Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology Science

Human Powered Helicopter 209

Posted by michael from the ejection-seat-not-included dept.
marcopo writes "In response to a 24 year old prize challenge from the American Helicopter Society, a number of engineering students at the University of British Columbia have designed a human powered helicopter. The prize requirements are 3 minutes flight at 3 meters, with only human power, and the team, led by UBC's Mike Georgallis, plans a test flight next Tuesday. The Vancouver Sun also has the story."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Human Powered Helicopter More

Human Powered Helicopter

Comments Filter:

  • The Fred Flintstone Chopper (Score:5, Funny)

    by mfh ( 56 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:01PM (#9906196) Homepage Journal
    Yaba-Daba-Dooooo!!!!! ~~~~~*Sppppppplat*
  • If it's $1000, and you don't need a helicopter pilot's license, I'll buy one. If it works, that is.

    • Re:How much? (Score:3, Informative)

      by c_oflynn ( 649487 )
      What is this? The linked page had a section CLEARLY TITLED "Project Cost"? Oh but no one would read that...

      Well it says about $29000 Canadian.

      • Re:How much? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by agraupe ( 769778 )
        Well, project cost is ambigous, as it may include research and things like that. The cost to produce another might be less.

        • Re:How much? (Score:2, Insightful)

          by JPriest ( 547211 )
          They spent 30 grand for a device that will stay off the ground for 3 minutes with a pilot that probably is no doubt, more capable running this thing than most of us.

          This was only a concept flight, you would be better off saving money with cheaper heavier material and adding an engine.

      • Re:How much? (Score:3, Informative)

        by op00to ( 219949 )
        It's actually over $70k unless you have some hookups at Boeing to give you the composite material for free...

      • Re:How much? (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        $29,000 Canadian, so yeah, that's about what, $1000 US?

  • Wait (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Quasar1999 ( 520073 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:04PM (#9906221) Journal
    Can they use a battery? As in charge the battery using human power and then run the motor off the battery power???

    • Re:Wait (Score:5, Informative)

      by KillerCow ( 213458 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:45PM (#9906471)
      Can they use a battery? As in charge the battery using human power and then run the motor off the battery power???

      From the rules [vtol.org]:

      4.1.4 No devices for storing energy either for takeoff or for use in flight shall be permitted. Rotating aerodynamic components, such as rotor blades, used for lift and/or control are exempt from consideration as energy storing devices.,
      • AHA, I see a fatal flaw in there plan, just use two large rotors, which when turned up to speed act as a flyweel that can be engauged with some gearing to spin a smaller rotor

        Seriously though, this is a bloddy difficult contest, I think the best bet is burning dead bodies as mentioned earlier...

  • Interesting FAQ Question (Score:5, Insightful)

    by danratherfan ( 624592 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:05PM (#9906230) Journal
    12.) WILL IT FLY? The machine is heavier than originally designed... The unknown at the moment is whether the machine will break up prior to lift off. Whether or not any system will break up becomes all the more relevant when it involves humans and rotating blades.

  • Bah, fraternities have had this for a long time (Score:5, Funny)

    by xsupergr0verx ( 758121 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:07PM (#9906246)
    Instruction manual:
    1. Place helmet on head. Take a swig from your hip flask. Decide you don't need the helmet.
    2. Spread arms parallel to ground.
    3. Hum 'whirrrr' as you spin yourself to speed.
    4. Upon striking your head on the floor on the way down, remark how free you feel in the open air.

  • OH NO! (Score:4, Funny)

    by schnits0r ( 633893 ) <nathannd@saskte l . n et> on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:07PM (#9906253) Homepage Journal
    First the machines use us to power helecopers! Soon they will have us power all their functions after we scortch the sun! Who is with me? We must stop this to save Zion!
  • That's the only real question. They should be more careful wording the requirement.

  • Long way. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Malicious ( 567158 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:08PM (#9906260)
    3 Meters is a pretty high distance to fall from, even without being surrounded by fast moving metal, cogs, and chains. Considering that they'll want to optimize the weight of the machine, there will almost certainly be no safety cage or equipment.
    I sure as hell wouldn't want to pilot it.

    • Re:Long way. (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:23PM (#9906351)
      I sure as hell wouldn't want to pilot it.

      That's why you're posting on Slashdot and not doing anything useful. Same with me.
      • I am not hundred percent sure that this qualifies as useful.

        What they could do is allow the human to pedal to power a generator and put the equivalent mass on board of the helicopter, put an electrical motor on the helicopter and save the pilot in case of an accident.

    • Re:Long way. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by lommer ( 566164 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:30PM (#9906390)
      First of all, three meters isn't all that much, it's roughly 10 feet. Second, you're not surrounded by that much metal cogs and chains. As you pointed out they want to reduce weight, so almost the entire thing is built of composites. Further, if you read about the design, they are favouring larger, slower-moving rotors and associated equipment over faster smaller ones. Thirdly, any engineer worth his salt would take time to make sure that if the machine DID fall from 3 meters, the supports for the person/seat could be constructed to collapse and absorb the shock.

      Finally, as with most under-powered helicopters, the most likely mode of failure is only being able to hop a couple feet off the ground, if they can lift off at all. Read up some helicopter flying books sometime, it's pretty inderesting how much more the ground effect affects them than fixed wing aircraft. This post is much longer than inteded, so I'll cut here with the conclusion that I if I could fly helicopters, I'd jump on this opportunity in seconds. That said, flying a helicopter is probably one of the hardest things I've ever tried to do (I'm a fixed-wing pilot).
      • 3 Meters/10 Feet is the top of a 1 storey house. Lets put you in a chair and drop you straight down, see how well you fare.
        If you read about the design, you'd know that the gear and rotor mechanism is DIRECTLY above the pilot, and in the event of a fall from 3 meters, would land directly upon him.

        • Re:Long way. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by WindBourne ( 631190 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:49PM (#9906495) Journal
          If the machine breaks apart, then yes, you are probably in trouble. But if all that happens is a chain slips, pilot get tired, etc, then the craft will autogyro in. That is the spinning blades will allow the pilot down much easier.

        • Re:Long way. (Score:4, Informative)

          by ergo98 ( 9391 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:16PM (#9906632) Homepage Journal
          Lets put you in a chair and drop you straight down, see how well you fare.

          If the occupant instantly lost absolutely all lift, they'd hit the ground at about 27 km/h - fairly hard, but certainly not fatal or serious on most surfaces (I'd presume they'd do this over grass or the like). Of course in reality it's highly unlikely that absolutely all lift would disappear (the thing would have to get itself up to 3 meters - if it lost lift, it'd more likely be a gradual reduction), so the much more likely scenario is a signficantly slower impact. Maybe someone will twist an ankle or pull a joint, but it's hardly life threatening.

        • I know several people who have fallen off a house, the lucky ones were able to continue work that day. It happens every once in a while in construction. Not something you want to happen to you, but rarely deadly. Often you will strain something, or break a bone. However if they have done their engineering correctly the total damage compared to the risk means that this really isn't something to worry about.

      • you're a terrible writer (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Aside from that, let me attack your points.

        I consider 10 feet or 3 meters to be high enough to cause significant injury to a simple terran.

        The gears and chains are made out of metal if you look at the pictures. Have you ever heard of such things being made of composites? That would be quite bizarre.

        Ground effect is the only decent bit of info you mention. For those who aren't aware, ground effect is the phenomenon by which a helicopter rests on a cushion of air bounded by the ground and the rotor disc
        • You've got to remember it's a college. Heck, give a guy enough beer and he/she will definitely pedal their butt off for a while a 3 meters. Heck, I was subjected to much worse than a 3-meter, gyro-slowed decent in college. I survived. Although many brian cells unfortunately did not.
        • "ground effect... essential for... especially an emergency autorotation landing in something [other] than an autogyro".

          Not sure why you think this. During an autorotation in a helicopter or an autogyro, airflow is upward through the rotor. Even during the flare phase, airflow is upward, and thus ground effect does not apply. During the landing phase (hovering autorotation) the airflow is briefly downward, but I doubt that ground effect has much effect - this phase only lasts 2-5 seconds. I've never seen a

      • Additionally, I don't think there's anything that says the whole thing can't be roped to the ground over a giant springy safety mat. It's only required to go up, there's no requirement that it move around while it's up there. This thing might not even have a seat, it might look more like a pogo stick with pedals at the bottom and a big propeller on the top, taking off from a holder on the ground.

        Not *practical* I admit, but it sounds like a hell of a lot of fun anyway...
    • The Workman's Compensation Board of British Columbia (where this is scheduled to take place) regulations state safety gear must be in place to "... ensure that a fall protection system is in place when employees or students work at elevations greater than 3 m (10ft) or where a fall from a lesser height involves an unusual risk of injury."
      • safety gear must be in place to "... ensure that a fall protection system is in place when employees or students work at elevations greater than 3 m (10ft) or where a fall from a lesser height involves an unusual risk of injury."

        That's mostly for people working on ladders, scissor lifts, or on top of buildings. It means you wear a harness so if you fall you don't hit the ground. What kind of safety system does a regular helicopter or other vehicle that flies under its own power have? I'm not an expert, b
    • 3 Meters is a pretty high distance to fall from
      Bah! I've fallen a bit further than that, without warning, without being buckled to a chair, etc. The worst thing that happened was a minor concussion (eg. just didn't remember a few minutes).

      Yeah, it's not something I'd like to do over and over again, but the vague potential of having to fall from that distance is little deterant to doing something important. Just look at all the people willing to take that risk when they go up on top of their houses, cli

  • Why bother? (Score:4, Funny)

    by foidulus ( 743482 ) * on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:08PM (#9906263)
    You already have the world's best human helicopter in Inspector Gadget.

  • TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Snover ( 469130 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:09PM (#9906271) Homepage
    Oh man, their project is named Thunderbird. Quick, Mozilla Foundation! Send our your legions of lawyers! We must stop this blatant misuse of your trademarks!!

  • impossible? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nbert ( 785663 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:15PM (#9906298) Homepage Journal
    afaik it's quite hard to build a human powered plane (yes, someone made it from France to England many years ago). A helicopter is much trickier, because the pilot must run two rotors at the same time. It's not easy to transfer human energy to two places without adding much weight. I'm not an expert in helicopters, but it's kinda obvious to me that the pilot would have to use extraordinary effort to stay above the ground for 3 minutes.
    • In a 'normal' helio, the main rotor is driven from the center. Because of all that action-reaction stuff, you need another rotor in the rear to keep the fuslage from spinning one way as the rotors spin the other.

      As for a lightweight, low-power helio, the best bet is to drive both rotors from the tips. If you affix small propellers to the tips of the blades, the only rotation you'll get in the fuselage is from friction in the main bearings.

      I saw a design several years ago where they used a drum in the ro

  • The next bicycle? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Savet Hegar ( 791567 )
    Could something like this eventually be as common as the bicycle? I, for one, think it would be pretty cool to fly to work everyday.

    Reminds me of watching the Jetsons as a kid LOL
  • Wouldn't it be more efficient to just burn humans for fuel?

  • recumbent postion (Score:3, Interesting)

    by frankmu ( 68782 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:38PM (#9906435) Homepage
    i wonder why they went with the recombent position rather than a upright postion. i would imagine you get a little extra power upright. you're not worried about airdynamics when hovering also.

    • Re:recumbent postion (Score:4, Informative)

      by stienman ( 51024 ) <.adavis. .at. .ubasics.com.> on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:08PM (#9906587) Homepage Journal
      The only reason you might get more power upright than recumbent is if you depend on gravity to force your body down so your legs have something (your weight) to react against.

      However, to generate 500 watts of power you need more than just your weight to push against. The pilot will likely be strapped into place, or at least have some sort of harness or surface to push their shoulders against, and someplace to put their hands.

      It's also possible, though not likely, that in a recumbent position the pilot could exert more energy with abdominal and arm muscles, since the torso would not necessarily be fixed on a seat.

      Imagine 5 100W light bulbs. Now imagine converting that light and heat into enough physical force to lift 200 pounds of stuff off the ground. Very interesting challenge.

      -Adam

    • Re:recumbent postion (Score:4, Informative)

      by blancolioni ( 147353 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @12:47AM (#9907033) Homepage
      According to TFA [mech.ubc.ca]:

      Results also show that for pilots tested in both vertical and recumbent positions, power output was very close. Recumbent position then is a benefit since it takes advantage of In Ground Effect (lower support structure).

    • The maximum force a person in an upright position can apply to the pedals is his own weight. A recumbant person can generate far more force because he can push against the back of the seat.
  • Everyone knows Alex Kidd invented the pedicopter in 1983.

  • 500 Watts (Score:5, Interesting)

    by pHatidic ( 163975 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:44PM (#9906461)
    In case anyone here doesnt know about generating watts, 500 sustained for over 3 minutes is quite a task. I have been rowing for 7 years and this year our team had physiological testing where we started at 200 watts and increased by 50 every 2 minutes. I last about 8 minutes and managed to hit about 400 watts but couldnt hold it long enough to be allowed to continue to 450. We increased in this manner in order to find our VO2 maxes, and certainly had I started at 500 watts I could have held it for a while, maybe a minute and a half. But 3 minutes is just sick. Especially since this was on the rowing machine which uses all muscles and this guy is only uses his legs, no back and arms. This 3 minute test will generate enough lactic acid to kill the average 60 year old man, and will certainly leave him in excruciating pain if he is able to do it at all.

    • Re:500 Watts (Score:4, Funny)

      by emeitner ( 513842 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:13PM (#9906619) Homepage Journal
      Yeah, the competition seems to require alot of the pilots. From the FAQ:
      We have built our own test rig that measures power output of a pilot over a minute duration. We have plotted the results of numerous potential pilots against their weight. A successful candidate is one that falls above a power requirement curve (power vs. weight). ... We have had people vomit after these one-minute tests. In similar tests in the United States they have had one person have a mild heart attack.

      Vomit AND rotating blades, nice.

    • Re:500 Watts (Score:3, Interesting)

      by the pickle ( 261584 )
      The students on the team, according to the Vancouver Sun article, underwent extensive testing to see if any of them were up to it. The test pilot says he's been doing a LOT of cycling over the last five years as conditioning and practise.

      Even if he can't, I'll bet money that Lance Armstrong or a similarly well-conditioned pro cyclist can hold this thing off the ground easily.

      p

      • Re:500 Watts (Score:5, Informative)

        by Zooka ( 457908 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:59PM (#9906824)
        Even if he can't, I'll bet money that Lance Armstrong or a similarly well-conditioned pro cyclist can hold this thing off the ground easily.
        I bet it will indeed take an exceptional athlete such as Armstrong to measure up to the task.
        Example:
        "Data from several researchers shows that professional cyclists produce power outputs of between 320 and 450 watts during time trials ranging from 5 to 70 km in major tours."
        "Dr. Alejandro Lucia, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Spain, has predicted that Lance Armstrong on his ascent of the Alpe D&#185;Huez (a 14 km climb of 8% mean gradient) in the 2001 Tour de France produced one of the greatest performances in the history of cycling: 38 minutes of near-maximal to maximal effort at an estimated mean power output as high as 475-500 watts! His average speed was 22 kilometers/hour, which he reached at a mean cadence of about 100-rpm using a 39 x 23 gear. Lance would have been averaging about 7 watts/kg."
        http://www.polarusa.com/consumer/powerkit/Article2 .asp [polarusa.com]
    • Another way to look at it is that 500 watts is almost exactly 2/3 horsepower.
    • Chris Boardman apparently produced around 440 watts during his hour record ride (riding around a velodrome for an hour and going as far as you can -- in Boardman's case, 56.375km, about 35 miles for the yanks).

      So I imagine a top cyclist could generate 500 watts for a shorter time. But I am certainly not a sports physician (although I am a cyclist).

  • Call me when it WINS (Score:3, Interesting)

    by angrist ( 787928 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:48PM (#9906486)
    BAH, we have one of these teams at my school too (University of Michigan).

    Although i will admit i didn't RTFA, it's not news unless it actually FLIES. This has been tried and failed many many times already.

  • Simple! (Score:3, Funny)

    by enginuitor ( 779522 ) <Greg_Courville&GregLabs,com> on Friday August 06, 2004 @10:59PM (#9906544) Homepage
    Just put the human(s), bald and naked, into liquid-filled pods and wire 'em up for electrical power! Then build some hovering tentacled robots to do maintenance. Then... ...Or you could do it the boring way -- you know, pedals and the like...
  • I proposed to build this very thing.

    Of course, I was only 10 at the time, and had no clue about mechanical engineering. Still, it's good to see someone else wanted to, and now someone will.

  • I'll Wait. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by the pickle ( 261584 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:19PM (#9906648) Homepage
    ...for a motorised version.

    Whilst there's something undeniably cool about what basically amounts to an airborne bicycle, I'd settle for an airborne moped. Using a small (~1-2 bhp) moped engine would make for only a minor weight increase, and it would surely make for less sweat ;)

    I'm a certificated pilot (fixed-wing) who's flown helicopters (a Robinson R22 Beta) once, and that was so incredibly fun that I'd hop in an ultralight homebuilt chopper in a second. Just let me know where to buy the kit.

    p
    • Here you go: http://www.rotorway.com/
    • Apparently some of you ACs don't know the definition of "ultralight."

      While these $50,000-sans-engine homebuilt helicopter kits are cool, if I had that much money, I'd buy a used Robinson, which has the added benefit of being certified for commercial ops, possibly IFR, etc.

      The FAA defines "ultralight" as a powered aircraft with an empty weight of 254 pounds or less, 5 gallons or less of fuel capacity, a maximum airspeed of 55 knots at full power in level flight, and a power-off stall speed of greater than

    • Some places you might want to check out are:

      The Mosquito helicopter [innovatortech.ca], a true ultra-light helicopter as designated by the FAA

      The HeliCycle [helicycle.com], which is the worlds smallest turbine-powered rotorcraft capable of transporting a person.

      I would steer clear of Rotorways, I know several people who have crashed theirs. The fault always is in the engine with those kits.

  • slashdotted (Score:3, Funny)

    by nanojath ( 265940 ) on Friday August 06, 2004 @11:39PM (#9906742) Homepage Journal
    maybe they need to have a contest where college kids build a webserver that can stand up to a slashdot link for more than 5 minutes...
  • This Human Powered Helicopter project is undoubtedly very interesting. What I would really like to see, though, is a Helicopter Powered Human. I've heard some rumors that scientists in Soviet Russia might be already working on it as we speak.
  • if they launch from Wreck Beach [wreckbeach.org] they should be able to safe a couple of (possibly critical) ounces of takeof weight.

  • RTFA already would you? (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    where does everyone come up with this 3 minute hover stuff?

    if you had read the rules of the contest, or the story from the paper (which i read IN the paper), you dorks would have seen its a 1 minute hover requirement, not 3.

    why bother even putting links to the info if no one is going to read it?

    oh, i forgot, i am new here, and this is slashdot. idiots.
  • It's all ball bearings nowadays.

  • If the UBC engineers have any sense of history... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Hamster Lover ( 558288 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @12:42AM (#9907015) Journal
    ...the end result would like a cross between a beer bong and Volkswagen Bug with rotors.

    While a human powered helicopter is impressive, I have a feeling the UBC engineers won't feel accomplished until they hang the thing underneath some bridge.

  • Age of pilot; age of contest (Score:3, Interesting)

    by westendgirl ( 680185 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @02:54AM (#9907423) Homepage
    Both the pilot and the contest are 24. I suspect UBC's genetic engineering program started on the engineer when the contest was first announced....It has nothing to do with the chopper design and everything to do with the pilot. ;-)
  • It's amazing that they get such a big team together (there is a list of the members on the website) and all are working motivated towards this goal... sadly, this is very rare.

    I only know very few people who have an interested in building things, educated tinkering etc. And as a physics student, I have many contacts to people who should(*) be interested in such things.

    (*) - IMHO, at least some of them should...
  • Here's a link to a SAMPE [mech.ubc.ca] journal paper describing the project in details.
  • At 3m, won't they still be in "ground effect"?

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close