmeyer. It covers the theory of how to work out what that mystery motor is good for. It contains a little
mathematics but is set out in such a way that you can know as much as you want to know, from using the
ready to fill in form to reading the derivations. After reading this article, I feel a personal cloud of ignorance
had been lifted and I hope you will too. On a lighter note (pun intended) Gordon Johnson has written two
mini-articles (gold star for that man!), one covering the lightening of normal micro servos and receivers
and the other on the need to keep a close eye on your volts when using the new Lithium Polymer cells. I
have also managed to squeeze out a second mini on making a simple circuit board to allow two
multimeters to be used simultaneously and conveniently. Just to prove the microwave is good for
something more than cooking ready meals we have a tip from Peter Frostick a free flight and micro RC
guru on his unusual method of fast prototyping balsa props. You should probably be working while
reading this so let's get started.
Feature Article - Motor Constants, How To Find Them And Use Them
by Joachim Bergmeyer
Introduction
Have you ever bought a tiny DC motor from a surplus store and asked yourself at which current and
voltage it might work best? Do you believe that the well-known KP00 motor is an "amp hog" and eats up
the current more quickly than it should? Then read on; you might find some help and a new point of view.
Abstract
This article describes how to measure and calculate the motor constants of small, brushed, DC motors at
home with common and relatively cheap tools and instruments. Furthermore, it describes how to make
use of them to choose a good point of operation for an unknown (or known) DC motor i.e. the working
voltage and current. It also gives some insight to the physical basics. For this purpose, some high school
level mathematics will be used.
What Is A Brushed DC Motor?
The motors we are referring to consist of very few parts.

The Stator: In most cases, it is the outer housing of the motor. It is made of a soft (does not remain
magnetized) magnetic material, most commonly iron and contains magnets that are arranged to have one
north and one south pole. There are also two bearings, either plain plastic or porous brass bushes or (in
more expensive motors) ball bearings.
The Rotor: This either consists of an iron core carrying sets of windings (called poles) or is coreless. In
the latter case, the windings are wound by a machine and then fixed by resin such that they stand alone
without the iron core. The number of poles is most commonly three, and sometimes (in better motors)
five. More poles tend to be used only with bigger motors that are too large for small indoor models.
The Commutator: This consists of two halves; one-half fixed to the rotor, the other to the stator. Its
purpose is to route the current from the motor terminals to the rotor windings and switch the current in
such a way that the windings of the poles generate magnetic forces that cause the rotor to turn
indefinitely. This is the part of the brushed DC motor that makes it brushed. It is the brushes that connect
the rotating rotor to the stationary stator.
How do voltage, current, torque and rpm relate?
A DC motor converts current into torque and voltage into rpm. Unfortunately, there are losses. Friction in
the bearings must be overcome by an idle current I0. The resistance Ri of the rotor and alternator cause
voltage losses, and there are also so-called "iron losses" caused by current in the core iron which is
generated by the changing magnetic field in the rotor. In this article, the iron losses are ignored because
they are also represented by the idle current (and because they are not calculated as easily as the other
losses). Besides that, the often-used coreless motors do not have a core and therefore have much less
iron losses, which make them more efficient than cored motors.
Here Are The Fundamental Motor Equations.
The generated voltage of a motor and the rpm have a fixed ratio. It is called the rpm constant
(1)
The input power of a DC motor is the terminal voltage times the current:
(2)
The output power from a mechanical point of view is rotor torque times rotating speed (in radians per
second):
(3)
Here arises a problem, as is difficult to measure the torque. You have to build some sort of test fixture and
you need a good balance to measure the counteracting forces. Even if you do the former and already
have or are willing to buy the latter, it is difficult to get exact readings. However, there is another
possibility. We will not measure the torque, but calculate the output power as the input power minus the
losses.
is the voltage that we can measure at the motor terminals.
is the motor current. However, not
all the voltage counts for the output power, only the voltage generated in the rotor windings according to
formula (1) does. a part of the voltage is lost at the inner resistance
when
therefore, we have to subtract the voltage loss across the motor resistance
Ohm's law,
flows through it.

, (which is, according to
) from the battery voltage:
(5)
The motor torque caused by the idle current
is needed to compensate for the friction of the bearings
and the alternator; we do not see any torque outside the motor from this part of the current so we subtract
it from the battery current:
(6)
Now we multiply the effective voltage by the effective current and get the output power:
(4)
We can now find the output power without measuring torque!
The efficiency is the ratio between input and output power:
(7)
The rpm can be calculated using equation (1) and (5):
(8)
Now we have shown that with the help of the motor constants
,
and , we can calculate all these
values including the
. We just need the motor current and motor terminal voltage, both of which are
easy to measure. We need a voltmeter and an ammeter. The cheapest and easiest way is to use two
multimeters at the same time. These multimeters do not have to be very expensive, but those with digital
display are easier to read, and of course, multimeters that are more exact are more expensive than
simpler ones. There are also combined instruments available that show voltage, current and input power
at the same time; these are a taste of luxury.
There are even more interesting values!
The most important questions when trying out a new motor are...
How much power can I expect?
At which current will I get maximum power?
Which efficiency can I expect?
At which current will I get maximum efficiency?
Which current should I use?
How fast will the motor turn?
All these questions can be answered by help of the motor constants. First, we should decide about the
power source, because that will tell us how much voltage we can use. In general, more voltage leads to
more efficiency, more power, more current and, worst, more weight. The latter is because we micro-flyers
tend to use the smallest available batteries that provide us with the necessary power. Since energy to
weight ratio is worse with smaller cells, we always should try to use less cells first, not smaller cells. The
only reason to use smaller cells is when we are down to one LiPoly cell only and this one cell is too
heavy!
The new star under the power sources is the Kokam Li-Poly cell with 145mAh, giving us about 3.6V under
load and up to 1A. About the same can be expected from three Sanyo 50mAh NiCad cells (for a shorter
time, of course) or from three GP 120mAh NiMH cells. One of these power sources is generally used in
the "1oz-class" (models with an all-up weight of up to ~30g). More voltage needs a DC/DC booster which
adds complexity, costs and weight, or more cells, which also adds weight and therefore is used more in
the "2oz-class" (all-up weight up to ~60g). (Apart for some pager motor powered models that require a
DC-DC and weigh <1oz, Graham) Therefore, depending on the class to which our model belongs, we
assume that we have 3.6V or 7.2V and up to 1A.
Maximum Power
A formula for the current at the point of maximum power for a given motor can be derived from formula
(4).
(10)
Here I just show the formula, if you are interested in the derivations then you can find it here.
Power, efficiency, and rpm can be calculated using formulae (4), (7), and (8). Just put in the motor
constants, the chosen motor terminal voltage and use
for
We should never use more than

in any case with any motor because if you pull more than
then the efficiency goes down more quickly than the power consumption rises, so we will get less (not
more) power. The motor will become very hot, since all the electrical power that is not converted into
mechanical power will be converted into heat instead.
Of course, this tells nothing about how long the motor will stay alive at this power level. Formula (10) only
tells us at which current this particular motor will have the most output power when used with the
assumed voltage. Electrical motors generally have no fixed maximum working voltage, so this has to be
answered by experience. As stated above, the motor could quit by overheating, by burning the brushes or
by destroying the rotor.
The coreless motors are more sensitive because their rotor has little mass and thus will heat up very
quickly, and since it has no iron core, if the resin that fixes the windings melts then the rotor will expand
and rub to the outer housing of the motor, generating a lot of friction. In this way, I myself damaged some
tiny coreless pager motors.
Maximum Efficiency
The motor current at the point of maximum efficiency is:
(11)
The derivation can again be seen here. We also have a nice formula to calculate the maximum efficiency
directly (we could also put
into formula (7) for the same result):
(12)
The motor current at full throttle should never be less than
because the output power would be
very low and the efficiency would be bad. So, we have some nice guidelines on what we can expect from
a motor and which current we should try to reach by choosing prop and gear ratio.
The Rules
Use at least
motor.
Never use more than

will be low.
It is a good rule of thumb to use about 70-90% of

throttle for the small motors we normally use.
. If this is already too much power for your model, use a smaller
. Otherwise, your motor will burn and the output power
for static current at full
The output power, rpm and of course the efficiency can again be calculated using equations (4), (7) and
(8) in any point of operation, so we will know anything that we need.
But how do we get the constants?
We get the constants by measuring values that are relatively easy to get, and then use some special
formulas.
Firstly, we measure the idle current
. This is dependent on the motor terminal voltage, so we measure it
at about 2/3 of the operating voltage (means: battery voltage) that we want to use later. This is because it
will more or less be the rpm level at which the motor will run later with the best compromise of efficiency
and power. Measure the idle current without having a gearbox attached to the motor.
Then we choose two different loads that we believe to be near the upper and lower border of the
operating range of the motor. In the simplest case, these are the two props that we think are ok but which
we do not know which fits better. It does not matter whether the props are directly driven or geared, but in
the geared case, of course we have to multiply the measured rpm with the chosen gear ratio.
We take two sets of data.
,
and
with the first prop,
,
, and
with the
second prop. We should take the voltage directly at the motor terminals to avoid a measuring error. All
values should be taken at the same moment, or it might be easier to use a battery with big capacity
because the voltage will then not drop quickly during the measurements.
If we find later that the measured currents are about 30-60% of
for the lighter load and about 80-
100% of
for the heavier load then we guessed right about the two different test loads. If the
readings are much different from that then we should choose some other loads (means: props) and redo
all our measurements and calculations. Otherwise, our results might be less precise than they could be.
The motor resistance
can be calculated as:
(9-6)
...and the speed constant
will be:
(8-4)
These formulas are also derived here.
Examples
1). The Kp00 Motor
I have measured the following data at this little workhorse and got the following results.
Measurement with load 1 (bigger prop):
U1 2.10 V
I1 0.66 A
n1 13900 rpm
Measurement with load 2 (smaller prop):
U2 2.08 V
I2 0.62 A
n2 14450 rpm
Measured idle current at 2.1V: I0 0.10 A
We put our values into the formulas and get the following motor constants:
(9-6)
Ri = 1.559 Ohm
(8-4)
kv = 12980 rpm/V
Assuming an average discharge voltage of 3.3V for one Kokam 145mAh Li-Poly cell, we get the following
predicted data:
(10)
= 1,108 A
This fits well to the maximum current of the Li-Poly cell. We don't want to go all the way up to the
maximum power anyway. (Very Good!)
(4)
= 1.59 W
This is quite a lot of power. A rule of thumb says that the INPUT power of a sports plane should be
50W/kg, So we could expect to be able to power models up to 3.3V*1.1A/50W*kg = 72g. This isn't a micro
flyer anymore, right? Right! I would recommend this motor for models in the 1oz-class (around 30g
maximum). (good again)
(7)
= 43%
This is a quite high efficiency at the maximum power point of a so small motor (50% is the theoretical
maximum value here!), also very good.
(8)
= 20405 rpm
We can only use small props or have to use big gear ratios, since this motor turns fast! The micro scale
builders will enjoy this, as most micro scale flyers will be able to use a prop of about scale diameter! If you
are searching for efficiency of the prop then you will have to use a big gear ratio. We have all the
possibilities, good again.
(11)
= 0.46 A
(12)
= 61%
(4)
= 0,93 W
(8)
= 33524 rpm
Now comes the excellent part. The point of maximum efficiency for this motor at this voltage is still within
the area of useable power! Yes, this motor likes amps, but it gives us a lot of torque back for it also!
Lighter models (around 20-25g) will be able to stay in the air with this power, and a motor this small
performing with an efficiency of more than 60% is outstanding! Yes, we will have to use a high gear ratio
to make use of this high rpm.
My conclusion is that the KP00 motor is a very efficient and powerful one if you use a light load (=small
prop or high gearing) and let him turn as fast as he wants to. The useable current range reaches from
0.5A to 1A at 3.3V, which is exactly what we want for micro scale models around 1 ounce total weight. My
Guided Mite did loops! Yes, I love this little powerhouse! :-)
2) The N-20 Lv Motor
It is available from many surplus sources; mine are from Allelectronics.
I've measured the following data with this motor and got the following results:
Measurement with load 1 (bigger prop):
U1 3.19 V
I1 0.84 A
n1 7900 rpm
Measurement with load 2 (smaller prop):
U2 3.36 V
I2 0.52 A
n2 15700 rpm
Measured idle current: I0 0.12 A
We get the following motor constants:
(9-6)
Ri = 2.592 Ohm
(8-4)
kv = 7803 rpm/V
I've used this motor with a DC/DC booster that happened to deliver 5.2V. We get the following predicted
data:
(10)
= 1,063 A
This fits well to the maximum current that my DC/DC booster can deliver. (good)
(4)
= 2.3 W
This is more power than from the KP00. The rule of thumb (for bigger models) says 5.2V*1.06A/50W*kg =
110g. I would doubt that this motor would carry around a model that heavy, but it works at least for up to
60g. (good again)
(7)
= 42%
The efficiency of this motor is slightly lower, but still good.
(8)
= 19075 rpm
We still have all the possibilities. (good again)
(11)
= 0.491 A
(12)
= 57%
(4)
= 1,456 W
(8)
= 30653 rpm
As said above, at 5.2V this motor is not as efficient as the KP00 at 3.3V, but is still good. It is heavier, but
it will carry around models that are heavier also.
The N-20 LV performs well at a minimum voltage of 5V. It works notably less efficiently from one Li-Poly
cell without booster. It is therefore probably not ideal for the very small models. However, it works well in
my models around 2oz. In addition, it is cheap! So, if one ever quits (no one did yet for me), take the next
one! It will probably quit sooner if working from two Li-Poly cells, but this should be a quite efficient drive
system if you keep the current low enough (say at about 1A maximum).
3) Your Own Motor:
You can download a blank form that can be printed out and filled in with your measured values here. You
will need Adobe Acrobat Viewer to read it.
Conclusion
I wanted to show that these calculations are no black magic and that you don't have to grope in the dark
when you ask yourself how to make the best use of the tiny motor that you have recently found
somewhere. Some predictions are calculated easily, and it is even possible to develop the mathematics
yourself.
Bibliography
The following books helped me to understand the theory of DC motors.
K. Gieck, Technische Formelsammlung, Gieck Verlag 1981, Heilbronn, Germany
Dipl.-Ing. L. Retzbach, Ratgeber Elektroflug, Neckar-Verlag 1999, VillingenSchwenningen, Germany
Mini Article - Lightening Rotary Servos and the R4P Receiver

By Gordon Johnson
One of the keys to building a successful micro plane is an accurate estimate of the final AUW (All Up
Weight). A major part of the AUW for any of our planes will be the receiver, speed control, servos, motor,
and battery. A good estimate of what these will weigh allows us to determine in advance whether we will
achieve a low enough wing loading for the type of flying we are interested in, indoor or outdoor. This in
turn allows us to either (1) scale the plane up to achieve the target wing loading, or (2) select different,
and usually more expensive, equipment. One problem we face is that the weights listed by the
manufacturers for servos are not the effective weight including wires, plugs, and servo arms. Moreover,
the manufacturers don't tell us how much weight we can save by lightening their products.
In the tables below, I give effective weights for common servos and receivers to aid in planning a model. I
also give weights after relatively easy to perform lightening techniques. There are more aggressive
lightening techniques that I do not cover here. For example, you can lighten a R4P receiver even more by
removing the plugs and part of the circuit board and then soldering the wires from the servos directly to it.
People have also lightened servos by taking apart the cases and drilling many small holes. If you do a
search in the EZone micro forum, you will find examples of aggressive lightening of servos and receivers.
My emphasis here is on less aggressive techniques, and I will give a breakdown of the amount of weight
saved from each technique.
Now let's look at the table. First, even the very light Westechnik servos weigh almost half a gram more
than their stated weights once the wires and plug are included. Similarly, a HS50 is listed by the
manufacturer as weighing 5.8g, but is 6.24g with the wire and plug and a servo arm, and a GWS Pico
listed at 5.4g weighs 6.20g for the version with a JST plug.
Where do we get the greatest reduction in weight for the least effort? The picture below shows the wires
and plugs for (top to bottom) the HS50/Futaba, the GWS/JST, and very thin JST wires/plug from Dave
Lewis. Their wire diameters including insulation are 0.7mm, 0.5mm, and 0.4mm, respectively. The
"Potential Weight Reduction Breakdown" section of the table confirms that the biggest bang for the effort
for the HS50's is replacing the wire/plug for a saving of 0.84g. The wire/plug substitution yields only a
0.35g savings for the GWS.
The next picture shows both servos (the HS50 on the right) after the external wires have been replaced.
But, the wires inside the servo are also quite large. However, the HS50 uses very thin wires to the motor
while the GWS uses the thick wires for all internal connections. I measured the wire inside the servos and
estimated what the savings would be if thin wire were substituted. The savings would only be .07g for the
HS50 and 0.12g for the GWS. Ralph Bradley has performed this substitution on the HS50's, and he says
the resulting weight savings are generally not worth the effort.
The last two simple weight reduction techniques are to cut off the mounting tabs and leave off the bottom
part of the case. Removing the mounting tabs save 0.08g and 0.13g for the HS50 and GWS respectively.
This doesn't save much weight, but if the servos are going to be mounted with double-sided cellophane
tape, it's easy to remove the tabs. Removing the bottom part of the case is also easy and saves roughly a
third of a gram, but will leave the servo open to the elements and the circuit board floating free. This is a
matter of choice, and it might depend on whether the servos are going to be mounted internally or
externally.
What this shows is that with only a little work a conventional rotary micro servo like the HS50 can get to
within 1.54g of the effective weight of the Westechnik "3.0" servo, and possibly closer if the servo arm is
shortened on one side and cut off on the other. In addition, one does not have to resort to replacing the
internal wires to achieve this. Given that micro planes are clearly moving to using LiPoly cells, many
planes could now afford a three-gram increase in weight for using lightened, but less expensive, rotary
servos.
Here are a final few notes on replacing wires and the GWS and Hitec servos. Sketch out the circuit board
and color of the wires you are going to replace. For both the Hitec and GWS the wire colors correspond to
the JST wire colors from Dave Lewis as follows. Red=Red, Yellow=White, and Black=Grey, where the
second color is the JST color. When replacing the external wires I shortened the length to three inches
since I've found that to be plenty for most applications. The HS50 seems to come with two lengths of
wires. I recently purchased four of these from the same mail order house and one of them came with
wires that were 6-inches long instead of 4-inches, and the weight was 0.3g higher for that one. The GWS
Pico servos with the JST connector, but thicker wires, are available from Dave Lewis and are the standard
version, not the ball bearing version. The motor used in the GWS is 7.8mm diameter while the one in the
HS50 is 5.8mm diameter. I don't know the weights of the two motors, but this could be one reason the
HS50 ultimately maintains a slim weight advantage over the somewhat less expensive GWS servo.
Finally, the GWS Pico servos with regular Futaba plugs can be found for lower prices than the ones with
the JST plugs. If you know you are going to replace the wires anyway, it may worth shopping around for
the best price on the Futaba version.
Receiver Lightening
One of the most common receivers for micro planes is the GWS R4P, because of its low price and
relatively low weight. Like servos, it can easily be lightened. The three major types of R4P receiver are
shown in the picture below. They are (left to right) the JST plugs, Futaba side plugs, and Futaba endplugs.
The table below shows the weights and some other receivers for comparison. Most people know they can
save some weight by removing the case. However, weight can be saved by choosing the right version of
this receiver. The JST plug version is the lightest, which also means the servos will use the lighter JST
plugs. Even more weight can be saved by replacing the antenna. Again, different versions of this receiver
can have different diameter antenna wires. It is worth checking yours. Better yet, replace it entirely with
either a 1/2 length of fine wire or the Azarr antenna. The bottom line is that by choosing the GWS receiver
with JST plugs, and then going with a litz wire antenna and no case, you can save about 3.3g over the
heaviest version.
Mini Article - Actuator basics part II (Driving the actuator)

By Graham Stabler
I have brought this part of the planned (yeah right) series on actuators forward to the second issue as I
have received several emails and have seen just as many messages appear on the boards asking if it
possible to use these devices with standard receivers and if so, how? Therefore in this mini-article, I will
attempt to explain how we can use actuators in practice and a little of the theory behind how they are
driven for those who are interested. I will cover only proportional control, as it is likely that when bangbang (on/off) control is used it will be with a system made just for that purpose.
A Recap
Let us look back at what we learned last month. If you place a magnet in a coil, and current flows through
the coil, torque is applied to the magnet. This torque is proportional to the current. That means as the
current increases so does the torque. This in turn means that in order to control the torque generated by
an actuator we must be able to control the average current flowing through it.
The most common way to produce this controlled current is to use PWM (Pulse Width Modulation) this is
what is used in most speed controllers. The way it works is quite simple; imagine standing on the edge of
a dam with your hand on the outlet valve while listening to the ticking of a clock (as one often does). On
each tick, you open the valve and wait until some percentage of the time between ticks before closing it
again. If the percentage is 100% then the valve stays open and if 0%, it stays closed. Between 0 and
100%, the flow pulsates. Now if someone had built a flourmill downstream of the dam, they would be
much happier as the percentage of the time the valve opened increased, as this would mean the average
flow of water would be larger.
Obviously, there is no room for dams and clocks in our models but the system works in the same way.
The valve is a mosfet, a transistor, or similar electronic switch and the poor guy with the timer is a
microprocessor or similar piece of electronics. For those who are interested, the fraction/percentage of
"on time" is known as the duty cycle in electronic circles.
The added complication of an actuator drive over a speed control is that it must be bi-directional, i.e. the
current must be controllable in both directions so we can go left AND right. So just to recap, with the stick
in the middle the PWM duty cycle is 0, if we then move the stick to the left and the duty cycle increases,
as this happens, more torque is applied to the magnet/control surface. Moreover, the same thing happens
if we move the stick to the right, except in this case the current flows in the opposite direction.
Variations
Some systems drive the coils straight from the microprocessor without the mosfet/transistors; other
people flip the current back and forth. The PWM is a little different in this case, because the current is
flowing one way or the other, rather than being off or on in a particular direction. This means that with left
stick, it is mainly pulsing left and with right stick, it is mainly pulsing right. At neutral, it spends half the time
between "ticks" left and half-right. You would think that this would cause the rudder to oscillate but the
high frequency of the clock and mechanical damping of the rudder mean that it cannot be seen. The main
advantage of this drive system is ease of building drive circuitry; the disadvantage is the constant current
flow even with no rudder/elevator deflection.
Another more subtle variation is to smooth the PWM before it is amplified and fed to the actuators. This
results in a constant current being applied to the coil and makes the operation silent. The only
disadvantage it could be argued is the higher component count and the inherent lower efficiency of linear
amplification. This however is not a problem in practice.
Very nice, but what do I buy, beg, borrow, or steal?
To actually use actuators, there are essentially two routes to go down.
1. A dedicated receiver
2. A piece of hardware between a standard micro receiver and actuator coil
In the case of a dedicated receiver, you have a couple of choices presently, the RFFS-100 by Dynamics
Unlimited, the Micromag, to be made by FMA direct in near future, the Ztron system now out of production
effectively but still around (www.aeronutz.flyer.co.uk), the new infrared system by Didel and Nick Leichty's
ultralight system.
In terms of add on boards often know as DPCs (digital pulse converters), there are also a few options,
such as Cloud9 for single coil drivers and Bob Selman for single and dual coil drivers. If there are others
out there, drop me a line for a mention.
I'm Too Poor.
There are also options for the experimenter. You could look at Andy Birkett's website, there you can
download info on building a programmer for PIC microprocessors as well as the software required to drive
two actuators and a mosfet for speed control. This chip can then be connected to a standard but lightened
micro receiver. In this case, the microprocessor is not used to drive mosfets / transistors but rather the coil
is driven directly from its outputs. The current available is small (~25mA) so it is worth mentioning that as
it will only drive coils of around 200Ohms (not less) but these are fine for sub ounce models. Actually,
Andy has used 130-ohm coils without ill effect, but be cautious.
Another option is to cannibalize a micro servo. Take the servo and remove the small circuit board from
inside. Then disconnect the motor and connect your coil where the motor had been connected. Then desolder the potentiometer; this is a circular device with three pins and a shaft that rotates with the output
arm of the servo. In its place, either solder two 2.5kOhm fixed resisters or a 5kOhm surface mount
potentiometer. This will control an actuator proportionally because a servo drive without the feedback
works like a bi-directional speed control. Replacing the original feedback with fixed or surface mounted
resisters just makes it lighter and allows the current flowing through the coil to be set to zero when the
stick is centered (will require tweaking if a pot is used). Unfortunately, most servos will draw about 100mA
even when the coil is disconnected so they are hungry little things. That said they would work well with a
rudder only model in the sub 2oz range especially with the new Lithium Polymer cells available. Here is a
diagram showing the wiring, the important thing to know is that the potentiometer has a middle pin. This is
the slider, it is important to make sure that you connect this wire to the slider of your replacement
potentiometer or in-between the two fixed resisters.
Conclusion
There is more than one way to skin a cat but all the methods of driving a coil will help to produce a light
model that keeps a smile on your face.
Mini Article - Super Cheap Wattmeter

By Graham Stabler
I first built one of these about a year ago when testing some DC-DC converters. In that instance, I wanted
to know input power and output power to gauge efficiency. To do this I needed to measure current and
voltage at the same time because power = current x voltage. I already had a couple of meters lying
around and so I used them. Then after an hour of grappling with wires and clips, I yearned for one of
those lovely devices that many use to measure power into their electric drive trains. There are several
available, including the AstroFlight wattmeter. They are in no doubt highly useful but I really needed two of
them and I had other things to spend my cash on at the time. So I bought some super cheap multimeters
(5GBP/8USD for a pair on special offer) and set about making them a more convenient proposition for
measuring current and voltage simultaneously. What I did was to make a simple circuit board with 4mm
banana plugs attached that could be plugged into both meters at once. This made the simple circuit of
one meter in parallel with the load and the other in series, the former measuring voltage, and the latter
current, while also getting rid of several leads, and turning the two meters into a single "super" unit. Here
are the steps.
1. Procure some copper clad PCB material (fiberglass board with copper on one side), the normal FR4
1.6mm stuff is ok, it is not that critical for micro applications. You only need a small bit so scrounge some
like me.
Here is what you need.

2. Work out which hole is which on your meters and draw out your "circuit" on the copper clad using a
pencil or pen. Also, mark out the holes for the banana sockets.
Here is the circuit that needs to be made. (Diagrammatic only!)

3. Drill the holes and remove the copper from the surface of the board where the lines were drawn.
Here is the copper clad after it has been engraved using my Dremel drill,
you can of course etch it, scratch it or even use a different make of drill but
the main thing is that the copper is removed between the islands that make
the circuit.
Now the holes have been drilled, make them a little oversize unless you are
very accurate.
4. Put the sockets in the board and insert into the meters, then solder them in place, be gentle, as you do
not want to damage the meters.
Here you can see the board in place and soldered. Notice I have left a few
holes blank. The top left hole is redundant but I thought it might make it
more durable and hold the meters together, in the end I did not bother. Top
right is the output from the meter for the low current range, if used as the
positive output you can do sensitive measurements, as yet I haven't needed
to.
5. Have a cup of tea.
To hook your battery/motor/dc-dc/electronic gubbins to the meter you have a few options. You can solder
the wires direct for experimentation, Add flying leads with crock clips or even use special banana plugs
that also include a socket in the top allowing a selection of leads.
Conclusion
Takes 5 min to make, saves clutter, costs pence/cents/groats. Add a web cam and you have a data
capture system BUT the downside is you have to do the multiplication yourself to get the power.
Micro Tip - Rapid Prototyping in the Microwave

Courtesy of Peter Frostick
This little tip comes from Peter Frostick and describes his method of making small propeller blades FAST.
I'll let the picture do the talking but it basically allows you to test lots of options quickly. Anything you can
carve into a block you can mould. Balsa blades are ideal for floaters (slow flying models) and free flight
models as well as the smaller electrics, guess that's most things then. You will need to make a hub of
some sort from balsa or bamboo and glue the blades into that. More to come on prop making including
hub manufacture and we have a few articles on carbon fiber lined up as well for the high-tech inclined.
Mini Article - LiPoly Voltage Monitor

By Gordon Johnson
When we first started flying models with single LiPoly cells, we all wondered how we would know if we
were discharging the cell below its 3-volt limit. Discharging below 3 volts should be avoided and the cells
should definitely not be discharged below 2.7 volts, which could cause permanent damage. In both cases,
these are volts under load. At first people thought the plane would "land itself" because of insufficient
power to keep it airborne and that it wouldn't be a problem. However, a number of people have been
developing airborne systems to monitor voltage and signal when it drops below 3 volts via a LED. Bob
Selman and Dynamic Web enterprises are both selling voltage monitors made by the same source. Bob
also has a two-cell monitor that signals when the volts drop to 6v. Dave Lewis has recently introduced a
single-cell monitor and will soon introduce one for two cells. And, Abbott Lahti has developed one that
blinks when volts drop below 3 volts, and blinks faster when they drop below 2.7 volts. (This one will
probably be available from Cloud 9 RC.) The monitor sold by DWE and Bob Selmanis shown in the
picture below.
I installed the Dave Lewis voltage monitor (shown in the picture below) on a small Depron plane; I built to
use the RFFS-100 and a geared M20-LV motor. I knew that this motor would pull about 0.75 amps out of
the single Kokum 145 cell, so I thought this would be a good model to test the voltage monitor. I removed
two unisex pins from their plastic housing. These plugged perfectly into the power lead pins on the RFFS100. Then, I soldered the leads from the voltage monitor crosswise on the outside of the pins. This allows
the pins to be plugged into the RFFS-100, and then the leads from the battery to be plugged into these
pins. I mounted it on the LE of the wing pylon, where it would be easy to see, with a piece of foam sticky
tape. An alternate position would have been to let it dangle a short distance below the fuselage.
Using the Dave Lewis voltage monitor I found that when my plane was flying noticeably slower, but still
very flyable, the red light on the voltage monitor would go out indicating I had dropped below 3 volts. Most
of the time if I throttled back to just barely cruise speed, the light would come back on as the load
decreased, indicating in an increase in volts. Other times the light would not come back on until I landed
the plane and taxied it back across the floor at low throttle.
What this tells me is that for my planes that have higher current draw propulsion set-ups I may want to
consider a voltage monitor if I intend to fly them as long as possible. An exception is my planes with a Sky
Hooks and Rigging hybrid receiver that can be set for a soft 1/4 throttle cut-off at six volts when using a
two-cell pack. In any case, micro fliers may want to consider the amp draw of their propulsion system and
their flying style and decide if a voltage monitor makes sense for them.
The Last Bit

This is the end of this month's installment. Keep the suggestions coming in and lets have some photos of
what you lot are up to, the wackier the better. It struck me while sticking this issue together that one thing
we are lacking is models. In fact, I don't think we have had a single picture of a complete model. I would
like to do some plan features so any budding designers out there get drawing. You know who you are!
Also, you will have noticed how simple my second mini-article and Peter's microtip was, so why not have
a go if you have something useful to share.
Happy flying,
Graham
Quadrotor Physics 101
OK, it's finally time to make good on the promises I made in the first post and describe
quadrotor physics. I will start off pretty slow, just so we're all on the same page.
Quadrotors (and many other objects of engineering interest, flying or otherwise) can be
modeled via Newton's Laws (unless your quad is sub-atomic or can fly close to the speed of
light). The overall governing equation is F = m a (hopefully this sounds familiar to you),
where:
F is the net force in pounds, ounces, or Newtons
m is the mass in slugs (yes, slugs!), grams or kilograms
a is the acceleration in feet/second/second, or meters/s/s or centimeters/s^2 (all of these
units are just common examples; there are others)
In words, net forces cause masses to accelerate. This is why larger vehicles tend to be
more stable - it takes larger forces to move them. Similarly, smaller craft tend to be more
agile. Stability vs agility is a frequent design engineering trade off - at least before feedback
augmentation was available.
A certain amount of force has to be generated just to maintain a steady condition. For
example, for the quad to hover it must provide sufficient force to overcome gravity. For it to
maintain forward flight, the quad must overcome both gravity and air resistance (also known
as aerodynamic drag). When aircraft are in this steady condition, they are said to be
"trimmed" or "in trim". Only forces that are in excess of the forces required to trim the quad
will cause it to accelerate.
Acceleration is, by definition, the rate of change of velocity.Velocity has typical units of
feet/sec, meters/sec, miles per hour or kilometers/hour. If you're familiar with calculus,
acceleration is the derivative of velocity: a = dv / dt. So, for the quad to change its velocity, it
must:
1) apply forces over and above the trim forces to accelerate
2) wait until the desired velocity is attained, then remove the additional forces,
3) then finally supply the trim forces to maintain steady flight at the new condition.
Velocity is, by definition, the rate of change of position. Or, v = dx/dt. Similarly, acceleration
is the second derivative of position, a = d^2x/dt^2. Changing the position of the quad is
therefore more complicated. One way it can be done is as follows:
1) - 3) are the same steps as above
4) coast at this velocity for a certain period of time.
5) apply a force in the opposite direction to decelerate the quad (or take advantage of
existing forces, such as gravity or drag)
6) time the deceleration in step 5) such that zero velocity is reached precisely at the new
desired position
7) adjust forces to maintain the new trim condition.
I have enclosed a cartoon showing the relationship between acceleration, velocity, and
position for the above maneuver. I have simplified it by leaving out any considerations of
trim forces. Also, in the real world, it would not be possible to change the acceleration as
abruptly as shown in the figure.
Its important to recognize that, since we live in a three dimensional world (or at least a world
with 3 spatial dimensions, no matter what the string theorists would have you believe)
acceleration, velocity, and position are all vectors in 3 dimensions. Each one has three
components, which are usually referred to as X, Y, and Z; or lateral, longitudinal, and
vertical; or left/right, back/forth, and up/down.
Bottom line: in order for the quad to follow a desired trajectory in space and time, its control
system (and/or the human flying it) must determine the correct forces to apply and when to
apply them according to the above equations, which are repeated here:
F=ma
a = dv/dt = d^2x/dt^2
v = dx/dt
The last two equations are often called kinematics. They describe motion without explaining
how it happens. The first is called the dynamic equation, since forces are what cause
motion to take place. Together, they are known as mechanics, or "classical" mechanics, to
distinguish them from quantum or relativistic mechanics.
Are you with me so far? Did I lose anyone, or did I just bore you to death?
- Roy
Quadrotor Dynamics 102: Simple Rotations
The kinematics and dynamics of rotational motion are much more complicated than that of
translational motion, which I discussed last time. For now, I'll just confine myself to simple
rotation, where the axis of rotation always points in the same direction for the duration of the
rotation. We'll get to see at least some more of the complexity when I explain the sensing of
orientation in a future post.
The governing equation for rotational dynamics is similar to the translational equation we
encountered last time (F = m a). It is T = I alpha, where:
T = torque, which is twisting force, or force times a moment arm. Typical units include foot-
pounds, ounce-inches, Newton-meters, etc.

I = moment of inertia, which depends on not just the amount of mass, but the distribution of
mass in the body. Units are kilogram-meters^2, or slug-feet^2, and so on
alpha (this is supposed to be a Greek letter) = angular acceleration, in degrees per second
per second, or radians/s/s (read on to find out what a radian is)
You may be familiar with torque since many motors (electric and otherwise) are often rated
by the maximum torque they can output. Our quadrotor motors and props also put out a
varying torque due to the electrical power we supply, the aerodynamic forces on the
propellers, friction in the motor, and other factors. The torque output depends in general on
the speed of the motors. The steady torque that results from the props spinning at a
constant RPM is not the torque of T = I alpha, since there is no angular acceleration in a
steady rotation. The steady torque is a "trim" torque. But, as the props change RPM, then
they must accelerate or decelerate and the T = I alpha formula tells us how much additional
torque is required. Another familiar use of torque is the wrench we might find in our toolbox.
If we can't unscrew a stubborn bolt with a particular wrench, we can use one with a longer
handle that allows us to apply more torque to the bolt. Hence, torque is proportional to the
applied force times the moment arm.
I hope you'll recognize the formula for the circumference of a circle based on its radius r. It
is, of course 2 pi r. This suggests a more natural unit to express the angle subtended by a
circular arc, which is called the radian. There are 2 pi radians in a complete circle (we only
use 360 degrees to describe the complete circle because the ancients once thought there
were only 360 days in a year. Also, it a convenient since 360 can be divided evenly by many
numbers). So, if we rotate our quad by a particular angle theta (another Greek letter)
measured in radians, then any point along the quad will travel a distance of r theta, where r
is the distance from the center of rotation to the point in question. Similarly, if the quad is
rotating with an angular velocity of omega (yet another Greek letter) radians/sec, then that
point would be traveling with a velocity of r omega. If r is in meters, then the angular velocity
would be in meters/s (since a radian is a ratio of the arc length and the radius, it is unitless).
Finally, if the quad were accelerating angularly at alpha rad/s/s, then that same point would
be accelerating along its circular arc at r alpha.
Let's put it all together. The torque is the force F times the moment arm r, T = F r. But since
F = m a, T = m a r. And, since a = r alpha, we have T = m r^2 alpha. If we set I = m r ^2, we
have the equation we started with: T = I alpha. From I = m r^2, we see that the further the
mass is away from the center of rotation, the more torque will be required to change the
angular velocity. And the closer the mass is to the center of rotation, the easier it is to
change the speed of rotation.
So, if we want to change the rotation rate or angular position of a quad, we need to follow
the same steps as in the previous post, just substituting "torque" for "force" and putting
"angular" in front of "acceleration", "velocity", and "position". For completeness, here are the
steps written out:
1) apply torques over and above the trim torque to accelerate angularly
2) wait until the desired angular velocity is attained, then remove the additional torque
3) then finally supply the trim torque to maintain steady rotation at the new condition.
If we just want to change the angular velocity, we'd stop there. To change the angular
position, follow the rest of these steps:
4) coast at this angular velocity for a certain period of time.
5) apply a torque in the opposite direction to decelerate the quad (or take advantage of
existing torques, such as drag)
6) time the deceleration in step 5) such that zero angular velocity is reached precisely at the
new desired angular position
7) adjust torque to maintain the new trim orientation.
And here are the formulas:
T = I alpha
I = m r^2
alpha = d omega / dt
omega = d theta / dt
a = r alpha
v = r omega
x = r theta
- Roy
Quadrotor Dynamics 103: Applying the Principles to the Quadrotor
Most of what we've said thus far could apply to just about any physical object. Let's focus in
on the specifics of the quadrotor. As wikipedia will tell you, a quadrotor is just a cross with a
propeller (and probably a motor) at end of each of the four arms. Each propeller produces a
force, which we call thrust, and a torque, both of which increase as the speed of rotation
increases (we'll get into more details about thrust and torque generation in future posts).
There's another Law of Newton that we haven't covered yet, which is "If a force (or torque)
acts upon a body, then an equal and opposite force (or torque) must act upon another
body". This is how the props work: they apply a force to the air to accelerate it downward,
and the air applies an equal and opposite force on the prop to accelerate it upward.
Similarly, the motors provide a torque to the propellers and the propellers supply an equal
an opposite torque to the motor - and anything the motor is connected to, like the frame of
the quadrotor. So, the frame will tend to spin in the opposite direction as the props. The
inertia of the props is smaller than that of the frame, so the props will accelerate more than
the frame (recall the equation T = I alpha? The torques (T) are the same, but since the
moments of inertia (I) are different, so are the accelerations (alpha)).
In a typical quad, adjacent props will spin in opposite directions, so that the prop on the
other end of the axis will spin in the same direction (see picture). In other words, two of the
props will spin in a clockwise direction and the other two will spin counter-clockwise. In a
stationary trimmed hover condition, the torques from the clockwise spinning motors balance
out the torques from the counter-clockwise ones and the net yawing moment is zero
("moment" is another way of saying "torque"). In other words, there is no tendency for the
quad to spin about its vertical axis when it is trimmed. All the thrust forces are balanced as
well, so there are no pitching or rolling moments. That is, the quad does not rotate about
either of the two axes that are represented by the arms that connect two motors. It is this
symmetry and balance of the forces and torques that allow the quadrotor to work.
But what if we want the quad to rotate? Referring to the lower left corner of the picture, we
can increase the thrust on one prop - lets call it the left one - and decrease the thrust on the
opposite (right) prop by the same amount. The yaw torques are still balanced: the sum of
the axial torque of the left and right propellers is exactly the same as it was during the
trimmed hover. Hence, it is still balanced by the torque of the other propellers (the front and
rear ones). Similarly, the net thrust is exactly the same as it was during the hover. The only
difference, relative to trim, is that the props have applied a rolling moment to the airframe,
which will cause it to accelerate angularly about the roll axis. Due to the symmetry of the
quad, the "pitch" axis behaves exactly the same as the roll axis.
How about if we want to yaw the quad? As you can see in the lower right figure in the
picture, we can, for example, increase the RPM of the two clockwise rotating motors and
decrease the speed of the two counter-clockwise propellers. Once again, the net thrust is
the same as for the hover case, and the net roll and pitch moments are also balanced.
Since the yaw moment is unbalanced, the quad will yaw counter-clockwise (opposite to the
direction of the net propeller yawing moment). To yaw the quad clockwise, we just reverse
the situation.
To increase (or decrease) the altitude of the quadrotor, all we have to do is increase (or
decrease) the speed of all 4 props equally, as shown in the upper right corner of the picture.
As before, pitch, roll, and yaw torques are all balanced, so the quad will climb (or descend)
but remain at a level, flat attitude without yawing.
The longer the arms of the quadrotor are and the heavier the motors are, the larger the
moments of inertia will be and the less maneuverable the quad will be. This is especially
true for the yaw axis. The propellers we typically use are designed to produce lots of thrust
but not very much torque. After all, the more torque the props require, the more torque the
motors must supply and the shorter the flight times will be.
We now know how to rotate the quad about all three axes (pitch, roll, and, yaw) and how to
climb or descend, that is how to move or translate in the z axis. How do we get the quad to
move in the other two axes (x and y)? We'll find out next time.
- Roy
Quadrotor Dynamics 104 - Moving right along.
I feel confident that someone reading this thread has thought, "Why can't I just connect the
receiver directly to the motors? Why do I need sensors and a microprocessor and PID and
all that stuff?" I won't come out and say that this is impossible to fly - I work with test pilots,
so I know just how adaptable human beings can be. However, most people who tried this
for themselves probably found out just how difficult it is to control an unaugmented
quadrotor. Let's see why this is so.
Imagine we have our quad perfectly trimmed in hover over a particular spot of ground, and
we want it to hover at the same altitude, but several yards from where it is now. What do the
propellers have to do to achieve this objective? Recall in what follows, that it does not
matter how the rotors were commanded - either from a sophisticated feedback control
algorithm, or via direct commands from the r/c receiver. The rotors have to do something
similar to what I'm describing.
We already know what has to happen: we need to accelerate the quad in the direction we
want to go, coast at a particular velocity, then decelerate so the quad comes to a stop
exactly at the desired final hover spot. In order to accelerate, we need to tilt (pitch or roll)
the quad so some of the thrust of the rotors is pointing in the direction we want it to go. As it
rolls (or pitches), we have to increase the overall thrust to balance gravity, otherwise it will
accelerate into the ground. Of course, every time we adjust the attitude, we'll also have to
adjust the overall thrust to maintain altitude.
Next, we'll have to roll the quad back to level to stop its acceleration over the ground and
have it coast at a constant velocity. But, as its coasting along, there will be air resistance
(drag) slowing it down. Depending on how fast and how far we want the quad to travel, we
may have to tilt the quad slightly into the direction of motion to provide sufficient force to
overcome the drag. As it nears the destination, we have to roll the quad back toward the
direction it came to decelerate it. Once the the quad comes to a halt we have to roll it back
to level to keep it there.
And how to we get it to roll to a particular angle? Again, we already know. We have to apply
a rolling moment (spin up the rotors on one side and spin them down on the opposite side),
remove the moment (let it coast), then apply a rolling moment in the opposite direction to
halt the angular motion when it arrives at the desired angular position. This three step
process has to happen every time we want to alter the angular position. Does this sound
like a lot of work for a simple re-positioning maneuver? There's more.
If the quad is flying outside it (or you, the "pilot") will have to cope with wind gusts. Even
indoors, the propeller wakes will interact with the arms and other structures (and the floor
and walls if you get too close). The quad components and/or each prop/motor are probably
not perfectly balanced either, which may result in a requirement for offset trim. Finally, even
if you have all these factors completely solved, the quadrotor is dynamically unstable. The
situation is analogous to balancing a broomstick on the palm of your hand. This means that
if you (or the electronics) aren't actively controlling it, the quad will tend to deviate from its
hovering position and eventually spiral out of control and crash.
To summarize:
- Since the quad only has four motors, it can only directly control 4 degrees of freedom:
pitch, roll, yaw, and thrust. That is, it is underactuated.
- To control the other two degrees (longitudinal and lateral translation), we must tilt the
quadrotor. In other words, the translational and rotational dynamics arecoupled. To control
the position of the quad over the ground, we have to control its orientation or attitude.
There's not too much we can do about these (unless we want to add additional propellers or
control surfaces).
However, there are some undesirable aspects of the dynamics that we can correct:
- Mother Nature (or Newton, if you prefer), only provides us with forces and torques to
control the quad - meaning we can directly control accelerations. But, we'd rather have
control over velocities and positions.
- The quad is susceptible to unwanted disturbances, both external (wind) and internal (mass
balance)
- The quad is unstable and requires constant attention to hover.
These are the very items that control theory can address, as we'll discuss next time.
Control Theory 100 Some Introductory Remarks
Finally - the topic you've all been waiting for - Control Theory! An auspicious topic for the
100th post of this thread! (it sure took me long enough to get here)
Before we begin, I hope that no one reading this thinks they can become an expert controls
engineer by reading a few blog posts. After all, it takes a one-semester sophomore level
course in a typical engineering undergraduate program just to understand the language of
control systems.
Why is it so difficult to study Control Systems?
- You need to have a solid understanding of the physics of the systems you are trying to
control.
- The theory is based on a lot of mathematics: differential equations, difference equations,
complex analysis (in the sense of imaginary numbers), linear algebra, probability,
information theory, optimization, transforms, and more. It is not necessary to master all
these subjects, but a solid knowledge of the requisite components of these topics is
required.
- There is a considerable amount of art involved. Despite the overwhelming amount of
mathematics and the existence of sophisticated computer aided engineering packages, it is
still not really possible to press a button and have the computer design a practical control
system. There are so many tools in the controls toolbox that it requires some experience
and knowledge to know exactly which one is the best to use for the problem at hand. And
there is almost always some tweaking that must be done to ensure that every condition is
covered. As many of you have found out, it is entirely possible to ignore all the math and
just wrap a PID loop around the problem and continually tweak it until it basically works
which is an art unto itself.
Why is it so difficult to teach Control Theory? (in case you care)
- There is no obvious hierarchy of the mathematical concepts; theyre all just needed at
once. This makes it difficult to determine an order or sequence to properly teach the subject,
and I think many professors and textbook authors choose the wrong path. My intended
audience is, of course, not control engineers. But if you are an undergraduate suffering
through a controls program, let me know. I might be convinced to write some supplemental
posts.
Why is control theory so useful?
- The theory is pretty much the same no matter what the system is that you are trying to
control. Essentially the same theory that works for flying quadrotors also applies to: robots,
the cruise control of your car (and the engine controls, too), temperature control of your
living room (or of a bio-reactor), or even the economy.
- Much of the theory overlaps with other subjects, such as Digital Signal Processing. In fact,
a control algorithm running on a microcontroller can be viewed as a specialized digital
signal processor.
- I would claim that it is difficult to get very far in the study of other sciences, such as
biology, without a firm grasp of the concept of feedback, which plays a central role in control
theory.
So, presuming I havent scared you off, lets get started!
Control Theory 101 The Joy of Feedback
As we indicated in post 99, the objectives of control systems include the following:
1) Make the system (a quadrotor in our case) follow a desired trajectory that is, an
evolving sequence of velocities and/or positions over time. It does not matter if the trajectory
is predetermined (like a sequence of waypoints) or generated in real-time (from r/c joystick
commands, for example)
2) Reject any disturbances, such as might be caused by wind gusts or an imbalanced
configuration
3) Stabilize the system that is, alter the tendency for the system to diverge from trim
Practically, we have to figure out how to adjust the 4 propeller thrusts (which are the only
means we have to influence the quads behavior) to achieve these objectives. How can we
accomplish this?
To find the answer, we have to go back to the physics fundamentals that we discussed
earlier. Forces cause masses to accelerate (and the angular equivalent: torques cause
inertias to accelerate angularly). Acceleration, by definition, is the time rate of change of
velocity: a = dv/dt for those of you who have had some calculus. Velocity is, in turn, the time
rate of change of position: v= dx/dt (remember all that?). The last part of the puzzle is that
the inherent forces (that is, the forces other than the ones coming from the control system
itself) are themselves functions of velocity and position. For example, we said earlier that
the drag force on the quad is a function of its velocity through the air. Similarly, the direction
of the propeller thrust vector depends on the angular position of the quad. So, to sum up,
forces cause acceleration, which cause velocity to change, which in turn cause position to
change. These new velocities and positions result in new forces being generated, and the
loop repeats itself endlessly. Computer programmers out there may recognize this concept
as recursion. Control engineers call it feedback, and it is the key to control theory.
Besides recursion and feedback, this structure is also known as a differential equation,
because it defines relationships between variables and their rates of change. Recall
F=ma
The total force F comes from the control, which well call u (the prop-motor thrusts in our
case), plus a function of velocity plus a function of position.
F_total = u + F_velocity + F_position
For simplicity, well represent the force due to velocity as just a constant (b) times the
velocity v.
F_velocity = -b v
In general, this function may be more complicated than this. In fact, the actual aerodynamic
drag force is proportional to velocity squared. We will discuss later when this type of
simplification can be justified. The minus sign indicates that the force opposes the direction
of motion, similar to the way the drag force opposes the velocity (assuming b is positive).
Well also write the position-based force equation as just a constant (k) times the position
F_position = - k x
As with the velocity case, reality may be more complicated. The negative sign indicates the
force is acting to bring the mass back to zero displacement, like a spring, if k is positive.
However, if k is negative, the force will tend to pull the mass away from zero displacement,
like an inverted pendulum (which is a fancy way of describing balancing a broomstick on
your hand).
For the calculus savvy, weve said earlier that acceleration is the derivative of velocity. This
means that velocity is the integral of acceleration. Similarly, since velocity itself is the
derivative of position, position is therefore the integral of velocity. If these terms dont mean
anything to you, dont worry. We will be getting to a place soon where we can simplify some
of the details of calculus. For now, you can just think of it this way: forces cause
acceleration, which causes velocity to change, which causes position to change.
Putting it all together:
(-k x - b v + u) /m = a
v = (integral of) a
x = (integral of) v
If we put this into a diagram form, as in Figure 1, the feedback loops become apparent. Ive
included the integral signs, for those of you who understand such things. If you think of this
as a computer simulation program, all you have to do is give it an initial velocity and position
and supply it with the control input at each instant in time and let the computer crank
through the program to determine the system behavior for all future time. This is how flight
simulators and other physics based sims work. Its recursive because the current position
and velocity depends on the earlier position and velocity, which depends in turn on the v
and x before that, and so on - all using the same function at each time step (but with
potentially different inputs each time).
The behavior of the system is characterized by the parameters k, b, and m. If our quad is
very streamlined, for example, then the b term will be smaller, since aerodynamic drag wont
affect us as much as it would for a less streamlined configuration. If we dont like how the
system behaves, we have to change these parameters somehow. For example, as we
discussed earlier, if the sign of k is negative, the system will diverge, like the broomstick
balanced in our hand. In the past, such changes had to be accomplished entirely in the
physical domain. For example, this is why fixed wing airplanes, like passenger jet liners,
have tails (vertical and horizontal stabilizers). Without them, wind gusts would blow them
completely off course. The tail provides a restoring force to keep the plane pointing in the
right direction, like a weathervane. In other words, tails make the negative k of the fuselage
and wings into an overall positive k of the airplane as a whole.
Today, we can alter the system parameters using computers. Figure 2 shows us the basic
premise. If we can sense the position and velocity, the control system (which is essentially
just a computer) can simply multiply them by whatever numbers we want, and use these
values to provide additional forces via the control inputs (up to the limits of our control
actuators, of course). If the k of the physical system is negative, we can use this electronic
or digital feedback to make the overall k value positive. This is how the F117A Stealth
Fighter can get away with such a relatively small tail: it employs a sophisticated digital fly
by wire feedback control system. We refer to the combination of the system itself plus the
control system as a closed loop system, for obvious reasons.
We have discussed how feedback control can stabilize an unstable system (objective # 3
above). What about the first two objectives, trajectory tracking and disturbance rejection?
Once again, feedback comes to the rescue. If we alter our feedback loops from Figure 2 to
compare the sensed position and velocity with desired position and velocity, we can drive
the control system with the errors. The control system (if properly designed) can cause the
errors to converge to zero, or at least be minimized. In this manner, the quadrotor will follow
the desired trajectory (to a greater or lesser extent) See Figure 3. Note that if the desired
trajectory is zero, the system is identical to the one in figure 2. As in the earlier figures, the
blocks labeled Kv and Kp may be more complicated in practice than just constant values.
This diagram is meant as a notional illustration of the feedback concept, and shouldnt
necessarily be taken as a practical design solution.
Summary:
- Physical systems are feedback systems, and can be modeled via differential equations.
- The behavior of the system depends on its parameters (the coefficients of the differential
equations)
- Feedback control systems can be used to manipulate the inherent parameters, thus
altering the behavior of the physical system.
- Feedback control systems can also be used to compel the system to track a desired
trajectory and reject unwanted disturbances.
Next time, we will go into more detail on the physics and mathematics of the all-important
feedback loop
Right Said Fred - Modeling 101
Yes, Im back has it really been that long? Hopefully some of you are still with me. As a
reminder of where we left off, Im responding to gkes request to create a model of the
angular response of the quad from the data provided (from post
169 http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...&postcount=169).
As I mentioned earlier, this is getting ahead of my initial "lesson plan". So, if you're
confused, don't worry - I will backtrack and fill in the missing details later.
Every control design has 4 steps 1) understanding the dynamics of the object you are trying
to control; 2) understanding the desired behavior 3) choosing a controller architecture
(based on the first two steps); and 4) tuning the gains. You may find that you just cant
obtain the desired performance in step 4, so you have to choose another controller. Or that
you have to go back and revise your ideas about the desired behavior, if you just cant get
there. You may even have to go back and learn more about the dynamics. Very little is
completely easy or straightforward when it comes to control design.
I suspect that, for most people reading this, the architecture used is PID because that is the
only option they know. The other three steps are conducted simultaneously under the guise
of tuning the gains. Clearly this is not the optimal approach. A more analytical approach is to
first derive a mathematical computer model of the quadrotor based on physics and
experiments (thats step 1 above). Having a model wont preclude iteration and
experimentation, but it is a lot safer and cheaper to experiment on a model than on a real
quad. The model will also help guide the real-world experiments. Finally, there are many
advanced control methods that require a model.
Lets take a look at the data that gke provided. First, a quick sanity check does it make
sense? Is the rate the derivative of the angle? Yes, it checks out. In half a second, the quad
rolled about 0.6 radians = 34 deg, which is feasible. At that time its rolling at 2.5 radians/sec
= 143 degrees/second, which is certainly possible. The rate trace exhibits what Id call
higher order dynamics (all that wiggling), but lets ignore that at least for now. We should
strive for the simplest model we can that adequately captures the important characteristics.
Note that the average angular rate is a fairly straight line, as gke's excel plot shows
(ignoring the wiggles). Theres no evidence of rate damping, at least as of the 0.5 second
mark . Damping is a negative function of velocity. The faster the rotation, the more damping
would resist the motion and the curve would start to flatten out. That does not happen in the
0.5 seconds worth of data we have.
Recall from post 75 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...9&postcount=75) that the
physics for this case is simply torque = inertia times angular acceleration. For convenience,
lets say the input is 5 PWM counts (gke said it was +5 to one motor and -5 to the opposite
motor) This results in the ESCs changing the speed of the two opposed motors, which
results in a changed thrust force in the two propellers. These (roughly) equal and opposite
thrust forces (known as a couple) create a net torque when multiplied by the (unknown)
motor-to-motor distance. This is then equal to angular acceleration multiplied by the
(unknown) moment of inertia, per the physics. Im leaving out a lot of non-linear dynamics
and the algorithms inside the ESC. For reasons that Ill explain later, what we often desire in
the control world is a linear model.
Sounds like too many unknowns, but it isnt. What we are primarily concerned about is how
the motor commands affect the rotation of the quad, and we have that. The angular
acceleration (alpha) is just the slope of the angular velocity curve in this case 5.2856
radians/second/second. And the quad achieved that alpha with a motor command of 5
PWM counts. All of those unknowns collapse into the 5.2856 number.
If the dynamics were truly linear, we would expect that doubling the motor command to 10
PWM counts would produce double the acceleration, or 10.6 rad/s/s. But, since the
response isnt necessarily linear, this might not be the case. Wed have to get gke to
perform more experiments to be sure. For now, well ignore this inconvenient situation.
So, the relevant equation is 5 PWM counts = 5.2856 rad/s/s. Since we want to get this in
the form of figure 1 of post 129 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...&postcount=129),
we have to solve for angular acceleration. Hence:
alpha = 1.05712 U
where alpha is the angular acceleration in rad/s/s and U is the motor command input in
PWM counts.
All we have to do next is integrate alpha to determine the angular velocity (omega) and
integrate again to find the angular position (theta). As weve already mentioned, theres no
apparent damping, so the b term from figure 1 of post 129 is zero. Theres obviously no
spring trying to pull theta to zero, so the k term is also zero. Our model is almost complete.
There are just two more items Id like to include, at least for now: the delay in the response
and disturbance modeling.
Although it isnt shown on the graph, the input steps at time 0 (the input trace is in the excel
file), but the quad doesnt really start to respond until about 0.03 seconds later. This could
be due to a pure delay. If the internal ESC control loop is only running at 50 Hz, it would
take 0.02 sec for it to respond to a command. Or, the apparent lag in the response could be
due to the fact that it takes time for the propeller to spool up to speed. Just like the quad
itself, the motor supplies a torque, which results in angular acceleration of the prop, which
means it takes time to change the prop speed. Which of these is the culprit behind the
response delay? It is probably due to a combination of both effects. We may need more
experimentation or details of the ESC to be certain. Thirty milliseconds may not seem like a
lot of time, but either of these phenomena will have consequences for our controller design
(as we shall see). So, they should be included in our model.
Our quadrotor has to contend with more than just the forces and moments due to the
motors that our control system is deliberately commanding. For example, there are also
wind gusts and other undesirable aerodynamic phenomena (like blade flapping). Or, there
may be a center of mass offset due to the configuration. All of these can result in
uncommanded torques. Our model should include these effects, so we can test how well
our control algorithms can reject these disturbances.
Now we have enough information to create a model. As I mentioned earlier, I will implement
it using the free ScicosLab tool in the next post. But, you can do it in MATLAB or other
similar tool.

Multi Rotor

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Multi Rotor

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

An Easy Way To Select an Electric Outrunner

Motor Power System for an ARF, Kit or Plans Built

Converting a glow powered almost ready to fly (ARF), plans built

Why is picking an engine so 'easy' for a glow plane and a motor so

Prop Chart from www.flyurbana.com/media/Chart.PDF

A typical sport 1.20 4-stroke might use a 14x8, 15x6,

components! A power meter is essential when working with

Balsa USA 1/4 Scale EAA Bipe

The Wing Cube Loading (WCL), presented in result cell (B13),

More information on WCL.

Average and Median watts in/cu.ft.

The Suggested Power result is 975 watts in.

Prop Chart from www.flyurbana.com/media/Chart.PDF

Prop Chart from www.flyurbana.com/media/Chart.PDF

and the plane's mission.

The pitch suggestion box (cells A37 through B40) shows

Pitch Speed Table

The chosen prop combined with the number and chemistry of

the top of the screen.

2. From the left column menu, select Engine

4. Finding possible outrunner motors:

While 28 possible motors for this plane is significant, it is a lot

The motors may now be compared by Kv, weight, supplier and

A word about electronic speed controls:

6S 4900mAh or 5000mAh Li-Poly battery (4700mAh and 4800mAh

9, 10 or 11 "A123" 2300mAh cells could be considered for use

My purchased power system choice for my 1/4-scale BUSA EAA

Unlike glow engines, there is no standard way of 'naming' an

Electric Motor Kv or RPM/volt

One of the results of the previous testing method is the Kv.

The Kv Spreadsheet (sheet Kv) can do the math for you.

Getting Started in Electric Flight

Indoor - living room flyer

Park Flyer - Scale

Electric Ducted Fan (EDF)

QuadCopter controlled by iPhone or iPad

Temperature Effects on Batteries

Wing Cube Loading Defines Aircraft Types and Missions

Wing Cube Loading Table

Recommended First Purchase

P1 from Hobby Partz and similar meter at Hobby King

Progressive RC is a great source for decent chargers.

How to read a Battery Label or Battery Specifications

Li-Poly Storage and Safe Handling

Keeping the battery and charger under close observation

Lithium Polymer disposal instructions from Common Sense RC

Other Flight Power Batteries

Power lead connectors from the battery to ESC

Handy "Gripper" Covers for Deans Ultra Plugs from HDi

Anderson Power Poles (APP) aka Sermos

Crimper for APP connectors

The EC3 and its larger relative EC5 (EC3 shown)

Multi power plug adapter from Progressive RC - $16.99

Brushless Electronic Speed Controls (ESC) Basics

Kitchen timer that I use

Motors for Electric Flight

Outrunner nomenclature is not standardized. Comparing one company's outrunner to another's

Timing and Apparent Kv

Power In versus Power Out

Prop Shaft Rotation

Selecting the CORRECT Supplier Recommended Props

A much better way to list them would be

Power Levels for Various Types of Aircraft

Return to Table of Contents