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

2 Cent Solution to C23 Gimbal Buzz!

Joined
Oct 24, 2017
Messages
65
Reaction score
10
Age
63
Not very long, @Ty Pilot and @Steve Carr made me buy it for myself for Christmas. I'm still not sure whether to thank them, ....or keep on cursing them! 🤗-🤔-🤬

How'bout you? When did you get yours?
Last November then late Jan (I have 2). The lastest is shown with the camera retrofit showing one of two H dampers installed (foam packed) and George Washington bringing up the rear watching my flank (counterweight). Brilliant idea and seemes to be successful. Taking a virtual bow to you now while removing my hat! Actually, now that I look more carefully, George is looking intently to my 3. I'm noticing that 2 my remaining gel-filled dampers are maintaining a compressed appearance rather than the normal distended collapsed look. I have high hopes for better video footage going forward.
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: Steve Carr

DCH

Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
738
Reaction score
700
Age
72
Location
Olympic Peninsula
I'm noticing that 2 my remaining gel-filled dampers are maintaining a compressed appearance rather than the normal distended collapsed look. I have high hopes for better video footage
The ball type dampers you are using to replace the gel dampers are from a CGO2/3 (not CGO3+) Gimbal. These are technically too short and will hold the bottom gimbal plate too high, and you run the rick of shorting out the tiny gimbal wires against the top gimbal plate -this has already happened to a member here, and almost happened to me on my CGO3+, but his warning allowed me to catch it before the insulation was rubbed off the wires. This is potentially dangerous situation, a short during a flight could cause the aircraft to fall out of the sky.

You should use the slightly taller 3-rib style from the CGO3+. Two of these come with the Plus along with a gimbal damper lock. These work great and are hollow with no filling so they are ready to be foam filled with no prep.

ScreenHunter_6445 Mar. 24 14.52.jpg
 

Steve Carr

Missed Approach
Staff member
Premium Pilot
Joined
Dec 15, 2015
Messages
6,665
Reaction score
3,140
Location
Bessemer, MI
You should use the slightly taller 3-rib style from the CGO3+. Two of these come with the Plus along with a gimbal damper lock. These work great and are hollow with no filling so they are ready to be foam filled with no prep.
If you use the CGO3 three rib dampers they must be secured with at least a double layer of dental floss. The rubber seems more pliable than the gel filled dampers and the additional weight of the camera may pull them out of the top gimbal half. I think I may change them and use the original dampers modified with the foam insert to increase the strength of the rubber.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DCH
Joined
Oct 24, 2017
Messages
65
Reaction score
10
Age
63
Just an FYI - I believe that I am using the CG03+ dampers. See attached images showing I ordered them and the packaging in which they came. So, if I understand you correctly, the little wires in the gimbal top part can be expected to rub through if I use the dampers in my image?
 

Attachments

Joined
Oct 24, 2017
Messages
65
Reaction score
10
Age
63
To your point, on one of my Pluses, I did manage to use two of the hollow dampers that came with my Plus (not seen in ealier images). The other round bodied dampers I ordered from Terrestrial and are seen in my ealier photo with the quarters retrofit on the gimbal. I do not want a fail though...more than you know. Been there and got a Bind N Fly from Yuneec as a result last month. Although, that issue was not related to changing dampers - dampers not changed until today.
 
Last edited:

DCH

Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
738
Reaction score
700
Age
72
Location
Olympic Peninsula
The other round bodied dampers I ordered from Terrestrial and are seen in my ealier photo with the quarters retrofit on the gimbal.
That might be Terrestial's bad, or it might be Yuneec's bad for leading Terrestrial to believe those are the right ones. They are not. I know these will cause a short on a CGO3+ gimbal, however I am assuming they will cause problems on a C23 Gimbal, because after my close call with my H480, I was not even going to consider putting them on my C23. Besides they are WAY too stiff.

Here is another thing to consider. The C23/E90 is a much heaver camera/gimbal than a CGO2 or 3 and these ball type dampers were only designed with the lighter gimbal in mind. The 3-rib gel filled were designed specifically for the C23/E90 and are not only longer, but more compliant. To maintain good control and stability, it is important to match the damper to the load. This is why I chose to use the original gel filled C23 dampers. Once you get that gel out you have a very suitable damper with much better dampening characteristics.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2017
Messages
65
Reaction score
10
Age
63
That might be Terrestial's bad, or it might be Yuneec's bad for leading Terrestrial to believe those are the right ones. They are not. I know these will cause a short on a CGO3+ gimbal, however I am assuming they will cause problems on a C23 Gimbal, because after my close call with my H480, I was not even going to consider putting them on my C23. Besides they are WAY too stiff.

Here is another thing to consider. The C23/E90 is a much heaver camera/gimbal than a CGO2 or 3 and these ball type dampers were only designed with the lighter gimbal in mind. The 3-rib gel filled were designed specifically for the C23/E90 and are not only longer, but more compliant. To maintain good control and stability, it is important to match the damper to the load. This is why I chose to use the original gel filled C23 dampers. Once you get that gel out you have a very suitable damper with much better dampening characteristics.
Not to belabor the subject, but I want to understand exactly what you're saying. I did note a shorter spacing of the gimbal top and bottom plates as you've described (maybe 3mm narrower gap using the round bodied dampers I apparently mistook for CG03+ dampers - you disagree saying that they inmdeed are not CG03+ dampers). I only saw plastic in contact with the wires in question up in the gimbal plate area. Can you describe in detail your experience with the wires rubbing through - how did that happen? What "shorts" and how? Is it wire to wire short once wires lose their insulation or some other grounded metallic surface in there contacting wires through vibration over time, encouraged by the tighter quarters (no pun intended) of the gimbal plate from the incorrect shorter dampers?
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2017
Messages
65
Reaction score
10
Age
63
Name her “fiddy”.
PatR, since making my Plus "fiddy", I caught her making the vibration again. Yuneec CS said to get the latest firmware update. Oddly, it just came from them as a Bind N Fly with the latest updates already onboarded. I change cameras with my other Plus and there is no noise/vibration. So, maybe the camera needs FW update? I am a bit trepidacious at installing the latest FW update given some negative press already at the newest update... Your thoughts?
 

DCH

Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
738
Reaction score
700
Age
72
Location
Olympic Peninsula
Not to belabor the subject, but I want to understand exactly what you're saying. I did note a shorter spacing of the gimbal top and bottom plates as you've described (maybe 3mm narrower gap using the round bodied dampers I apparently mistook for CG03+ dampers - you disagree saying that they inmdeed are not CG03+ dampers). I only saw plastic in contact with the wires in question up in the gimbal plate area. Can you describe in detail your experience with the wires rubbing through - how did that happen? What "shorts" and how? Is it wire to wire short once wires lose their insulation or some other grounded metallic surface in there contacting wires through vibration over time, encouraged by the tighter quarters (no pun intended) of the gimbal plate from the incorrect shorter dampers?
Sorry for the delay in answering this, just got too busy.
As far as the short goes, I stated I assumed it could short on C23, but I have never taken the time to look closely. My experience is that it WILL short on a CGO3+, because there is a metal plate on the top plate just above where the wires come out of the bottom gimbal plate, This will short if you use the round dampers.

However more important than the potential short, is the design of the damper. Dampers are designed with particular characteristics in mind, like gimbal/camera weight and mass, @PatR, @Phaedrus and others are far more knowledgeable than I am in this area and can hopefully speak to the problems of using the wrong dampers. This is just such a case. The ball dampers were designed for a lighter smaller 2 axis gimbal/camera, and being much stiffer could introduce vibrations or jello. Maybe not, but I would strongly recommend using a damper that was designed for the camera/gimbal. This is why I chose to use the C23 damper with foam instead of gel, because it is more compliant than the round CGO2 and the 3-rib CGO3+ dampers, and was designed specifically to suspend that particular weight mass combination.
BTW, foam filling eliminates the stretched look of the gel filled damper.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 24, 2017
Messages
65
Reaction score
10
Age
63
Sorry for the delay in answering this, just got too busy.
As far as the short goes, I stated I assumed it could short on C23, but I have never taken the time to look closely. My experience is that it WILL short on a CGO3+, because there is a metal plate on the top plate just above where the wires come out of the bottom gimbal plate, This will short if you use the round dampers.

However more important than the potential short, is the design of the damper. Dampers are designed with particular characteristics in mind, like gimbal/camera weight and mass, @PatR, @Phaedrus and others are far more knowledgeable than I am in this area and can hopefully speak to the problems of using the wrong dampers. This is just such a case. The ball dampers were designed for a lighter smaller 2 axis gimbal/camera, and being much stiffer could introduce vibrations or jello. Maybe not, but I would strongly recommend using a damper that was designed for the camera/gimbal. This is why I chose to use the C23 damper with foam instead of gel, because it is more compliant than the round CGO2 and the 3-rib CGO3+ dampers, and was designed specifically to suspend that particular weight mass combination.
BTW, foam filling eliminates the stretched look of the gel filled damper.
DCH,
An apparent Irony is that the "correct dampers" are so stretched out that in essence the camera is hanging from rubber bands that get wiggly jiggly. I see little vibration dampening going on but more just suspending action with collapsed stretched out dampers - and I might add that I doubt that the engineers intended to have stretched out dampers. Maybe the dampers should instead be firmer and therefore more vibration dampening.
Your thoughts?
 

Phaedrus

Premium Pilot
Joined
Dec 1, 2018
Messages
1,351
Reaction score
898
Age
63
I have not had any issues with my dampers. When I do I will go to the foam filled version.
 

DCH

Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
738
Reaction score
700
Age
72
Location
Olympic Peninsula
DCH,
An apparent Irony is that the "correct dampers" are so stretched out that in essence the camera is hanging from rubber bands that get wiggly jiggly. I see little vibration dampening going on but more just suspending action with collapsed stretched out dampers - and I might add that I doubt that the engineers intended to have stretched out dampers. Maybe the dampers should instead be firmer and therefore more vibration dampening.
Your thoughts?
Read the write up below on this very subject. In it there a link to the How-to that will guide you thru it step by step. It is an excellent solution to the limp noodle gel filled dampers. Basically you replace the gel with open cell foam. You will end up with a damper that is slightly firmer, yet very compliant, more robust, will not stretch or look flat, and offers a deluxe and plush suspension for the camera. @Ty Pilot and I have been using these for 3 months now with no issues whatsoever. I will never go back the gel filled dampers and I'm sure he will agree this is a great solution the dreaded "wiggly jiggly" wet noodle rubber band issue.

C23/E90 Gel Filled Damper Solution
 
  • Like
Reactions: cbecker125

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
16,487
Messages
192,469
Members
19,136
Latest member
vinnie