Yes , I have tried graupners and apc´s with and without arms reinforcement and I got the white flashes almost the same after the same maneuver , 2 white flashes after a little agresive stop in att or gps mode , so I prefer to save some weight with the original carbon props . Concerning vibrations I just test it with the iPhone and there is a little less with the graupners but still the white flashes ...:upset: . but well this is just my experience , other´s can be different.
S800 alternative props
- Thread starter DennyR
- Start date
david.scarbrow
Member
Denny, I would like to buy a set and attempted to PM you but it seems your message file is full and will not allow for more.
Regards
David.
Hi David
I just cleared the box again or you can email me at dennyrowland@mac.com
I just cleared the box again or you can email me at dennyrowland@mac.com
snurre
Member
Last edited by a moderator:
R_Lefebvre
Arducopter Developer
Funny, I did almost the EXACT same thing! I was flying my quad, over a lake... and I had been playing with switch assignemts. Normally Ch 7 I use for "simple mode", but I had changed it to auto-trim. Later on that day, I had forgetten what I'd done, and flicked into simple mode. I ended up chasing the quad all over the skies! Luckily I figured out what I'd done and got it back safely!
But, like you, I appreciate the features. We just have to be very careful about what we're doing. It does scare me that people are buying these systems so that they DON'T have to learn to fly properly. They should only be an enhancement, not a replacement.
I like RTH because I can turn off my transmitter, and it will just come home. Now, I don't just turn off my transmitter for fun. But, should something happen such that I lose the radio link, it will return to home. It's priceless. Because in the past, if you lost your radio link, you lost your aircraft. And it happened A LOT.
But, like you, I appreciate the features. We just have to be very careful about what we're doing. It does scare me that people are buying these systems so that they DON'T have to learn to fly properly. They should only be an enhancement, not a replacement.
I like RTH because I can turn off my transmitter, and it will just come home. Now, I don't just turn off my transmitter for fun. But, should something happen such that I lose the radio link, it will return to home. It's priceless. Because in the past, if you lost your radio link, you lost your aircraft. And it happened A LOT.
snurre
Member
I am not surprised Robert, and I am sure similar things happened many of our fellow RC pilots. (congrats that you had a non destructive outcome!).
With some reason it is easy to feel stupid when we do errors like this. But it´s human. See, IMO it is not the features that is the problem, rather the user interface (and I guess that´s part of Dennys point) and lack of training. Controlling a multitude of higher or lower grade automated features, from a box full of sticks, levers, knobs and three position switches while simultanously navigating the copter in tricky environments is VERY CHALLENGING. It takes skill, concentration and a lot of training.
An ever ongoing debate in aviation industry is the usage of different levels of automation. Generally automation reduces pilot workload and enhances safety. But not being fully aware of current flight mode status or lacking understanding of underlying system logic is a common source of errors and incidents: "What the f_ck is it doing now?!" This while airline pilots are extensively trained on their job and aircraft design has gone long way to provide clear and unanbigous flight mode status announciation facilities.
When managing MR flight, we usually have to rely on our fingers finding the correct switch and doing the right thing with it, while not looking at our hands. Especially so during one man video ops. I recently implemented 3-axis gimbal contorl and camera control on the DX18 I use to fly the octacopter. While I am really excited about the possibilties it brings I do worry about screwing up due to exceeding my own capacity of performing multi simultaneous tasks. I intend to train a lot and not push myself too hard.
Finally I share your concern about people jumping into MR flying, cutting corners by not learning manual flying, thus being totally depending on higher level flight modes.
With some reason it is easy to feel stupid when we do errors like this. But it´s human. See, IMO it is not the features that is the problem, rather the user interface (and I guess that´s part of Dennys point) and lack of training. Controlling a multitude of higher or lower grade automated features, from a box full of sticks, levers, knobs and three position switches while simultanously navigating the copter in tricky environments is VERY CHALLENGING. It takes skill, concentration and a lot of training.
An ever ongoing debate in aviation industry is the usage of different levels of automation. Generally automation reduces pilot workload and enhances safety. But not being fully aware of current flight mode status or lacking understanding of underlying system logic is a common source of errors and incidents: "What the f_ck is it doing now?!" This while airline pilots are extensively trained on their job and aircraft design has gone long way to provide clear and unanbigous flight mode status announciation facilities.
When managing MR flight, we usually have to rely on our fingers finding the correct switch and doing the right thing with it, while not looking at our hands. Especially so during one man video ops. I recently implemented 3-axis gimbal contorl and camera control on the DX18 I use to fly the octacopter. While I am really excited about the possibilties it brings I do worry about screwing up due to exceeding my own capacity of performing multi simultaneous tasks. I intend to train a lot and not push myself too hard.
Finally I share your concern about people jumping into MR flying, cutting corners by not learning manual flying, thus being totally depending on higher level flight modes.
R_Lefebvre
Arducopter Developer
Yes, for sure, there's a level of information overload. The automatic features bring a lot of benefits, but they actually increased the complexity a great amount. For sure, the existing RC transmitters aren't helping matters. Again, just the other day, I was trying to change modes, but it wasn't responding... oops, that was the wrong lever. Luckily that lever didn't have anything programmed to it.
One of the reasons I'm looking to build a clean-sheet ground control system.
2 sticks
6 pushbuttons for mode selection. No knob, or 2 and 3 position switch combos. 6 colour coded buttons. Push a button, that's the mode you get.
1 knob for Ch6 tuning.
1 switch for Ch7 functions.
And then one more knob or switch for Ch8 which is currently unused.
But that's it. I don't need a fighter plane cockpit and one hundred assignable buttons.
One aspect to this as well, and you sort of touched on it, is airliner automation. I've heard it said that the automation makes them safer. But the problem lies in the transfer from automatic flight to manual flight, when suddenly something goes wrong. It's an order of magnitude more difficult for a pilot to take control back over *after* something goes wrong, compared to regaining control if he was flying manually when something failed. It's just, to get your brain back in the game is difficult.
Same applies here. If the copter just starts zipping off in one direction when you were in GPS hold, is it because something is wrong with the GPS hold program? Or have you had a motor failure?
Back in the day when I was flying on a Futaba Conquest 6-channel non-computer radio, there was a lot less to think about. You would only use one radio for a given airplane, because all your servo reverse switches and endpoint knobs, you didn't want to have to reconfigure that. Sure, multi-model memory is nice, but I never took off holding the wrong transmitter! And it only had 2 switches. A 2 position for Ch 5 gear, and 3 position for Ch 6 flaps. And you couldn't reassign them.
But, if I had a radio glitch, down goes the plane. Or a flyaway.
One of the reasons I'm looking to build a clean-sheet ground control system.
2 sticks
6 pushbuttons for mode selection. No knob, or 2 and 3 position switch combos. 6 colour coded buttons. Push a button, that's the mode you get.
1 knob for Ch6 tuning.
1 switch for Ch7 functions.
And then one more knob or switch for Ch8 which is currently unused.
But that's it. I don't need a fighter plane cockpit and one hundred assignable buttons.
One aspect to this as well, and you sort of touched on it, is airliner automation. I've heard it said that the automation makes them safer. But the problem lies in the transfer from automatic flight to manual flight, when suddenly something goes wrong. It's an order of magnitude more difficult for a pilot to take control back over *after* something goes wrong, compared to regaining control if he was flying manually when something failed. It's just, to get your brain back in the game is difficult.
Same applies here. If the copter just starts zipping off in one direction when you were in GPS hold, is it because something is wrong with the GPS hold program? Or have you had a motor failure?
Back in the day when I was flying on a Futaba Conquest 6-channel non-computer radio, there was a lot less to think about. You would only use one radio for a given airplane, because all your servo reverse switches and endpoint knobs, you didn't want to have to reconfigure that. Sure, multi-model memory is nice, but I never took off holding the wrong transmitter! And it only had 2 switches. A 2 position for Ch 5 gear, and 3 position for Ch 6 flaps. And you couldn't reassign them.
But, if I had a radio glitch, down goes the plane. Or a flyaway.
snurre
Member
Interesting idea, Robert. If you go ahead with that project I hope you would tell us about it here on MRF.
high guys, excuse me its not about props but my video downlink from zen to ground sometimes failed even in low distance.anybody else has this problem?
may be connection cable to camera? may be the hdmi converter? anybody else with this problem? error comes and goes . i get crazy.. ;-)
may be connection cable to camera? may be the hdmi converter? anybody else with this problem? error comes and goes . i get crazy.. ;-)
Yes I do agree that a lot comes down to personal preferences. But these devices are cpu controlled and the more complicated they become the more chances for murphys law to catch you out. Human and electrical errors abound. That said I do feel that all of the systems are getting much better in terms of reliability. The S800 that I have here is as close to perfect as I have yet seen in a MR But would I put my life on the line with it. No.... Not yet anyways. I did recently find a way to saturate the processor into a Flip of Death just by toggling the X2 and X3 switches.
To draw a comparison with a company who make aerospace electronics and most of the very high tec Formula One stuff, They use a different technology. A typical F1 car for example has around 2,000 sensors that are required to send realtime info to that line of engineers who you see in the Garage monitoring a race. The main control unit could not handle sequential cpu info at that rate so they use what's called a FPGA system. When we have that I will relax. That company BTW is Mclaren. They make the engine and gearbox controller for the entire grid of cars. FPGA boards are readily available and are not that expensive.
When my life depends on it I use a custom SR Heli with a well proven Vbar and Kontronics ESC and a Pyro 720-52 motor. The 3D guys have put that stuff through 20 times what I will ever use. But what is coming this month is a new Skookum Flybarless controller with GPS and a Multirotor feature built-in, it also sports SS Pinpoint gyros. I could have used a WKH but I am again introducing a factor of unknown reliability. Not enough of em out there compared to Vbar. If I have to fly it manually the SR heli is always my first choice due to easy orientation, speed, high wind stability And autorotation. I don't do beyond visual range....
I like the idea that you will start your flight in the same mode that you end it. I can still use POI on the Zen as it has it's own WKM IMU I just have to fly the model manually.
To draw a comparison with a company who make aerospace electronics and most of the very high tec Formula One stuff, They use a different technology. A typical F1 car for example has around 2,000 sensors that are required to send realtime info to that line of engineers who you see in the Garage monitoring a race. The main control unit could not handle sequential cpu info at that rate so they use what's called a FPGA system. When we have that I will relax. That company BTW is Mclaren. They make the engine and gearbox controller for the entire grid of cars. FPGA boards are readily available and are not that expensive.
When my life depends on it I use a custom SR Heli with a well proven Vbar and Kontronics ESC and a Pyro 720-52 motor. The 3D guys have put that stuff through 20 times what I will ever use. But what is coming this month is a new Skookum Flybarless controller with GPS and a Multirotor feature built-in, it also sports SS Pinpoint gyros. I could have used a WKH but I am again introducing a factor of unknown reliability. Not enough of em out there compared to Vbar. If I have to fly it manually the SR heli is always my first choice due to easy orientation, speed, high wind stability And autorotation. I don't do beyond visual range....
I like the idea that you will start your flight in the same mode that you end it. I can still use POI on the Zen as it has it's own WKM IMU I just have to fly the model manually.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes I have had this problem also. I traced it to vibration on the Tx downlink which in my case was a 1.3 Digital. The board was moving about inside the alum case. Cured with a packing strip to stop it moving.
Hi Guys
I did make quite a few 6mm to 8 mm alum. inserts for those of you who cant find decent ones anywhere.
Over one hundred sets of adapters out there now so I guess you guys are doing a few experiments. What is the best prop. out there for an S800 that beats APC.......
Interestingly no reports of FOD since adapters.
I did make quite a few 6mm to 8 mm alum. inserts for those of you who cant find decent ones anywhere.
Over one hundred sets of adapters out there now so I guess you guys are doing a few experiments. What is the best prop. out there for an S800 that beats APC.......
Interestingly no reports of FOD since adapters.
jffry7
aka TruckBasher
I guess Denny you really prefer the APC 14x4.7 over the graupner 14x8. I am still waiting for the adapters it maybe this week or next. Hope to get it soon. I wonder how Borris is doing with the Xoar, I found on local shop that they sell 14" and 15", I might try and grab them soon
I'm guessing the Radian uses these, too - would be a sensible choice for their single-axis approach.
RancherPete
Member
I hope that this is not too terribly off topic but I thought that it was good information as I was blaming some of my problems on my props:
I was finally able to test my reinforced arms on the S800. What a huge difference this makes with an added weight of only 4 oz. I forget who it was that originally posted this idea but it sure was a good one. I cut 6 pieces of 16MM CF tubing at a length of 7.75 inches. The tubing I used was actually 1.5MM wall thickness because that is what I had available but you could use the more typical 1MM wall thickness and have the same results, I'm sure, but at less weight. This length will take the tubes from where they attach to the hub all of the way out to just past that little tab that hangs down before the LED under the S800 arm. I used my Dremel to cut a 1/2 inch slot for that tab to fit into. This is important because when you include the tab you help to provide a little bit of lateral support for the tube when you are positioning it with wet silicone (helps to hold it in place). I ran a perfect bead of regular clear silicone along the entire length of the tube (including the slot itself) and then carefully pressed the CF tube up under the S800 arm. I held it in place until the silicone hardened by applying only black tape to support CF tube. If you try to hold it in place with wire ties you will disturb the position so you just have to be patient and hold it in place over night with the tape. The next day you can remove the tape and place three black zip ties evenly spaced. The arms are so much more stable like this! My video is many times better than before and the craft hovers without even the slightest twitching as it did before. This is a very worthwhile fix for these otherwise flimsy S800 arms. I believe the silicone is a very critical part of this equation in minimizing the flex. I tried one arm without the silicone and it was hardly worth doing. This solved a lot of problems for me. However, as carefully as I have tried to balance these DJI CF props I still believe that they are creating a little vibration. I am eager to try the adapters and perhaps the APCs or ???
View attachment 6933
View attachment 6934
I was finally able to test my reinforced arms on the S800. What a huge difference this makes with an added weight of only 4 oz. I forget who it was that originally posted this idea but it sure was a good one. I cut 6 pieces of 16MM CF tubing at a length of 7.75 inches. The tubing I used was actually 1.5MM wall thickness because that is what I had available but you could use the more typical 1MM wall thickness and have the same results, I'm sure, but at less weight. This length will take the tubes from where they attach to the hub all of the way out to just past that little tab that hangs down before the LED under the S800 arm. I used my Dremel to cut a 1/2 inch slot for that tab to fit into. This is important because when you include the tab you help to provide a little bit of lateral support for the tube when you are positioning it with wet silicone (helps to hold it in place). I ran a perfect bead of regular clear silicone along the entire length of the tube (including the slot itself) and then carefully pressed the CF tube up under the S800 arm. I held it in place until the silicone hardened by applying only black tape to support CF tube. If you try to hold it in place with wire ties you will disturb the position so you just have to be patient and hold it in place over night with the tape. The next day you can remove the tape and place three black zip ties evenly spaced. The arms are so much more stable like this! My video is many times better than before and the craft hovers without even the slightest twitching as it did before. This is a very worthwhile fix for these otherwise flimsy S800 arms. I believe the silicone is a very critical part of this equation in minimizing the flex. I tried one arm without the silicone and it was hardly worth doing. This solved a lot of problems for me. However, as carefully as I have tried to balance these DJI CF props I still believe that they are creating a little vibration. I am eager to try the adapters and perhaps the APCs or ???
View attachment 6933
View attachment 6934
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator: