CarbonCore Cortex....Owners' Thread

[TheUFGadget]

Is this guy for real? £659 for a full frame kit and he doesn't want to deal with "hobbyists"? And you can't show pictures of it? What planet is he on? Add me to the "never going to shop there" list!

Also, this sounds worrying:

I'm not familiar with DJI gear (also on my "don't shop there" list) but, if I understand you correctly, this is a serious safety issue - basically an "un-commanded takeoff"? Wow!

Hi There,

It is not a safety issue nor is it an "un-commanded takeoff." It was a case of a switch, whos function is to put the craft in failsafe mode and bring it home at the designated height and land safely, that was previously for a timer being for RTH. He hit it, from what his story said, thinking he could reset his timer and threw it into failsafe. Sounds like the craft did exactly what it was told to do.

-Gadget

 

[jes1111]

I have to disagree with you - I would have no expectation that engaging RTH on an aircraft that is stationary on the ground would cause it to take off so that it can land again where it already is! It's completely counter-intuitive and therefore dangerous. And, in coding terms, easily fixed:

:::pseudo:::
if{currentPosition == homePosition} do nothing;

 

[TheUFGadget]

I have to disagree with you - I would have no expectation that engaging RTH on an aircraft that is stationary on the ground would cause it to take off so that it can land again where it already is! It's completely counter-intuitive and therefore dangerous. And, in coding terms, easily fixed:

:::pseudo:::
if{currentPosition == homePosition} do nothing;

I appreciate that you have your own opinion and can respect that. Again the craft functioned exactly the way it was supposed to. Being unfamiliar with NAZA I would understand, and it's no big deal. One of the greater features about NAZA, in my opinion, is that before if moves it climbs to the designated altitude. Even if it was in the same position then it would climb to the correct altitude. Again, this may not be a feature that you necesarily like but the craft will not do this unless failsafe is engaged. Knowing your controls, no disrepect to the poster because I have made the mistake too, but the copter did the exact function that it was programed to do. It was controlled, calculated, and safe. Don't see where dangerous is in that equation. Sounds like from your knowledge of code you would be better suited for a hobby grade APM, MultiWii, etc where you can manually alter the code to your "exact" liking. Other wise you will have to put up with different brands and different features.

 

[Quinton]

Here is a quick video of it hovering in GPS earlier today, apologies for the shakey footage but I was on my own with an Iphone.
My woes continue a bit, I was taking the top of to try and find out what was wrong why the motors wont start, and 2 of the small screws that hold it together have rounded off, so not sure yet how I am going to sort that, as they are 2mm hex screws that are flush with the Carbon Fibre.
Anyone considering getting this frame really should get a few sets of screws, as they are very soft and could probably only be used once or twice.
Nearly forgot, that is a 2.5KG dumbell weight hanging underneath it.

 

[jes1111]

It's not my (meagre) coding skills that prompt me to label this behaviour as a safety issue but rather some interface design knowledge and a dose of common sense. Take a close analogy: a car fitted with an (imaginary) Return To Home system. So you're sitting in your driveway and, explaining the car's features to a friend, you push the RTH button. Would you expect the car to launch itself out into the roadway, go round the block and bring you back home? Of course not.

Anything that causes an unexpected throttle up when the craft is on the ground is a big problem. In fact, in interface design terms, there should only be one, single action that would cause the craft to lift off. Usually that would be the throttle stick but if, for example, you had an "auto take-off" feature then the throttle should be disabled until the routine is completed. Going back to a car analogy - you can't use Cruise Control and manual control simultaneously: using the brake or accelerator instantly disengages the cruise control.

 

[Mrtarango32]

Here is a quick video of it hovering in GPS earlier today, apologies for the shakey footage but I was on my own with an Iphone.
My woes continue a bit, I was taking the top of to try and find out what was wrong why the motors wont start, and 2 of the small screws that hold it together have rounded off, so not sure yet how I am going to sort that, as they are 2mm hex screws that are flush with the Carbon Fibre.
Anyone considering getting this frame really should get a few sets of screws, as they are very soft and could probably only be used once or twice.
Nearly forgot, that is a 2.5KG dumbell weight hanging underneath it.

Button head screws?

 

[jes1111]

My woes continue a bit, I was taking the top of to try and find out what was wrong why the motors wont start, and 2 of the small screws that hold it together have rounded off, so not sure yet how I am going to sort that, as they are 2mm hex screws that are flush with the Carbon Fibre.

Good luck getting that out! I'm afraid I don't have any suggestions. But when you succeed, I can suggest replacing them with quality Torx (TX) headed screws (stainless steel, of course). The shape of the head/bit is MUCH better for small sizes - they don't get chewed out like hex heads do.

Screws here:
http://www.pts-uk.com/Products/Socket_Screws (Cap, button, flanged button and low head types)
Tools here:
http://airbugz.com/pro-tools/32-wiha-picofinish-torx-screwdrivers.html (shameless self-promotion - my own site )

 

[bunnygirl80]

Hi guys,

I thought I'd post a link to some photos of a CC Cortex I'm building and also the CC Cortex gimbal.

http://www.multi-rotor.co.uk/index.php?topic=6704.msg55445#msg55445

 

[Quinton]

Good luck getting that out! I'm afraid I don't have any suggestions. But when you succeed, I can suggest replacing them with quality Torx (TX) headed screws (stainless steel, of course). The shape of the head/bit is MUCH better for small sizes - they don't get chewed out like hex heads do.

Screws here:
http://www.pts-uk.com/Products/Socket_Screws (Cap, button, flanged button and low head types)
Tools here:
http://airbugz.com/pro-tools/32-wiha-picofinish-torx-screwdrivers.html (shameless self-promotion - my own site )

Thanks for the links, nice site BTW
I popped into Screwfix tonight and bought this, as the ones I had were too big, will give it a go in the morning.
http://www.screwfix.com/p/trend-pro-grabit-screw-and-bolt-remover-2-pieces/21391

The screws are socket countersunk screws.

They are really soft, I just checked some of the screws that attach the rest of the stuff (The ones I did not do, and there are 4 around the top motors that are rounded off also if you try and tighten them, so its not just me.
http://shop.carboncore.co.uk/epages.../Shops/es140672/Products/"M3x6mm Bevel Bolts"

They really are use once/twice screws max.

 

[SoCal Blur]

....a hobby grade APM, MultiWii, etc where you can manually alter the code to your "exact" liking.

I find this an interesting statement. In my estimation, it is the ability to customize to a specific need would make it "more professional" than a system that cannot be customized...especially if it were in a competative industry as commercial multirotors will surely become. And, I agree with Jes1111, the behavior is counter-intuitive and therefore could be dangerous...even if it is working as designed.

 

[jes1111]

Countersunk Torx: http://www.pts-uk.com/Products/Machine_Screws_TX_Countersunk_Machine_Screws

Nice find on those extractors - hope it works. My experience in the past with that kind of tool is "lots of pressure, lots of speed" but YMMV - maybe try on some wood screws into the workbench to get the feel of it before committing!

 

[SoCal Blur]

Here is a quick video of it hovering in GPS earlier today, apologies for the shakey footage but I was on my own with an Iphone.
My woes continue a bit, I was taking the top of to try and find out what was wrong why the motors wont start, and 2 of the small screws that hold it together have rounded off, so not sure yet how I am going to sort that, as they are 2mm hex screws that are flush with the Carbon Fibre.
Anyone considering getting this frame really should get a few sets of screws, as they are very soft and could probably only be used once or twice.
Nearly forgot, that is a 2.5KG dumbell weight hanging underneath it.

Looks pretty stable, though.

 

[Mrtarango32]

Hi guys,

I thought I'd post a link to some photos of a CC Cortex I'm building and also the CC Cortex gimbal.

http://www.multi-rotor.co.uk/index.php?topic=6704.msg55445#msg55445

Very nice. Is that your own custom build or the artf kit?

 

[Quinton]

Looks pretty stable, though.

I have no experience with an x4(8) before this, so I am not sure how well they perform.
When you send it off, it is smooth as butter, if you went on a fast forward then stopped, it would swing like a pendulum, same if you try and descend straight down (This is without weight underneath).
With my Skyjib 6 Super I can descend straight down no bother and very little wobble.
Just looking at your sig, can I ask what props and FC you use, as the motors are very similar to the CC ones

 

[Mrtarango32]

View attachment 16726View attachment 16727View attachment 16728View attachment 16729View attachment 16730View attachment 16731

Photos from bunnygirl

 

[Quinton]

View attachment 20739View attachment 20740View attachment 20741View attachment 20742View attachment 20743View attachment 20744

Photos from bunnygirl

OMG she is doomed
Now that is very interesting regarding the retracts servo arm, as it is not the one that comes from CC
Theres not a lot of room in there, is there.
Also what I don't understand is they are def the CC (CarbonCore) ESCs, and they look like the motors too, which is not the same ones as posted on that site?

 

[TheUFGadget]

It's not my (meagre) coding skills that prompt me to label this behaviour as a safety issue but rather some interface design knowledge and a dose of common sense. Take a close analogy: a car fitted with an (imaginary) Return To Home system. So you're sitting in your driveway and, explaining the car's features to a friend, you push the RTH button. Would you expect the car to launch itself out into the roadway, go round the block and bring you back home? Of course not.

Anything that causes an unexpected throttle up when the craft is on the ground is a big problem. In fact, in interface design terms, there should only be one, single action that would cause the craft to lift off. Usually that would be the throttle stick but if, for example, you had an "auto take-off" feature then the throttle should be disabled until the routine is completed. Going back to a car analogy - you can't use Cruise Control and manual control simultaneously: using the brake or accelerator instantly disengages the cruise control.

Lol again respect your opinion but there was no "unexpected" throttle up. He was unprepared for the craft to do exactly as it is programed. The craft will instantly disengage when you remove failsafe. It uses plenty of common sense when it achieves the SET height. It is set so that it can clear the obstacles in your flying field and come home (going back to the car analogy, why you would set the car to have the speed limit of your roads)! It is not dangerous no unless the controller is the one making the mistake, which we all do! The controller is acting flawlessly and safely

 

[jes1111]

unless the controller is the one making the mistake, which we all do!

Quad Erat Demonstrandum

 

[TheUFGadget]

I find this an interesting statement. In my estimation, it is the ability to customize to a specific need would make it "more professional" than a system that cannot be customized...especially if it were in a competative industry as commercial multirotors will surely become. And, I agree with Jes1111, the behavior is counter-intuitive and therefore could be dangerous...even if it is working as designed.

Hate to say it but you don't agree if it COULD</SPAN> be dangerous because he said it WAS. There is no doubt that it CAN be. It's a great feature just the way it is for MANY reasons and it also has its flaws. My point is that its design is a certain way and that the current way it's designed, functioning as intended, is not dangerous. I see your argument and many people have different tastes and flavors when it comes to FCs but I would argue that a Professional Grade flight controller comes plug and play along with its own software and functions. NAZA is customizable and tunable to make it to your liking. There is a reason that when people want a PROFESSIONAL rig, they go to DJI, Hoverfly, Cinestar etc for all their gear </SPAN>

 

[Quinton]

Lol again respect your opinion but there was no "unexpected" throttle up. He was unprepared for the craft to do exactly as it is programed. The craft will instantly disengage when you remove failsafe. It uses plenty of common sense when it achieves the SET height. It is set so that it can clear the obstacles in your flying field and come home (going back to the car analogy, why you would set the car to have the speed limit of your roads)! It is not dangerous no unless the controller is the one making the mistake, which we all do! The controller is acting flawlessly and safely

Please dont also forget what I said regarding the failsafe.
I flicked the switch "by accident" and it shot up.
However next day I changed the failsafe to just "hover" instead of going up 20m and come home, I tested the failsafe today, and it did not hover, it shot up 20m and came home, so there seems to be a major bug in the latest A2 firmware.