Reach M+ getting so hot after latests upgrades

tiedtke · February 13, 2020, 2:01am

Hi,

Recently I noticed that the lastest update is increasing the temperature os M+ … increasing too much.

I use the M+ just for Log of raw data (all options for corrections and outputs are disabled) in an internal integration using DJI P4 family (very similar to the topodrone.ru kit).

Today, the update section in reach suggested the upgrade to 2.22.2, and I did it.

Ok, the update runs ok, and after some minutes of use in a lab with air-conditioner, the external shell of the P4 Pro was beating 58ºC … probably inside it’s close to 60~70ºC

Then I get another new unity of M+ and leave it on the bench of the lab to test (the local temperature is about 22ºC), and after minutes the M+ reaches 52ºC! (just logging the raw data).

Well, I live in Brazil … and the external temperature on normal days is about 32 … 35ºC

In a test with integration in a Phantom, the M+ Freezes during the 3~5minutes stoped in the ground to get the fix, and I just noticed this behavior after the flight… losing the survey.

I did these tests with 3 other units and after the latest firmware upgrades the temperature increase too much.

It’s possible to downgrade the firmware? Where I can obtain the old version for M+?

Thanks!

tiedtke · February 13, 2020, 2:27am

My Thermometer is not professional, but it’s impossible to put/maintain the fingers in the top of M+ due the high temperature.

See in the picture, the M+ stops to work… only the orange led reamains turned on. The temp in M+ reaches 76ºC in a lab with air conditioner at 22ºC.

Remembering, this happened after upgrade to the last versions.

Please, any help?

polina.buriak · February 13, 2020, 11:26am

Hi Thiago,

May I ask you to generate the Full System Report on the unit and send it to me in PM?

tiedtke · February 14, 2020, 1:45pm

Hi @polina.buriak, how are you?

Some news ?

polina.buriak · February 14, 2020, 2:38pm

Hi Thiago,

Could you please specify the firmware version you updated from?

tiedtke · February 14, 2020, 2:51pm

I not sure.

It was a new device. When I connected it to the internet in the first use, it automatically ask for the upgrade… I can’t access the interface of ReachView before the update.

Then I just run the upgrade.

polina.buriak · February 14, 2020, 3:21pm

Thiago,

Do I understand correctly that you have only one Reach M+ that experiences this issue from the start? Or did you have an experience of working with another Reach M+ on which this issue occured after the update?

tiedtke · February 14, 2020, 4:27pm

Hi @polina.buriak

I have more two units with the same behavior. I’m using a homemade heatsink, but in some days, like today ( 32 degrees in the shadow) the units overheat until turn off.

I associate the overheating with firmware upgrade due to the fact that I did several integrations inside Phantom 4 for some clients around October/November of 2019 (+/- the start of our summer), and they are using it with no problems. These units are with an old version of firmware, and normally not access the internet. And even the client access the internet, I ask to modify nothing in the configuration or upgrades.

polina.buriak · February 14, 2020, 4:48pm

Thiago,

Do I understand correctly that all three of your units experience heating issues after the update to v2.22.2 from previous versions?

May I ask you to specify the firmware versions that you’ve updated from on all of the devices?

It’d be great if you sent the Full System Reports on all of the Reaches to me in PM.

tiedtke · February 14, 2020, 5:23pm

Yes, I don’t know what exact version, but in September of 2019 I did several integrations using M+ and this behavior does not appeared.

I just run the automatic update when the M+ connects to internet. Today i think the current stable version is 2.22.2 , correct ?

Ok, I’ll try, one of devices are installed in a client equipment.

tiedtke · February 15, 2020, 2:39pm

Hi @polina.buriak,

And about the sys log that I sent to you, do you have some information about it?

tiedtke · February 18, 2020, 6:43pm

Hi @polina.buriak,

Have you some information about this topic?

About the other devices, just one I can generate the complete report system. Other two devices are um field, without contact with surveyors.

polina.buriak · February 19, 2020, 8:23am

Hi Thiago,

May I ask you when it’d be possible to reach other units and generate the System reports on them?

I’ve looked into the system report you sent and I can’t see the extreme heating of the unit. The temperatures of it are within the optimal working range.

We couldn’t reproduce this issue on our units while comparing their performance on different firmware versions. It’d be great help for us to see system reports from all of your units to determine the cause of the issue.

tiedtke · February 20, 2020, 4:33pm

HI @polina.buriak, me again

Yesterday I run a simple log with a new board. I let it work in my lab in ambient temperature (with no air conditioner), and in the morning when I returned to work, I checked the board and it was almost burning, and just the orange led remain turned on.

Follow the logs for your analysis:

SystemReport.zip (249.1 KB)

raw_202002200351_UBX.zip (2.8 MB)

Like you will see in the file (inside the zip in the following path: [root]SystemReport\systemd-logs-and-status\journalctl\temperature-logger_log - 16kB), the temperature increases until 81 deg C, and after some time the M+ stops, like you can see in a part of the log (latest 15 lines):

Feb 20 04:14:42 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:14:42,154] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:14:42.153690,480000,70 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:15:12 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:15:12,175] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:15:12.174083,312000,72 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:15:42 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:15:42,208] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:15:42.207197,312000,72 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:16:12 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:16:12,224] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:16:12.223179,240000,72 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:16:42 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:16:42,233] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:16:42.232716,312000,72 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:17:12 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:17:12,267] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:17:12.266434,480000,74 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:17:42 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:17:42,300] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:17:42.299075,480000,75 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:18:12 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:18:12,331] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:18:12.331054,480000,77 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:18:42 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:18:42,339] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:18:42.337837,240000,80 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:19:12 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:19:12,368] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:19:12.367850,480000,79 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:19:42 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:19:42,392] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:19:42.391214,240000,80 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:20:12 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:20:12,401] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:20:12.400343,240000,79 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:20:42 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:20:42,433] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:20:42.431145,120000,81 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:21:12 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:21:12,472] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:21:12.471145,312000,79 (temperature_logger.py:91)
Feb 20 04:21:42 reach temperature_logger.py[528]: [2020-02-20 04:21:42,505] [ INFO] — 2020-02-20 04:21:42.504771,480000,76 (temperature_logger.py:91)

Unhappily this kind of peaking of temperature is impracticable in my country where on a normal sunny day we can get 35~37 deg C in the shadows.

I need to know if this behavior is normal for M+. If so, unfortunately, I will need to adopt some alternative to use of M+.

Regards,

Thiago Tiedtke dos Reis

polina.buriak · March 3, 2020, 4:51pm

Hi Thiago,

Sorry it took so long to get back to you!

As far as I can see from the report you sent, the unit demonstrates the same behavior on v2.22.1 as it did on v2.22.2.

The high temperatures indicated in the logs do not prevent the unit from working correctly. They are within the optimal working range, especially due to the temperatures of the environment.

I can’t see any issues in the unit’s performance from the log you provided. I’ll attach the screenshot below.

system · June 19, 2020, 1:35pm

This topic was automatically closed 100 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.