Latest Flight testing of CARVEC Brushless Gimbal Controller & Photohigher AV200IDD

[smartaerials]

Hi guys,
Really dont know if the AV200/Brushless is a goer..Can t find one single video on youtube with some disent footage on it:upset:
They all have jitters, all of them. And I would REALLY like to go for it but it ain't seam right.(Hope somebody can prove me worng within the next week..)
A

 

[henrysj]

Hey Droider,

Are you still winning with this setup? Have u got anymore updates form the last month? Thanking you in advance :nevreness:

 

[DucktileMedia]

Was the intention of swapping the gear roll and belt driven tilt to friction drive due to precision or the little gear clicks you could feel when it moved about? My roll has never been perfectly smooth the whole way around so this would make sense. But seems like the added friction needed to keep everything from slipping would also add a fair amount of resistance which could contribute to the jiggering IMO.

 

[MombasaFlash]

I fail to see either the point or the attraction of the AV200 brushless conversion. The whole point of brushless motors is direct drive of the axis and the consequent speed of reaction, so to have any form of mechanical gearing between the motor and the axis would seem to largely cancel the potential gains. The AV200 was acceptable when there was nothing else available but it's kinda had its day now.

 

[henrysj]

Hey MobasaFlash,

So what would you recommend for around the £2k mark for a brushless setup that can take up to a red epic?

 

[MombasaFlash]

Hey MobasaFlash, ...

Hey Hnrysj,

None.

I wonder if you have ever even seen a Red Epic? If that isn't just a plain idiotic question it must be rhetorical, since none of your listed machines is capable of lifting a 6kg camera payload in addition to the LiPo's and camera mount - bringing the total payload to around 10kg?

A Red Epic can be crammed into an AV200, with very little regard for full freedom of Tilt axis movement, balance or structural twisting of the flimsy light-duty aluminium construction. Stabilisation options include the frustrating and ineffectual RSGS, Picloc and Radians - with or without the ill-conceived brushless conversion.

What exactly is the point of attempting to carry a $50,000 camera in a cheapo hobby gimbal that cannot be stabilised?

 

[henrysj]

I was after your constructive advise in case you knew of a gimbal that could rather than just a ****ish comment. Yes it might not be ideal but the AV200 has been proven to take a red if needed and certainly beats dropping £12k on a Movi10 while getting started.

And FYI the Skyjib can take a payload of over 6kg - there is even a video floating around somewhere of kopterworx lifting 16kg payload with virtually the same setup.

 

[jes1111]

Certainly when you get up to the weight of a Red plus glass then your requirement for torque goes up and so does the need for rigidity of the total gimbal structure ("stiffness" in engineering terms, which includes bearing play and other subtle factors). Just looking at the construction (never handled one) the AV200 would seem lacking in that department. Physically you might fit a Red in there but results are likely to be sub-par. A 5D MkII/III is probably the sensible limit for one of these.

As to using "gearing" to increase the available torque, that in itself will not negate the advantage of a brushless motor. It depends how much backlash, slop and hysteresis that gearing system has ("total accumulated errors", in engineering terms). Toothed gears, in their natural state, suffer from backlash - the circumferential gap between the teeth results in a delay (and a subsequent impact shock) when reversing direction. There are schemes for removing this backlash but they tend to be complex and heavy. Belt drive is also subject to backlash, although there are specific belt/tooth profiles which claim to eliminate it - but hysteresis (think: elasticity) remains. The AV200 IDD uses a friction drive which is theoretically backlash free but since it has a rubber/rubber interface then hysteresis will remain. Most likely the system will also have slop due to bearing tolerances, etc. and non-linearity of torque due to runout (imperfect roundness) of the driving/driven wheels. As a sum total, the AV200 IDD is unlikely to exhibit the same performance as a "pure" direct drive system but whether or not the difference will be discernible in the end result is (currently) a subjective judgement. Without doubt, though, it will be better than the original RC servo drive - by a long way!

 

[Bartman]

............Just looking at the construction (never handled one) the AV200 would seem lacking in that department...............

seriously? this is the epitome of what is wrong with the internet.

why don't we wait for Dave to get caught up and maybe he can give us an actual update on how it's going. after all, he's actually handled it.

 

[jes1111]

seriously? this is the epitome of what is wrong with the internet.

why don't we wait for Dave to get caught up and maybe he can give us an actual update on how it's going. after all, he's actually handled it.

Not for the first time, I disagree with you, bart . On the contrary, this thread points up one of the distinct issues affecting the multirotor and gimbal world: the general absence of proper engineering principles and techniques in the design and construction of airframes and gimbals. In fact, your questioning of my post is actually another example of the widespread preference for the subjective opinions of "perceived experts" over proper understanding of the science and engineering involved. I'm simply trying to add some science to the discussion

It's not difficult to assess the construction of the AV200 from photos and drawings (I even have a complete 3D model of it on my computer) and to conclude, quite reasonably and with certainty, that it's designed for minimum weight and cost, not maximum stiffness.

 

[Bartman]

jes,

you make no sense. first of all, you're not an engineer. second, you say you've never handled it but then go on to pontificate about this and that. i've got three AV-130's sitting on my bench and i've installed another two. they don't look like much but they work great provided you understand their limitations.
the AV-200 is as strong as it needs to be in the direction of the loads. i wouldn't take it ripping around and expect to get flawless shots but for a lot of uses it may be perfectly suitable and certainly capable of carrying a Red.

will the stabilization deliver? it remains to be seen.

regarding this "perceived expert"....BS Mechanical Engineering, Rutgers University, 1991
been building/fixing stuff my whole life including my frames and camera mounts which work pretty damn well, thank you.

 

[MombasaFlash]

I was after your constructive advise in case you knew of a gimbal that could rather than just a ****ish comment. Yes it might not be ideal but the AV200 has been proven to take a red if needed and certainly beats dropping £12k on a Movi10 while getting started.

And FYI the Skyjib can take a payload of over 6kg - there is even a video floating around somewhere of kopterworx lifting 16kg payload with virtually the same setup.

First of all, spell my name right. Second, why does someone just "getting started" need to carry a Red Epic? Third, have you actually tried flying with 10kg of total payload? If you have I am willing to bet that your X4 flies like a pig ... or rather, struggles like a pig ... for all of four minutes before it has to come down. Just because it can get off the ground does not make it a worthy camera ship.

Back to the AV200 ... as I said, a $50,000 camera deserves a proper mount. The AV200 is not suitable so, as every system is only as good as its weakest component, until you can afford to slap down 12K, stop dreaming about Epics.

 

[Bartman]

First of all, spell my name right. Second, why does someone just "getting started" need to carry a Red Epic? Third, have you actually tried flying with 10kg of total payload? If you have I am willing to bet that your X4 flies like a pig ... or rather, struggles like a pig ... for all of four minutes before it has to come down. Just because it can get off the ground does not make it a worthy camera ship.

Back to the AV200 ... as I said, a $50,000 camera deserves a proper mount. The AV200 is not suitable so, as every system is only as good as its weakest component, until you can afford to slap down 12K, stop dreaming about Epics.

isn't the camera more like $10,000 plus extras??

 

[jes1111]

isn't the camera more like $10,000 plus extras??

http://www.red.com/store/cameras

 

[jes1111]

jes,

you make no sense. first of all, you're not an engineer. second, you say you've never handled it but then go on to pontificate about this and that. i've got three AV-130's sitting on my bench and i've installed another two. they don't look like much but they work great provided you understand their limitations.
the AV-200 is as strong as it needs to be in the direction of the loads. i wouldn't take it ripping around and expect to get flawless shots but for a lot of uses it may be perfectly suitable and certainly capable of carrying a Red.

will the stabilization deliver? it remains to be seen.

regarding this "perceived expert"....BS Mechanical Engineering, Rutgers University, 1991
been building/fixing stuff my whole life including my frames and camera mounts which work pretty damn well, thank you.

If you want to dispute or develop any of the specifics of what I've written then please go ahead - I'll be happy to continue any useful conversation. But I'm not interested in a dic*-swinging contest

 

[henrysj]

First of all, spell my name right

Are we back in primary school now? And thats pretty hypocritical from you or maybe that was just ur attempt of humor by getting my name wrong?

Secondly who are you to judge who carries what? You have no idea who I am or my background to make a judgment like that. And before you bring it up - I am "getting started" in multi copter aerial photography hence the reason I'm looking for constructive information, that doesn't mean I haven't worked in film production or flown heli's for the last 15+ years.

Thirdly the owner of Red uses a skyjib to fly his cameras so I'm very much doubting its completely useless at doing so.

I've got better things to dream about than Reds luckily but thanks for your input - a simple "no" would have pretty much sufficed though

 

[Droider]

Aye Up chaps calm down please this is supposed to be a friendly and helpful forum not a place for slagging.

I aint read all the posts to see why this has turned in to a slagging match, matbe this place has changed since I ast was on! The looks most certainly have

Anyhow

MBF I really respect your opinion but can you please respect others and add constructive criticism in a slightly more polite fashion... Ta

Bart and Jes I am a bit surprised at your attitude so calm please play nice and respect each others opinoin as none of us really know each others history or qualification to make useful contributons.

Brrrrrr now let me go back and see what sparked all this off

Dave

 

[DucktileMedia]

My thoughts on the av200 are that it is mechanically pretty well built. It lacks in a few areas though. One MAJOR thing that gets me even more than being brushless or not is the aerodynamics of the thing especially with the 360 kit and legs. When you are hovering in 0 wind its fine but as soon as you move forward everything changes. Since brushless gimbals are so sensitive to balancing I am seeing a come back with the ball around the cam. It seems like a no brainer to streamline the camera when talking about expensive gear on highly calibrated and sensitive gimbals. also the av200 has a special carriage for the epic which is supposed to help it clear in tilt. The problem is that you start moving your roll and maybe tilt off the nodal center point of the cameras lens. I think this is a must with a well tuned setup as no matter how good your stabilization is, if the gimbal's axis are not really close to the lens' center you will see odd movements during correction. In regards to the brushless not making sense on a non-direct drive gimbal, I think that it may not be as good but you are still eliminating a ton of gearing in doing so. Maybe its a good compromise for torque until a system becomes available that allows us to over torque the motors and run them as smoothly on various weight rigs.

 

[Bartman]

If you want to dispute or develop any of the specifics of what I've written then please go ahead - I'll be happy to continue any useful conversation. But I'm not interested in a dic*-swinging contest

i responded to you in an objective fashion, hardly a dic* swinging contest. if you don't have a meaningful reply then don't try to detract from what I've said by making it out to be something less than what it is.

@dave, have you continued to fly the brushless AV200 system? anything new to report?

@MBF, a little less hot sauce on the new guys' thread replies please? i generally appreciate what you have to say but we aim to welcome the new guys wherever possible. there are a few old guys that i myself have trouble not tangling with and i continue to seek counseling for that!

 

[Droider]

Well as far as am concerned the AV200 and the AV130 still as its place in the MR world. All the brushless stuff is really great if you are happy to tune tune and tune again. If like me you like flying then servos are still OK. All my footage on Vimeo is with a AV130 with Radian on roll filmed with CX730. Unless you are a pro then its fine. All the stuff I have done for the BBC has been shot on this setup, sure its not class 1, I dont even think the CX730 is in class 5 as far as the BBC goes but my footage has been integrated into prime-time BBC stuff. So as far as the AV200IDD is concerned I have used it for a new CH5 series flying the BMPC. I have flown it with the GH3 and its great. The Carvec system is going from strength to strength, NO bull**** just real honest Yorkshire engineering that works and will get even better. The latest firmware makes tuning easier but as far a auto tune is concerned forget it, its bollocks no matter what FF or DJI post their autotune still relies on everything being set up on the Gimbal precisely and if you do that then the tuning is easy.

For the Epic forget it, the AV200IDD is not an option and as MBF said it never really has been suitable. If you wan to fly a RED talk to Kloner, not sure what he is using but he seem to be flying it more than anyone I know. Or you will need to shell out for a Movi which will carry the Red.. well I have heard it will.

The AV 200IDD is suitable for GH3/BMPC sized cameras. It could fly bigger ones but its the ability to balance the gimbal that is the restriction on a fixed tray.

I love the engineering of the AV200 and AV130, great solid design that works but with limitations.

I fly

AV130 with Radian roll control with Cannon 550D, Nex5 CX730
AV200 with SkyLine 2 axis control for Canon 550/5D for stills
AV200 3 axis Carvec controlled servo for all above as emegency gimbal
AV200 IDD Carvec controlled 3 axis for GH3/CX730/BMPC
New test unit Carvec controlled 3 axis for GH3/CX730/BMPC

Hope that as answered the questions. Here is the latest testing video not with the AV200IDD as thats now in my working tool box, but with a new DD gimbal in less than favourable conditions.