It would only need to be relative altitudes anyway. I've considered just making the code work with whatever the raw digital value is, and not worrying about converting it to anything. The issues I see with that are:
1) Logged values wouldn't be particularly meaningful
2) Setting things like a ceiling limit wouldn't be trivial, because the offset scale would depend on your initial (takeoff) altitude
3) If the code imposed ascent / descent rate limits, they'd be different at different altitudes. I don't know by how much - I haven't plotted it.
How fast are you taking measurements, and are they reasonably stable?
It would only need to be relative altitudes anyway. I've considered just making the code work with whatever the raw digital value is, and not worrying about converting it to anything. The issues I see with that are:
1) Logged values wouldn't be particularly meaningful
2) Setting things like a ceiling limit wouldn't be trivial, because the offset scale would depend on your initial (takeoff) altitude
3) If the code imposed ascent / descent rate limits, they'd be different at different altitudes. I don't know by how much - I haven't plotted it.
How fast are you taking measurements, and are they reasonably stable?
They are being read at 400 hz (I think that's high speed, the default for contemporary I2C parts?). My part has four devices: L3G4200D 3 axis gyroscope, ADXL345 3 axis accelerometer, HMC5883L 3 axis digital compass, and BMP085 Barometric Pressure and Temperature Sensor. If I recall the data sheet (s) said each device makes readings at 200 hz, so I think it scans the whole thing about 50 times a second.
I have one cog watching the I2C bus. The I2C driver cog reads all the devices and dumps the values each x, y, z, temp, and pressure into hub memory. I think its 22 bytes. The terminal cog reads the values from memory and spits them out on the screen at 230400 baud, the values bounce around very fast. The values appear to change at least as fast as the terminal can display them, I think they change twice for every time they get displayed.
Right now the numbers change very quickly, I think they bounce around +/- 10, but its too quick to really see. But it seems really jittery. It might just be a software bug, or maybe I need to change the defaults on the parts.
1 - Why wouldn't logging be meaningful? I was thinking of mapping. I was thinking of storing the X,Y,Z delta several times a second, and then make my video gamer friend plot the path in space and display it on the fancy graphics station. I already convinced him it would look cool, and his part would be easy.
2 - Around my house, the intital altitude is well known. Illinois is mostly flat as a pancake, and the few interesting hills are marked on the topo maps. I was thinking of using the known ground elevation from the map, and the known pressure from the airport. I just have to make friends with the meteorology (without getting arrested by airport security).
3- ascent / descent rate limit- I didn't think about this. Maybe I'll carry the unit around and look at the data awhile before I strap it on a flying blender.
I meant that logging would simply be storing raw data, and it would need to be converted to actual readable height values for it to be human readable in a meaningful way. One of the things I've considered trying is doing a proper reading on startup, and using that to compute fixed point offset and scale values that would give you a correct conversion to (meters / feet / cm / whatever) at your current altitude. The assumption being that no one is likely to take one of these more than, say 1000m away from the takeoff point, so the numbers would be "accurate enough". This would be easy if it was just pressure, but since temperature plays into this too, it gets more complicated.
I'd also suggest inbuilt GPS when it loses signal, make it go back to it's take off point? or until it regains signal?Or at least make the API simple enough for students to add something like that.
I've been out collecting a bit of market intelligence about this program and there's certainly a very solid niche for bringing UAVs into schools. Between several days at the USA Science and Engineering Festival and two more at the National Science Foundation Research Experiences for Teachers meeting https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5736 I am certain that we need to build this program.
There are several large-scale, commercial or government funded efforts already underway. We will look into tapping into them, but the style isn't quite the way we like to provide this material. We like to have quick learning through real hardware that students can use, for many reasons you probably already understand.
This summer, Parallax will host four high school students to participate in specific aspects about the development of this program. Prepare to be introduced to these students in June. Their initial focus will be testing assembly instructions for ELEV-8 v2, but they will move on to specific projects once they've built their craft. Their work will be documented in public.
I'll need the support of our whole community to welcome them when the time comes. I know you're already "in" for this effort.
I've been out collecting a bit of market intelligence about this program and there's certainly a very solid niche for bringing UAVs into schools. Between several days at the USA Science and Engineering Festival and two more at the National Science Foundation Research Experiences for Teachers meeting https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5736 I am certain that we need to build this program.
There are several large-scale, commercial or government funded efforts already underway. We will look into tapping into them, but the style isn't quite the way we like to provide this material. We like to have quick learning through real hardware that students can use, for many reasons you probably already understand.
This summer, Parallax will host four high school students to participate in specific aspects about the development of this program. Prepare to be introduced to these students in June. Their initial focus will be testing assembly instructions for ELEV-8 v2, but they will move on to specific projects once they've built their craft. Their work will be documented in public.
I'll need the support of our whole community to welcome them when the time comes. I know you're already "in" for this effort.
Thanks,
Ken Gracey
Ken,
I will document my build of my newly acquired Elev-8, and try to keep it on the students level, but some of the students I met in Washington are already my level.
Thank you for making the trip to DC this weekend - 280 miles each way! It was fantastic to meet you and learn a bit about your history, which is far more colorful than most people I've known.
I have a nice photo of you, Jessica and myself to post when I get home.
This all makes sense considering I don't even know where I slept last night and what I had for lunch. That photo was from my camera and I must've sent it to you right away.
One of the best features of BoeBot is the multiple configurations. We build the chassis. Then build light sensor, test and tear back to chassis. Build tactile, test and tear back to chassis. Build Ir, etc. When courses are short I can skip one of those. It would be great if the ELEV-8 could follow that model.
Instead of the text broken to 60 min sections, shoot for 45. By the time students are in and set up time is lost. Include a few extra exercises in each chapter for when a full 60 min is available.
In text don't leave out all the end-of-chapter material that makes SIC so useful for educators.
How many educators got their start in BoeBot through the educator's courses? It might be worth developing a syllabus that fits 2 days and plan on presentations at a half dozen locations across the country.
A platform for classes has to be tough not only in crashes but also in build/rebuild that will go on several times per year. I have never seen an ELEV-8 so don't know the fasteners. Pretty much any screw should be replaced with a bolt, etc.
It would be cool if there was an appendix activity of creating a spare part on a 3D printer. Many schools will have access to one of the cheap models. CAD could be provided. It would be nice intersection of two important technologies.
This needs some thought before implementing. Maybe best as on-line extra activity so easier to update. Make it a non-crucial part in terms of safety, perhaps a landing strut.
This all makes sense considering I don't even know where I slept last night and what I had for lunch.
Ken, to refresh your memory, you had the Ramada for lunch and stayed at the Lasagna Inn. They wouldn't let you stay at the Waldorf Salad because wearing leather loafers with jeans doesn't meet their dress standards. Too "California-ish." What's next, huarache sandals and white socks?!
Keeping this on topic, I still believe that a successful education program for a product that must convey the dynamics of flight needs a strong video component. Students need to be shown, not just told. The videos would augment the traditional great textual guides Parallax is known for.
Videos in all these things are great, but I was thinking the most important are step-by-step videos showing how to fly the thing. My original suggestion, some time back, is to do this with simulated 3D. It's a clearer presentation, easier to produce, and control stick positions can be shown side-by-side with the simulated flight characteristics. Whereas BOE-Bots are pretty sturdy, and students have to try to wreck one, that's not the case with an Elev-8. Students need a lot more preparation study before they should attempt to operate the Elev-8.
I've been out collecting a bit of market intelligence about this program and there's certainly a very solid niche for bringing UAVs into schools. Between several days at the USA Science and Engineering Festival and two more at the National Science Foundation Research Experiences for Teachers meeting https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5736 I am certain that we need to build this program.
There are several large-scale, commercial or government funded efforts already underway. We will look into tapping into them, but the style isn't quite the way we like to provide this material. We like to have quick learning through real hardware that students can use, for many reasons you probably already understand.
This summer, Parallax will host four high school students to participate in specific aspects about the development of this program. Prepare to be introduced to these students in June. Their initial focus will be testing assembly instructions for ELEV-8 v2, but they will move on to specific projects once they've built their craft. Their work will be documented in public.
I'll need the support of our whole community to welcome them when the time comes. I know you're already "in" for this effort.
Thanks,
Ken Gracey
This sounds like an interesting project. I am stalled a little here in Texas, but we are moving slowly forward with the beginnings of a program here.
The first thing that comes to my mind, involving students, is the high probability of injury with unguarded propellers. I think a prop guard needs to be developed.
This sounds like an interesting project. I am stalled a little here in Texas, but we are moving slowly forward with the beginnings of a program here.
We finally got the administrative paperwork cleared up.
We are moving forward with a project to see what the UAS industry looks like, what entry level skills are needed by job category.
We plan to offer a first course on what UAS is and how to enter the job market by late this fall. I am planning to have operating a UAS (short introduction) as part of that course.
We will also be looking at what courses are being offered, where, and what the content and sequence looks like. We will use this to begin the design of a UAS education program.
I should give you guys an update from Parallax. We haven't been dormant on the topic during the gestation period of this thread. Our time has been used for the primary four purposes:
- Hiring four students this summer to simply create "ELEV-8 V2 Projects" of their choice, which can be done anywhere
- Working with NSF to see if there are funds for teacher Research Experience Training at Parallax
- Improving the ELEV-8 V2 kit, to be released in July
- Scoping out the contents of what an educational tutorial would look like
In regards to the third point - the ELEV-8 V2 hardware - it's shown below with Joe Grand at the controls last week. We were testing some 3D printed propeller guards. There's no better person to try these than Joe Grand, and we found out that they indeed work well but they were far too brittle.
Placing a duct around an propeller increases efficiency only if the gap between the blade tip and duct is kept to a high tolerance. Also, I believe this increase in efficiency only applies to high blade density impellers where the intention is to build pressure - such as in the ducted fans used in RC model jets, or hovercraft.
For slow flying craft the rule is that a large propeller moving a large amount of air slowly has greater efficiency than moving a small amount of air very fast. For any given powerplant to get the most static thrust you fit the largest possible propeller that the airframe will handle and add gearing as necessary. If there is power to spare then you add more blades to the prop. Compromises must be made if you want to have a decent cruise speed. For a quadcopter maximum static thrust is what we want since they are optimized for hovering and forward speeds are low.
Anyone that thinks the FAA is the enemy is wrong. Without turning this into a regulatory conversation, I think Parallax is looking for ideas for a curriculum, not legal advice.
I have three generations of FAA employees in my family. I can tell you right now that nobody is out to get Parallax for trying to educate people. It's the rouge uneducated folks that screw it up. If you think Parallax is either of the two then you must be new here.
According to the FAA, the PILOT in COMMAND is the person who is responsible for everything related to flight, I don't care if it is a model airplane, Y6, UAS, "drone", or a Gulfstream 6. You can skip right over the manufacturer, recent federal court cases spell this out in plain English.
There is no reason to bring legalities, or the FAA into this equation. How many manufacturers require a phone briefing before purchasing a copter? Let's see... There's Parallax,,, and.... nobody else. Parallax is setting yet another standard for everyone else to learn from.
I fly airplanes all day long, big ones, little ones, fast, slow low high off shore. It doesn't matter to me what Parallax does because I know that they bring education, not recklessness and personal endangerment.
So from one pilot to another, these regs exist for a reason. Nobody here is busting regs. End of story.
EDIT: While I'm on my soap box, these views directly represent those which the FAA is trying to protect, to include passengers to which include those closest to. There is no risk here.
I'll qualify Pilot in command under the pretense UAS aircraft are not considered model aircraft and under a few pounds.
The FAA cares just as much about education as Parallax. Undoubtedly between the two we can positively participate in the bonding. There is no enemy here, it's just a small breakdown in communication! I'd put life and limb on the Propeller microcontroller. I do not often experience the unparalleled quality of the Propeller microcontroller. Thanks to everyone here for affording me that opportunity!
IMNSHO there is one point along the training trail Parallax should never even allude to in any way. That is the point at which you take your contraption out into the wide open spaces.
No matter how much you are willing to hang your life and limb by some electro-mechanical gadgets you bought and put together, I will take strong objection to you hanging it over me or my property. Let us not forget that the FAA is our governments effort to keep the sky over our heads safe... get it - voters + gov't agency = safe skies for all.
Perhaps we have reached the next level for some communities to not feel safe without their own air defense network?
I should give you guys an update from Parallax. We haven't been dormant on the topic during the gestation period of this thread. Our time has been used for the primary four purposes:
- Hiring four students this summer to simply create "ELEV-8 V2 Projects" of their choice, which can be done anywhere
- Working with NSF to see if there are funds for teacher Research Experience Training at Parallax
- Improving the ELEV-8 V2 kit, to be released in July
- Scoping out the contents of what an educational tutorial would look like
In regards to the third point - the ELEV-8 V2 hardware - it's shown below with Joe Grand at the controls last week. We were testing some 3D printed propeller guards. There's no better person to try these than Joe Grand, and we found out that they indeed work well but they were far too brittle.
Ken Gracey
Awesome project! I had offered an Idea to Elizabeth City State University in North Carolina about using drones to monitor the quality of the coastal estuaries. Drones could monitor the enviromental
variables, in real time, which gives scientists and students the chance to improve the quality of the coastal waterways, and maintain the quality/quantity of the marine life. "torpedo" drones
could be dropped from the flying drones. The "torpedo" drones navigate through the waterway, and report any number of factors in which the scientists are looking for.(temp, salinity, etc).
The Drones, the army of them, would not act alone, but in unison, contributing to a overall mission, in which each drone worked with each other, like "ants". Drones to constantly scan the
earths' surface for changes in terrain. This information fed back to the main server, empowered the "virtual" waterway to be interpreted by all drones, providing a true map for all drones
to follow. Other drones could "crack" any ozone clouds that were endangering the public. Nethertheless, the idea was not adapted. Drones could be used to help us control/monitor
real time problems on the earth.
I am about ready to purchase an Elev-8 to support the UAS project a Tarrant County College. My shopping list includes: Elev-8 ELEV-8 Li-Po Battery Pack Tenergy TB6B Balance Charger DX6i 6-Channel Full Range w/o Servos MD2 (includes AR6200 receiver, battery, charger - I hope) Does this sound like a good list to get started with? Bruce Elliott
It is a very interesting platform, I agree that having safety housing around the blades is a must.
Years ago I flew RC helo's, (not very well) so I purchased a training harness, that "tethered" my helo by its landing gear, and limited its range of movement. This would keep you from crashing, while learning how to fly. The tether would keep the helo from tipping over and damaging the blades, but allow a few feet of up/down and small angles.
I am a high school teacher that has used BOE-Bots, Sumos, Stingrays, Scribblers, and now am starting to incorporate Activity Bots into my curriculum. (I teach 2 elective courses using Parallax robots as the project portions of them)
I agree with many of the other suggestions about safety, and the suggestions about having some different levels/add-ons to increase the usage of the kits.
One suggestion from me would be to have a 'cheaper' kit that involves minimal or no soldering - this would make replacing parts for the teacher much easier and hopefully more cost effective. Then there could be more options for parts to be swapped in/out and make it easier for students to work with. I can tell you that many of my students have researched the E8 platform on their own, and would really like to use something similar, but the cost and fear of breakage has prohibited me from investing into it as of yet. $700 for 3-4 robots, or the same amount for 1 flying one, means that using the money to purchase cheaper options allows for more students that can work individually. (I have written and recieved grants for many of my current robots and would look into this as the platform is developed.)
I would be willing to have students (and myself) test out options and/or curriculum pieces and would be willing to contribute my efforts into helping design a curriculum. In my second course, students get to select one of the alternate robots/add-on kits from Parallax that I have accumulated over the years and either test them out, help develop curriculum ideas for them, or use previously developed curriculum. This type of project would fit great into that class as I do not need to have all of my students participating (initially at least) on working with a UAS curriculum and testing out various aspects of it.
So, I believe the major aspects needed to implement a successful UAS program include:
1) Cost-effective
2) Safe for student use
3) Easily modded/repaired
4) Well-designed curriculum that details aspects of flight, physics, programming, and math with the ability to increase/decrease difficulty based on the types of students
Hi, Does anybody have SimpleIDE C code for the MS5607 Altimeter Module? I just need to be able to get a variable integer out of it that goes up and down accordingly.
I'd like to note that our first phase of being able to introduce the ELEV-8 V2 UAV to high schools is now complete. Go to http://learn.parallax.com/elev-8-v2-quadcopter-assembly-guide and you will see that we've got a step-by-step assembly guide that was produced and tested on four high school freshmen this summer. They provided many comments and improvements. Each of them successfully built and flew an ELEV-8 V2 (and got paid for it!).
Our next step is to improve the capabilities of the flight control system with an accelerometer. This will likely be accomplished with an add-on board. Next, we will be producing fully open code that customers can modify and run on their own. There's a whole big world of education in this single craft and the opportunities to present the material with Next Generation Science Standards and Common Core in mind are really huge.
Educators, teachers, and volunteers: we really need your feedback and input. The kind of comments Tim made (above) are very valuable to us. If you show us how to help you then we can provide exactly what you want.
Comments
1) Logged values wouldn't be particularly meaningful
2) Setting things like a ceiling limit wouldn't be trivial, because the offset scale would depend on your initial (takeoff) altitude
3) If the code imposed ascent / descent rate limits, they'd be different at different altitudes. I don't know by how much - I haven't plotted it.
How fast are you taking measurements, and are they reasonably stable?
They are being read at 400 hz (I think that's high speed, the default for contemporary I2C parts?). My part has four devices: L3G4200D 3 axis gyroscope, ADXL345 3 axis accelerometer, HMC5883L 3 axis digital compass, and BMP085 Barometric Pressure and Temperature Sensor. If I recall the data sheet (s) said each device makes readings at 200 hz, so I think it scans the whole thing about 50 times a second.
I have one cog watching the I2C bus. The I2C driver cog reads all the devices and dumps the values each x, y, z, temp, and pressure into hub memory. I think its 22 bytes. The terminal cog reads the values from memory and spits them out on the screen at 230400 baud, the values bounce around very fast. The values appear to change at least as fast as the terminal can display them, I think they change twice for every time they get displayed.
Right now the numbers change very quickly, I think they bounce around +/- 10, but its too quick to really see. But it seems really jittery. It might just be a software bug, or maybe I need to change the defaults on the parts.
1 - Why wouldn't logging be meaningful? I was thinking of mapping. I was thinking of storing the X,Y,Z delta several times a second, and then make my video gamer friend plot the path in space and display it on the fancy graphics station. I already convinced him it would look cool, and his part would be easy.
2 - Around my house, the intital altitude is well known. Illinois is mostly flat as a pancake, and the few interesting hills are marked on the topo maps. I was thinking of using the known ground elevation from the map, and the known pressure from the airport. I just have to make friends with the meteorology (without getting arrested by airport security).
3- ascent / descent rate limit- I didn't think about this. Maybe I'll carry the unit around and look at the data awhile before I strap it on a flying blender.
This is kind of fun!
I've been out collecting a bit of market intelligence about this program and there's certainly a very solid niche for bringing UAVs into schools. Between several days at the USA Science and Engineering Festival and two more at the National Science Foundation Research Experiences for Teachers meeting https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5736 I am certain that we need to build this program.
There are several large-scale, commercial or government funded efforts already underway. We will look into tapping into them, but the style isn't quite the way we like to provide this material. We like to have quick learning through real hardware that students can use, for many reasons you probably already understand.
This summer, Parallax will host four high school students to participate in specific aspects about the development of this program. Prepare to be introduced to these students in June. Their initial focus will be testing assembly instructions for ELEV-8 v2, but they will move on to specific projects once they've built their craft. Their work will be documented in public.
I'll need the support of our whole community to welcome them when the time comes. I know you're already "in" for this effort.
Thanks,
Ken Gracey
Ken,
I will document my build of my newly acquired Elev-8, and try to keep it on the students level, but some of the students I met in Washington are already my level.
Jim
Thank you for making the trip to DC this weekend - 280 miles each way! It was fantastic to meet you and learn a bit about your history, which is far more colorful than most people I've known.
I have a nice photo of you, Jessica and myself to post when I get home.
Ken Gracey
This all makes sense considering I don't even know where I slept last night and what I had for lunch. That photo was from my camera and I must've sent it to you right away.
Ken Gracey
Instead of the text broken to 60 min sections, shoot for 45. By the time students are in and set up time is lost. Include a few extra exercises in each chapter for when a full 60 min is available.
In text don't leave out all the end-of-chapter material that makes SIC so useful for educators.
How many educators got their start in BoeBot through the educator's courses? It might be worth developing a syllabus that fits 2 days and plan on presentations at a half dozen locations across the country.
A platform for classes has to be tough not only in crashes but also in build/rebuild that will go on several times per year. I have never seen an ELEV-8 so don't know the fasteners. Pretty much any screw should be replaced with a bolt, etc.
This needs some thought before implementing. Maybe best as on-line extra activity so easier to update. Make it a non-crucial part in terms of safety, perhaps a landing strut.
Ken, to refresh your memory, you had the Ramada for lunch and stayed at the Lasagna Inn. They wouldn't let you stay at the Waldorf Salad because wearing leather loafers with jeans doesn't meet their dress standards. Too "California-ish." What's next, huarache sandals and white socks?!
Keeping this on topic, I still believe that a successful education program for a product that must convey the dynamics of flight needs a strong video component. Students need to be shown, not just told. The videos would augment the traditional great textual guides Parallax is known for.
In addition to videos on theory, design and assembly, consider including videos of troubleshooting situations (as discussed JK & KG)
http://www.electronicproducts.com/Electromechanical_Components/Motors_and_Controllers/Ohio_man_charged_with_felony_for_using_drone_to_film_accident.aspx
Those Ohio guys (Rick)!
Mine would read something like, "Ohio man ridiculed by forumites for STILL not having built his Elev-8!"
This sounds like an interesting project. I am stalled a little here in Texas, but we are moving slowly forward with the beginnings of a program here.
We finally got the administrative paperwork cleared up.
We are moving forward with a project to see what the UAS industry looks like, what entry level skills are needed by job category.
We plan to offer a first course on what UAS is and how to enter the job market by late this fall. I am planning to have operating a UAS (short introduction) as part of that course.
We will also be looking at what courses are being offered, where, and what the content and sequence looks like. We will use this to begin the design of a UAS education program.
- Hiring four students this summer to simply create "ELEV-8 V2 Projects" of their choice, which can be done anywhere
- Working with NSF to see if there are funds for teacher Research Experience Training at Parallax
- Improving the ELEV-8 V2 kit, to be released in July
- Scoping out the contents of what an educational tutorial would look like
In regards to the third point - the ELEV-8 V2 hardware - it's shown below with Joe Grand at the controls last week. We were testing some 3D printed propeller guards. There's no better person to try these than Joe Grand, and we found out that they indeed work well but they were far too brittle.
Ken Gracey
UPS just delivered my screws, (along with other parts I had ordered), and I am going to use Roy's Program to program the ESC's.
I highly recommend watching Dino's build on youtube:
http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php/146234-Building-the-ELEV-8-quad-copter
It is very inline with the current product.
Jim
Placing a duct around an propeller increases efficiency only if the gap between the blade tip and duct is kept to a high tolerance. Also, I believe this increase in efficiency only applies to high blade density impellers where the intention is to build pressure - such as in the ducted fans used in RC model jets, or hovercraft.
For slow flying craft the rule is that a large propeller moving a large amount of air slowly has greater efficiency than moving a small amount of air very fast. For any given powerplant to get the most static thrust you fit the largest possible propeller that the airframe will handle and add gearing as necessary. If there is power to spare then you add more blades to the prop. Compromises must be made if you want to have a decent cruise speed. For a quadcopter maximum static thrust is what we want since they are optimized for hovering and forward speeds are low.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/education/edlife/universities-offer-degrees-in-unmanned-aircraft-systems.html?pagewanted=all
If you can't see it I'll copy paste here
IMNSHO there is one point along the training trail Parallax should never even allude to in any way. That is the point at which you take your contraption out into the wide open spaces.
No matter how much you are willing to hang your life and limb by some electro-mechanical gadgets you bought and put together, I will take strong objection to you hanging it over me or my property. Let us not forget that the FAA is our governments effort to keep the sky over our heads safe... get it - voters + gov't agency = safe skies for all.
Perhaps we have reached the next level for some communities to not feel safe without their own air defense network?
Awesome project! I had offered an Idea to Elizabeth City State University in North Carolina about using drones to monitor the quality of the coastal estuaries. Drones could monitor the enviromental
variables, in real time, which gives scientists and students the chance to improve the quality of the coastal waterways, and maintain the quality/quantity of the marine life. "torpedo" drones
could be dropped from the flying drones. The "torpedo" drones navigate through the waterway, and report any number of factors in which the scientists are looking for.(temp, salinity, etc).
The Drones, the army of them, would not act alone, but in unison, contributing to a overall mission, in which each drone worked with each other, like "ants". Drones to constantly scan the
earths' surface for changes in terrain. This information fed back to the main server, empowered the "virtual" waterway to be interpreted by all drones, providing a true map for all drones
to follow. Other drones could "crack" any ozone clouds that were endangering the public. Nethertheless, the idea was not adapted. Drones could be used to help us control/monitor
real time problems on the earth.
Years ago I flew RC helo's, (not very well) so I purchased a training harness, that "tethered" my helo by its landing gear, and limited its range of movement. This would keep you from crashing, while learning how to fly. The tether would keep the helo from tipping over and damaging the blades, but allow a few feet of up/down and small angles.
I agree with many of the other suggestions about safety, and the suggestions about having some different levels/add-ons to increase the usage of the kits.
One suggestion from me would be to have a 'cheaper' kit that involves minimal or no soldering - this would make replacing parts for the teacher much easier and hopefully more cost effective. Then there could be more options for parts to be swapped in/out and make it easier for students to work with. I can tell you that many of my students have researched the E8 platform on their own, and would really like to use something similar, but the cost and fear of breakage has prohibited me from investing into it as of yet. $700 for 3-4 robots, or the same amount for 1 flying one, means that using the money to purchase cheaper options allows for more students that can work individually. (I have written and recieved grants for many of my current robots and would look into this as the platform is developed.)
I would be willing to have students (and myself) test out options and/or curriculum pieces and would be willing to contribute my efforts into helping design a curriculum. In my second course, students get to select one of the alternate robots/add-on kits from Parallax that I have accumulated over the years and either test them out, help develop curriculum ideas for them, or use previously developed curriculum. This type of project would fit great into that class as I do not need to have all of my students participating (initially at least) on working with a UAS curriculum and testing out various aspects of it.
So, I believe the major aspects needed to implement a successful UAS program include:
1) Cost-effective
2) Safe for student use
3) Easily modded/repaired
4) Well-designed curriculum that details aspects of flight, physics, programming, and math with the ability to increase/decrease difficulty based on the types of students
Tim Lewis
Gahanna Lincoln High School
Science
I'd like to note that our first phase of being able to introduce the ELEV-8 V2 UAV to high schools is now complete. Go to http://learn.parallax.com/elev-8-v2-quadcopter-assembly-guide and you will see that we've got a step-by-step assembly guide that was produced and tested on four high school freshmen this summer. They provided many comments and improvements. Each of them successfully built and flew an ELEV-8 V2 (and got paid for it!).
Our next step is to improve the capabilities of the flight control system with an accelerometer. This will likely be accomplished with an add-on board. Next, we will be producing fully open code that customers can modify and run on their own. There's a whole big world of education in this single craft and the opportunities to present the material with Next Generation Science Standards and Common Core in mind are really huge.
Educators, teachers, and volunteers: we really need your feedback and input. The kind of comments Tim made (above) are very valuable to us. If you show us how to help you then we can provide exactly what you want.
Thanks,
Ken Gracey