Surveillance flying vehicle
The project aims to construct a flying vehicle, which can also operate semiautomatically. The customization of the flying vehicle will include customized 3D printed protectors for its front and rear. This report presents various approaches to construct this vehicle with experiments on different prog...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Final Year Project |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10356/64183 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Nanyang Technological University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | The project aims to construct a flying vehicle, which can also operate semiautomatically. The customization of the flying vehicle will include customized 3D printed protectors for its front and rear. This report presents various approaches to construct this vehicle with experiments on different programming codes from APM and PX4 to determine which is better in terms of user-friendliness and customizability. Arguably, APM would have a greater customizability by end-user with the help of its software. But end-users would have to re-calibrate a few settings every time the firmware is being updated. PX4 is ideally a better choice for developers, as they do not have to comprehend additional 3rd party applications. Several experiments were conducted in both the APM and PX4 environment with different methods of connecting the hardware components, which include how the battery connected. Evidently, PX4 would refuse end-user to disable pre-arm safety check, whereas, APM allows it. By connecting one battery to one ESC is not an ideal choice, as the microprocessor will not be able to land safety should the battery drains up. Programming the microprocessor is challenging and many times it leads to unsuccessful compilations. |
|---|