Hello and welcome to our community! Is this your first visit?
Register
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Y6 vs flat hexa

  1. #1
    New Recruit
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    13
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Reputation Points (Add)
    0

    Question Y6 vs flat hexa

    I understood that that Y6 is less efficient due to the coaxial construction. But on the other hand is the frame a lot lighter.

    In my opinion there are a few advantages with the Y6 frame. It's easier to see which direction you are flying and it's easier to provide a clear view for a camera.

    Anyhow, I have a few questions:

    Does the Y6's lighter weight normally compensate for the efficiency loss?

    How much efficiency will I approximately lose with the Y6 coaxial?

    Are there any other important pros/cons that I should consider?

    Let me know what you think.

    //The F-Bird

  2. #2
    Moderator AeroQuad Technologist Honk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Stockholm
    Posts
    5,440
    Blog Entries
    2
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Reputation Points (Add)
    1
    Your assumptions might be right, that the inefficiency is compensated by lighter weight, if you build it like that.

    But the biggest issue I have read about is the motor mixing between upper and lower "deck" being a little PITA to get right, and if you don't it will go up/down a lot when yawing for example.

    Have you considered a H6 (or H8)? Those are very attractive and seem like the ultimate photo/video platforms. Something like this:
    http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...postcount=7431

    or this:

    or this:

    from:
    http://rc-cam.pl/viewtopic.php?t=2799

    Or why not a twelvo-copter? :P

    DODEKAKOPTER from khead19 on Vimeo.

    Last edited by Honk; 03-29-2011 at 04:31 PM.
    Smart people don't need a signature.
    http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/...rd-signs-3.jpg

  3. #3
    New Recruit
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    13
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Reputation Points (Add)
    0
    Thanks for the input.

    I'm not very experienced when it comes to multicopters, so the easy way out would be to buy a frame, and I've found mostly Y6 or flat (symetric) frames when it comes to hexas.

    I have considered building my own frame (see attached image). I have an idea of setting the arm mounts in a "V". The frame would then provide a better view forward and it would be smaller when collapsed, compared to a regular flat hexa.

    The problem is then that it's not a "default" setup, and the motor mixing must probably be adjusted. I'm not much into programming either. Many controls are available preprogrammed for a Y6. Thats why I got interested in the Y6 in the first place.

    I didn't know about the Y6 mixing problems though, that they could go a bit up and down while yawing. That was useful information and totally new to me.

    That twelveocopter looks interesting. Maybe one can build it using a regular quad mixing (since the propellers seem to be in groups of three). That would be easy, but one can't take advantage of redundancy though.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  4. #4
    Senior Pilot itod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Belgrade, Serbia, Serbia
    Posts
    731
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Reputation Points (Add)
    0
    Maybe you should take a look at Warthox's simple hexa frame design:


    It flies almost as nicely as a quadcopter:

  5. #5
    New Recruit
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    13
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Reputation Points (Add)
    0
    That's an interesting solution too. Maybe not as easy to fold as a coaxial Y-frame though.

    Do you know why the rear arm is Y-shaped, while the side arms are T-shaped?

  6. #6
    Senior Pilot jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Cherry Hill, NJ
    Posts
    582
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Reputation Points (Add)
    0
    That is a neat frame design, I particularly like the duct tape.

  7. #7
    Senior Pilot
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suffolk County NY , USA
    Posts
    647
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Reputation Points (Add)
    0
    Isn't y 6 the smallest number of motors that allows you to loose one and still have controllable flight ??

  8. #8
    Senior Pilot rb101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Sanford NC
    Posts
    230
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Reputation Points (Add)
    0
    If you look at the one in the video, all three cross arms are straight. The picture might be an early design.

    Rick

  9. #9
    Senior Pilot itod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Belgrade, Serbia, Serbia
    Posts
    731
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Reputation Points (Add)
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Falcon View Post
    Do you know why the rear arm is Y-shaped, while the side arms are T-shaped?
    I see only two explanations: either he experimented with material consumption/rigidity (notice that the motors are in the same position in Y and T shape), or he wanted to make rear end easier visually to find in flight being different than the other two. You have to ask him in the RC Forums

    Quote Originally Posted by kevo View Post
    Isn't y 6 the smallest number of motors that allows you to loose one and still have controllable flight ??
    Yes, I think you can even lose two and land safely if they are not next to each other, but never saw that in video. I saw a video of a guy lose one and kept flying for a short time.
    Last edited by itod; 03-30-2011 at 09:28 AM.


 

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •