Testing out how the new Y6 responds to an in-flight motor failure. Not bad!
You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!
Testing out how the new Y6 responds to an in-flight motor failure. Not bad!
You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!
Comments
I have had three instances with my Y6 of what appears to be a brief motor-out situation causing a crash each time. Randy M. has helped me analyze the logfiles. The behavior appears to show a rear motor, probably the lower one, quitting briefly, causing a pitch rear, roll right, yaw right action. When the roll exceeds 90 degrees the throttle out drops to minimum, and the craft never recovers before impact.
So this would seem to be a situation where a motor out may not be recoverable with the Y6. It is a RTF from 3DR, using 4500mAh 3S, and has about 200g of payload (FPV camera, transmitter, OSD).
Anyone willing to look at logfiles and discuss would be immensely appreciated. The motor redundancy is a big part of why I chose this craft, and a major bummer if it cannot be counted upon to work.
im looking to buy the new y-6 RTF kit is there any more video out there I can see of them flying thanks tom
...also i was always thinking that Arducopter code will spin lower motors faster than top,developers,is that true or not,if not cvan you implement that?
Loss on my Y6 compared to hexa is around 10%(23min to 20min),same props up and down,10cm spacing between them is better than 15cm(for 10cm u need to use pancake motors)...with y6 finally props are not in the picture...about losing one motor(in the flight,not if u try to take of like that),hm,it wont fall down but u will be able to have controllable fall down with hard landing(only in stab mode,acro no way)depends of your skills how hard(tip:do not touch right stik just the throttle....for sure y6 is better on windy day but also harder to fly and more prone to mistakes.....
Jared, anecdotal evidence from others confirms your theory.
Joshua: This is really good flight performance with Y6. Nice work guys. I'm curious to see a test of two things:
Performance with payload.
Performance of a comparable Hexa.
Did a little simulation on the school computers and found the best combo is larger upper props and high pich smaller low props the smaller the better obviously.
Other combinations include low kv top motor and high kv bottom motor and when in conjunction with the above suggestions you can see the power and efficiency loss drop from 25% down to 10% above normal
My guess is that you can get the overall efficiency improved somewhat by working on the prop combinations a bit more.
All other things being equal, the prop on the bottom should have a higher pitch than the one on top and the larger the diameter prop(s) your motor can swing the higher the aerodynamic efficiency you can get.
In coaxial planes, there is a considerable pitch difference between the front and back prop but they are dealing with a dynamic air mass whereas the copter is essentially dealing with a static one, should work the same though.
Basically a great design, simple and with better forward clearance for Cameras.
Excellent result on the single motor out.
Once you have prop selection down it will be interesting to do an equal 1 - 1 comparison with this versus your standard hex and find out just what the time / power penalty is if there is one.
Now ignite the ESC on fire, like what usually happens.
I did a bot of research and found you loose 25% of your power and efficiency through this setup, so what you gain through redundancy you loose in flight time and power to weight, however i would rather have a copter that ;ands more often than a copter than "lands" once.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next