2022/09/24 Phoenix Design Review Meeting
- Megan Spee
| Justification | Priority | Owner | Notes | Requirement Achieved? (2022/09/24) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ESCs shall be DSHOT capable | Firmware has a DSHOT implementation that should be tested | MID | @Anthony Luo | DSHOT is generally more responsive, accurate and easier to use than PWM motors, but also more expensive. | yes |
No part shall take a single person more than 30 min to replace | Testing drone is expected to crash and hard to replace parts will delay fixing | HIGH | @Anthony Luo | For example: make arms replaceable with one or two screws, don’t mount legs to arms if possible, attach connects between pdb and escs, etc. | yes |
Propellers shall be protected in case of a crash | Doing so avoids the cost and time of replacing props every time the drone crashes | MID | @Aidan Bowers (Deactivated) | depending on design it may not be feasible to do an entire roll cage, but for props bigger than 6” something to prevent prop strikes is ideal | soft yes: action items:
|
Aircraft shall be able to survive a drop from at least one meter in a normal landing orientation | The first point to impact the ground during a straight drop need to be able to survive the fall | LOW | @Dhruv Upadhyay |
| Reconsider requirement bounds - “good enough” look into scotch weld, reference @Conall Kingshott |
A method to harness the drone must exist | while testing, it may be unsafe or otherwise unfeasible to let the drone free-fly and it needs structurally sound points to attach tethers or joints to limit movement to certain axes | HIGH | @Anthony Luo | in a worst case scenario imagine that the drone is dropped 2 meters and is jolted to a stop by the attachment points. ideally nothing breaks | Yes, with strings. Flyaway string can attach PID action items to make phoenix compatible:
|
The airframe shall be as small as possible while being able to facilitate zp | smaller allows the drone to survive harder crashes due to less momentum while also being cheaper and easier to fix once it breaks | MID | @Sahil Kale | Personally Andy recommends a frame based around 6~8 inch propellers and a target auw of under 1.5kg (aim for prop size between 6” ~ 12” unless there is a signifcant reason to deviate outside of these guidelines which outweighs other concerns) | Yes If problems in future just resize body |
The frame must have a mechanism to mount ZP (or a Nucleo) securely | testing frame intends to fly with both zp2, nucleos, and zp3 | LOW | @Gordon Fountain (Deactivated) | What will ZP3’s dimensions and mounting dimensions be? The nucleos used will probably be nucleo-f401re and nucleo-h743zi | Yes Internal mounting works well enough |
Battery must be swappable without disassembly or tools | should continuous testing happen with a set of batteries, they should be able to be swapped out as needed | MID | @Andy Meng |
| Yes |
Protection must exist for critical electronics on all axis | ZP and expensive hardware needs to be protected in the case of a crash from any angle | MID | @Anthony Luo | perhaps put it in the middle of the frame if using a sandwich style design again | Yes |
A mounting solution should exist for an imu which reduces vibrations traveling from the frame | need to be able to mount imu securely | MID | @Anthony Luo | What IMU will be used for testing? | Not really We can use velcro, double sided yellow tape, rubber, any kind of vibration dampener - 2 screws for IMU, 2-4 for Nucleo, buy in bulk. @Megan Spee to bring up at next mech meet M3 bolt holes for ZP @Daniel Puratich |
The drone shall have a minimum 5 minute flight time | We want to fly for enough time to perform tests | LOW | @Sahil Kale |
|
|