Skip to content

Research & Concepts

Before building anything we compared the common ways drones release a payload. The decision is dominated by our platform: a 3.5-inch CineWhoop (SpeedyBee BEE35 Pro) flying indoors. That means:

  • Tiny mass budget. The frame already carries a GPS mast, the MTF-01P, a Raspberry Pi Zero 2, an AI camera and an FPV system on 2004-size motors. Every mechanism gram is a gram off the payload and off the hover margin.
  • Prop-guard clearance. The ducts sit close to the body; anything that hangs low or swings sideways can touch a duct or shift the CG.
  • Indoors = no GPS. Position holding comes from optical flow, which is good to roughly tens of centimetres, not the centimetre-level precision that a docking-style mechanism would need.
  • Simple electronics preferred. The companion Pi has free GPIO pins and a 5 V BEC is available; high-current switching hardware is extra weight and extra failure modes.

Options compared

1. Servo trapdoor / pin release ← chosen

A micro servo either opens a small hatch under the payload bay or pulls a pin that lets the payload slide off a hook. One moving part, one PWM signal.

Pros Cons
Lightest active option: a 9 g servo plus a printed bracket One-shot per flight — reloading is done by hand on the ground
Trivial electronics: one signal wire to a GPIO, servo power from the existing 5 V BEC Open-loop: no feedback that the payload actually left
Release point is fixed and repeatable — position accuracy is whatever the drone's hover accuracy is, no extra precision needed Drop height = flight height; the payload falls freely, so it must tolerate the drop (soft payload or low release altitude)
Fails safe: an unpowered servo simply holds its last position, the payload stays attached Mechanism must be designed so vibration cannot creep the pin open

2. Servo claw / gripper

Two jaws (or a single lever) actively clamp the payload and open to release.

Pros Cons
Can grab irregular payloads; also allows pickup, not just release Heavier: bigger servo (holding torque under load) plus jaw structure
Positive grip during aggressive maneuvers Servo draws holding current the whole flight — heat and battery drain
Jaws protrude below/beside the frame, exactly where duct clearance is tight
Pickup would need centimetre-precision positioning we don't have indoors

3. Winch lowering

The payload is lowered on a line by a motorized spool and released at the end, so the drone can stay high.

Pros Cons
Gentle delivery — payload touches down at near-zero speed By far the heaviest and most complex option (motor, spool, line guide, release at the hook)
Drone keeps distance from the ground — no downwash interaction at the target A swinging tethered mass under a 400 g-class quad couples directly into the attitude controller — a real stability risk indoors
Line can snag on the prop guards or on obstacles in the hall
Overkill: our delivery height is 1–2 m indoors anyway

4. Electromagnet

An electromagnet holds a ferromagnetic plate on the payload; cutting the current releases it.

Pros Cons
No moving parts at all; release is instant Continuous current draw for the whole flight just to hold — the worst possible trade on a small battery
Very simple release logic (one MOSFET) Power loss (brownout, wiring fault) drops the payload immediately — fails dangerous, the opposite of the servo
Payload must carry a steel plate (dead mass)
Holding force vs. coil mass scales badly at this size; jerky flight can shear the payload off

5. Passive hook

No actuator: the payload hangs on an open hook and is released by a flight maneuver (touching down, dragging it off) or stays attached until a human takes it.

Pros Cons
Zero mass beyond the hook, zero electronics, nothing to fail No commanded release — the mission cannot decide when to drop, which defeats Task 5
Release-by-maneuver needs precise, aggressive flying near the floor — with optical-flow-only position hold that is exactly where the estimate is weakest
Payload can detach unintentionally in any hard maneuver

Decision

The servo pin release wins on every criterion that matters for this platform:

  1. Mass and clearance — a 9 g servo and a printed bracket are the smallest footprint of any active option, and nothing protrudes into the duct zone.
  2. Fail-safe behaviour — unpowered = closed. The electromagnet inverts this, the gripper needs constant current, the hook cannot be commanded.
  3. Electronics we already have — one GPIO pin on the Pi and the existing 5 V BEC. No new power stage, no extra battery load worth measuring.
  4. Precision match — a fixed release point asks nothing more of the position estimate than hovering over the pad, which is exactly what the vision + optical-flow stack already does.

The mechanism is deliberately one-shot and open-loop: for a graded indoor demo, one reliable drop per flight beats a reloadable mechanism that adds mass and failure modes. The implementation is described in Servo Mechanism; the housing that turns the bare servo into a payload bay is specified in 3D Printing.