The Autel Evo 640T boasts impressive specs, but how does its battery hold up in real-world applications? This article examines the Autel Evo 640T’s battery duration during a topographic mapping project, comparing its performance to the DJI Mavic 3 Enterprise RTK. We’ll analyze flight times, battery consumption, and factors influencing performance to provide a comprehensive understanding of the Evo 640T’s battery capabilities.
An 85-acre agricultural site served as the testing ground, utilizing an Emlid Reach RS2+ base station connected to a state CORS network for RTK corrections. Ground control points were established using a total station. The goal was to complete data acquisition in a single flight, with flight parameters adjusted to target approximately 70% battery consumption on the Evo, equating to a planned 22-minute flight.
Flight Conditions and Performance Discrepancies
Conditions included temperatures around 40°F and 5-8 mph surface winds. A critical observation emerged: the Evo’s performance was significantly impacted by wind direction. Flight lines parallel to the wind resulted in slower speeds (averaging 6 m/s into the wind versus a planned 9 m/s) and increased battery drain. Despite planning for 30% remaining battery, the Evo triggered a low battery warning and landed with 21% remaining, requiring a second flight. This highlights the importance of planning flight lines perpendicular to the wind when using the Evo, especially in windy conditions.
The Mavic 3 Enterprise, in contrast, maintained consistent speed regardless of wind direction, completing its mission in a single 18:52 minute flight with 18% battery remaining. Its higher speed (approximately 19 m/s) allowed for quicker data acquisition. While the Mavic’s planned mission speed should have been 15 m/s, its actual speed significantly exceeded the Evo’s, showcasing superior performance in these conditions.
Data Processing and Analysis
Both datasets were processed in Pix4D and Metashape. The Mavic consistently yielded better accuracy and higher key/match points. The Evo required camera calibrations from previous projects and multiple re-optimizations to achieve acceptable results. It’s crucial to enable rolling shutter corrections in Pix4D for Evo data. While the Autel offers EXIF formatting for Pix4D, results suggest potential compatibility issues.
Autel Evo 640T Battery Duration: Conclusion
This real-world comparison reveals the Autel Evo 640T’s susceptibility to wind conditions, directly impacting battery life and requiring careful flight planning. While the Evo can capture high-quality data, its battery duration under challenging conditions may necessitate multiple flights, impacting project efficiency. The DJI Mavic 3 Enterprise demonstrated superior performance in this specific scenario, completing the mission faster and with greater efficiency. However, it’s important to acknowledge that individual experiences may vary, and further testing under diverse conditions is recommended. Ultimately, understanding the factors influencing the Autel Evo 640T’s battery performance is essential for successful mission planning and execution.
