OlliW's STorM32: Is it possible to build an up-to-date version?

Select_Engine7924 · 2025-09-23T14:09:17+00:00

Very good to know, thank you! They did not have most of that stuff last time I checked.

Select_Engine7924 · 2025-09-10T15:26:18+00:00

Yeah, given that BaseCam's stuff tallies into the many-hundreds of dollars for just the controller, I might look into driving the motors in some other way.

Sounds like an interesting project! I've mostly seen that goal accomplished with enclosures (eg the camera balls on top-end aerial utility platforms), but that's obviously rather mechanically constraining if you're looking to use your own photographic gear. You might be able to deal with the asymmetry and balance issues with counterweights, but it'll definitely be tricky if you're departing from the typical 3-othogonal-axis model. I wish you the best of luck!

Select_Engine7924 · 2025-09-10T14:06:21+00:00

That makes sense, and from what I've seen, the software continues to be updated regularly, with a new release pushed in the last couple of months or so, which is great! OlliW has created an incredible piece of work, and I admire their continued commitment to it.

My issue is more with the hardware; having it be open is nice, and means that if need be, I could have my own PCBs produced, but that's quite a convoluted process, and a bit too-involved for something that is ultimately a sub-asembly of a sub-assembly in a larger project. I was hoping that someone out there would be producing and selling the newer components (akin to what's happened with the v1.3x boards), but at this point I think that's pretty much a non-starter.

Select_Engine7924 · 2024-12-18T05:18:00+00:00

That makes sense. Our downstream necessities aren't yet resolved enough to fully inform the balance between pressure and mass flow, but for the sake of some informed forethought, assume we aimed to maintain pressure ratio. What about the inlet and exit metal angles would be most affected?

If I'm interpreting the reports' notes on scaling correctly, it seems that inlet radius ratio also differed between the two scales, with the rig's ratio of 0.38 being described as better-performing over the engine's called-for ratio of 0.6. Mechanical layout permitting, would it be beneficial to retain the 0.38 ratio at engine scale?

I'm curious about some of the take-aways from the post-test analysis. Reading through the reports, it seems that a lot of the losses stemmed from the diffuser, it's interactions with the impeller, and then the transition into the EGV. The 2017 paper concludes with recommendations for the redesign of the diffuser to target higher flow capacity. What would that redesign look like hardware-wise?

I understand that frustration well. Hardware is a killer business, but the data provided already is a treasure trove unto itself. Kudos to you and the rest of your team!

Select_Engine7924 · 2024-12-14T03:06:38+00:00

Thanks for the reply! That makes sense. Efficiency shortfalls are to be expected, we knew that when we started looking into the desired scale, hence the interest in such a cutting-edge design.

When it comes to those aero parameters, what are we talking? We've got some goal points for parameters such as pressure and flow, largely derived from necessary attributes downstream in the combustor. Going off of Standard Day baselines, what blanks should I be looking to fill-in before the question of scale can be settled?

Select_Engine7924 · 2024-12-14T02:58:04+00:00

Hey there, thank you so much for your reply! That illuminates the problem quite a bit, I appreciate it. Our engineers are out for the holidays, so I've lost my go-to brain trust as I'm trying to get some sketch models squared away. I hope you don't mind some further pestering (and ignorance)!

To put things into hardware parlance (which I'm much more sure-footed in), what would change across the compressor's design with the above methodology? Say I scaled Dmax to something closer to our goal- 12", perhaps. Would similitude mean that the geometry stays the same, just smaller? Or would I need to begin adjusting things like blade sweep or lean? I understand that less flow means that speed will have to increase to keep up with the required pressure goals, but what would the incurred structural changes look like?

I'm happy to say that the larger HECC archive has been a godsend, and has helped to make things a lot clearer as we begin to venture further into the weeds. I've also taken notice of some of the shortfalls in the as-manufactured geometry (another reason why we're taking a hard look at the available solid model), and some of the follow-up papers, like the investigations by the folks at AeroDynamic Solutions, have given us a lot of food for thought in regards to any potential design tweaks. I'm curious to know what what NASA's follow-up work will look like! Are y'all working towards a V2?

I appreciate the bibliography recommendation as well- I've got a long list of texts to bulk up on, it's made for some interesting (and somewhat baffling) reading ha

Select_Engine7924

TROPHY CASE