Hello Fellow Yuneec Pilot!
Join our free Yuneec community and remove this annoying banner!
Sign up

Typhoon H Required Maintenance ....

Joined
Jan 3, 2017
Messages
116
Reaction score
21
Location
Arizona
Does anybody know what if any - published maintenance needs to be performed on the Typhoon H to meet the Part 107 requirements. Somewhere I've heard that the locking propeller catches need replacing every 25 - 30 hours. Could this be a partial explanation for some of the unknown crashes. And what else would be deemed 'required maintenance'?
 
Does anybody know what if any - published maintenance needs to be performed on the Typhoon H to meet the Part 107 requirements. Somewhere I've heard that the locking propeller catches need replacing every 25 - 30 hours. Could this be a partial explanation for some of the unknown crashes. And what else would be deemed 'required maintenance'?

I don't see where anybody has lost props as cause of crash especially considering it has the 5 motor mode. I'd think keeping your batteries properly charged and reliable would be the most important maintenance followed by physical structure reliability and proper lights.
 
I read somewhere around the forum that Yuneec stated that "as long as the propellers lock in place, they are good to go"; meaning that it doesn't matter if they feel kind of loose from a worn lock.

Haven't heard of any scheduled maintenance.

Greetings!
 
Does anybody know what if any - published maintenance needs to be performed on the Typhoon H to meet the Part 107 requirements. Somewhere I've heard that the locking propeller catches need replacing every 25 - 30 hours. Could this be a partial explanation for some of the unknown crashes. And what else would be deemed 'required maintenance'?
Maintenance would include a close inspection of the airframe for cracks, checking tightness of screws, prop inspection and replacement, connection of H to GUI to run diagnostics tests and check each motor for noise, manually rotating each motor and checking end play and side play for bearing condition and removal of the camera to check the mount for cracks and the gimbal dampers for integrity.
 
Maintenance would include a close inspection of the airframe for cracks, checking tightness of screws, prop inspection and replacement, connection of H to GUI to run diagnostics tests and check each motor for noise, manually rotating each motor and checking end play and side play for bearing condition and removal of the camera to check the mount for cracks and the gimbal dampers for integrity.

So what I already do...cool
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jester
Does anybody know what if any - published maintenance needs to be performed on the Typhoon H to meet the Part 107 requirements. Somewhere I've heard that the locking propeller catches need replacing every 25 - 30 hours. Could this be a partial explanation for some of the unknown crashes. And what else would be deemed 'required maintenance'?
Interesting subject.
In "real aviation" 50 hrs. are a common short interval for inspecting critical parts closely by technical staff.
Parts have to be replaced if declared "suspicious". Beyond those 50 hrs. parts are replaced often by strict intervals, no matter if they "look o.k.". Engines e.g. get replaced by overhauled "as new" ones.
This way aviation got "safe", because parts are inspected and replaced long before their actual end of life.
This is a subject that IMO needs to be taken much more seriously by all "professional" drone manufacturers. Flying until falling out of the sky (and e.g. maybe on somebody's head) would mean to repeat the mistakes aviation made in the early last century...
 
  • Like
Reactions: K2BLS and AZSteveB
And clean the camera lens with a wipe or cloth made for that purpose.:)
It's amazing, to me, how this part is often forgotten about by some people during pre-flight checks. Since the camera is the main pay-load of most consumer drones I think a swift wipe of the camera lens should be near the top of any drone pilot's pre-flight 'to do' list.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rayray
Does anyone have recommendations for replacing props besides after crashing? I am waiting for a prop balancer but it would seem after certain amount of rotations there should be some sort of degradation to the plastic as MM was just implying too as well as the other critical flight systems?
 
I've noted a very small bit of play in all 3 "A" propellers when they are mounted on the motors, but none in the "B" propellers. All the props have 14 flights on them with total flight time of about 4.5 hours.
 
There's some pretty good info and questions in this thread, which brings up some fun points to ponder.

Regarding our plastic props; unfortunately I doubt any significant life cycle testing has been performed on them to establish a 75% or 80% life cycle period. When dealing with aviation components we always want to replace them prior to reaching the end of their life cycle. Failing to do that means the life cycle of the part is over when the part breaks, which in turn carries a high probability of that point also becoming the life cycle of the aircraft as well. When the component fails it takes the aircraft down with it.

What's 75% of life cycle? Since manufacturers do not publish life cycles, for reasons we can only surmise, each of use becomes a guinea pig. Because of that we should perhaps be performing more frequent inspections. Instead of inspecting props at the beginning and end of a flying day it might be better to inspect them before each new flight. Since environmental conditions vary widely, where and how we fly influences how often we should inspect our props. Do we fly in a very high insect count environment? Fly through swarms of bees or over decaying kelp beds with high fly counts? If so we'll experience some level of plastic erosion that has to be watched over. Do we land and take off in tall grass often, or get a bit sloppy with our landing techniques and run prop tips through tall grass? If so we should be looking for chips and splits at the tip of the blades and cracks at the prop hubs.

Since we don't have a published life cycle we get to determine when props should be replaced through a systematic inspection process. We'll check the security of the prop locks for free play. Those that leave the props on will see their prop locks last much, much longer than those that install and remove them every day. What might be considered a failing prop lock? If it makes you feel uncomfortable when doing a wiggle test it's definitely time to replace. If you can hold the motor still and cause the prop to separate from the motor with not too aggressive reversal of prop rotation it's time for a new one.

Next we'll look at the blades. Chipped tips? If small and we have a prop balancer and know how to use it we might be able to smooth out the chip with some #400 sand paper and re-balance the prop. However, that only has a chance if whatever caused the chip didn't also introduce a crack or split of the blade. We'll look for those by using a light opposing twisting motion with our fingertips on each side of each propeller tip. Did the prop appear to hit something pretty hard but not break? Time to check the tips of course but it's also time to check the blade hubs to see if any cracks have been introduced. A seriously out of balance prop or one that has experienced too many flex cycles will show itself at the blade hub with what is at first a small stress fracture where the blade meets the hub. Those usually spread somewhat radially until the blade separates. Once started they progress quite rapidly and always end catastrophically.

Those that are tracking every flight and recording the times will be the ones to provide the data to establish life cycles. Some of them will be commercial operators, some of them dedicated amateurs, buy what we want to know can only come from those that are dedicated in recording sorties and times. Unfortunately the H has not been out long enough to accumulate enough time on numerous individual aircraft to put time between failure numbers together yet. Props that are not abused can last a very long time so for now all we can do is perform good inspections to assure they have not been damaged by external objects or worn out from numerous removal and installation activities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AZSteveB
In "real" aviation replacing an engine at 50 hours is one that would never get bought. More like 1000-1200 hours.
I didn't say that in "real" aviation engines are replaced after 50 hrs.:
The 50 hrs. inspection is a standard interval for certain (moving) parts and components like the engines. Piston engines may run up to 2000 hrs. and jet engines up to 5000 hrs., after that the manufacturer's guarantee runs out. The engines are replaced by overhauled ones because overhauling is a long process that would ground the aircraft expensively.
 
Since my plane was always used for hire (flight instruction and rental) it was subject to mandatory 100 hour inspections. Oil and spark plug changes were on a more frequent schedule.
 
In "real" aviation replacing an engine at 50 hours is one that would never get bought. More like 1000-1200 hours.

Depends on the aircraft. I worked at an engine tech on several aircraft, and some stayed on the wing for years (KC-135R), while others (i.e. B-1B) averaged a mean time between failures of about 100 hours in the early years of it's operation. They are much better now. :)

As for the H, I do a simple pre-flight and post-flight, and after about 20 flights, I look deeper.
 
I remember getting hauled around in C-5's. Seems with every flight where they shut the engines down afterwards I ended up on a different aircraft because the original had broken down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: K2BLS
In other groups it has been stated by several experienced PIC to replace your blades after 10 hours of use. Longer use risks fatigued blades and the slow bow effect that can effect lift and strength of the blade. A cheep cost for blades vs the cost of a wrecked UAS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foxs1
In other groups it has been stated by several experienced PIC to replace your blades after 10 hours of use. Longer use risks fatigued blades and the slow bow effect that can effect lift and strength of the blade. A cheep cost for blades vs the cost of a wrecked UAS.
The YTH prop blades are quite stiff and small in diameter. Both characteristics reduce blade fatigue due to less bending during RPM changes and reduced torque forces on the mountings and shafts. In contrast to e.g. DJI Phantom 3 props, which are "softer" and at the same time larger in diameter.
The hexacopter's six motor concept with smaller (and lower torque) motors IMO also contributes to a longer life time compared to quadcopters.
The only real problem with stiff props is that you brake them immediately if they hit something harder. Soft props are more forgiving on drones e.g. when tipping over...
After over 300 missions (approx. 75 hrs.) I still use the 10 original kit blades in a continuous row in order to spread the "wear and tear" among them evenly. I nevertheless have two fresh spare sets of A and B props just in case...
IMO the props will break most probably close to the shaft as this seems to be the most weak and stressed area.
 

New Posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
20,955
Messages
241,587
Members
27,284
Latest member
csandoval