asimace

Hello all,
I'm using a Weatronic 12-22R GyroIII HV in my Ultra Lightning since last summer.
Although is quite a large model, space in fuselage isn't all that much after installing all the flight equipment and extra tank for smoke.
In particular I had noticed bad signal numbers (low Frames Rx and RSSI) when I was looking direct at the tail.
In that position infact the line between transmitter and receiver antennas is disturbed by the pipe, turbine, carbon bypass, saddle tanks, hopper tanks, turbine and smoke pump and many cables!
I actually even recorded some 0.1 failsafe events in a couple of occasions.
As I did not want to take any more chances I grounded the model until this last weekend when I finally flew the model again with new patch antennas installed.
Flight log files show now much better numbers and no failsafe events.
In the attached pictures you can see the previous position of the normal antennas and the new patch antennas.
It is the best arrangement I could find, do you see anything really wrong?
I could not find a way to point the antennas toward nose and tail in a convenient way.
I'll keep on checking the flight log files but in any case this weekend I flew really far away and the system worked flawless!

Mauri

P.S. 400 km/h barrier is not too far!

HarryC

My Feedback: (1)

Mauri, the new arrangment of your flat patch antennas is what Weatronic recommends so you have got it absolutely right. Each patch antenna covers a half sphere as per your drawing, with no polarisation effects, so by putting them back to back you have covered a full sphere with equal reception in all directions.

I have had two flights of a model which is fitted with one flat patch and one conventional aerial. The result is not conclusive because they are in different locations so that may cause a difference, but the flat patch aerial was giving significantly better dB readings than the conventional aerial and that is encouraging.
Harry

speed is life

Posted this in the Weatronics Support forum as well:

STAN-CAUSSEL

I phone them sometimes and I always have some to speak with.
No problem for me ....

speed is life

thankyou for the input; however I was specifically targeting the announced "New USA Weatronics Rep" one Mr. Larry Jolly

luv2flyrc

My Feedback: (6)

I experienced the "faulty" cable issue yesterday. Fortunately, it was noticed on the ground as I set up for my second flight of the day at an event with many spectators. It is quite alarming as I realize that my 200+mph CARF Flash could have easily become an out of control missile.

I have been aware of the potential for this issue since day one of using this equipment ( for me, that's about 2 years) but, you don't really take the reports seriously until it happens to you. My cable has been "babied" knowing it's a potential weak link but, still it has failed.

I'm very surprised that Wea has not done anything yet to address this issue, the equipment in general is to such high standards, frankly superb but, this is a very big achilles heel. A new cable fixed the problem immediately but, for how long?

I'm considering shelving it after this incident. Unfortunately, I'm heavily invested in it with 4x Micro 12 Gyro 3's, 1x smart 8 and 2x Gizmo 12-22R's Gyro 3's.

I await the new Bat 60 which will eliminate the problem but, it has now been delayed further.

Mike

HarryC

My Feedback: (1)

Mike you have forgotten Weatronic's response to this problem - it's user error there is nothing wrong with weatronic design.

So glad you caught it on the ground. Same happened to me last year, took great care of it but still it failed.

tms-ger

Hi Mike and Harry,

as I wrote some posts before, we are using two MX22 with WEA DV4 each. No problems with the cables for over two years of usage now. But we take great care about our equipment and that includes the TX and the patch cable of course.

I am interested in the defect of the cable. Is there anything you can visualy notice ? Did you (re)install the DVx every time you going to fly (at the flying field) ? Maybe you can post a picture of the faulty cable here which shows the "achilles heel" ?

This may also be interesting for other users.

Maybe the patch cable is a wearing part which needs to be replaced every season for saftey ? (Like done with parts of a car during inspection.)


best regards from GER

Tom

luv2flyrc

My Feedback: (6)

Hi Tom,

The cable was my original, it was in use for just over 2 years. The module may have been removed 3 times in that 2 year period but, for 99% of the time , it was never removed.

Visually inspecting the cable under a magnifying glass shows nothing abnormal. I cannot see what causes the fault. I have tested the cable for connectivity from one end to the other using an ohm meter and it checks OK.

I can only assume that the fault is intermittent contact of the pins in the cable with the pins in the connector. Possibly, they wear with slight movements of the cable as it is very hard to completely avoid touching the cable in regular use of the transmitter. I'm sure it moves slightly just putting the transmitter back in it's case.

I think you may be correct to assume that this is a "wearing" piece and replace it yearly.

Mike

HarryC

My Feedback: (1)

For a while lat year weatronic was giving out free replacement cables because of the number of complaints but they still denied it is a problem! I became aware of it because my module would sometimes not power up. The module had been removed just 2 or 3 times in the two or so years I had it. It is one of the two reasons I may buy a BAT60 as soon as it is on sale.

fireblade5437

Guys

The amount of contact area of the blades either side of the wire is tiny, these type of connectors with this type of ribbon cable were designed to be inside a enclosure (where they never move) never like how Weatronic are using them hence why I soldered the wires to the blades. It is not a cable breaking that's causing the issue but actual contact etc never had a problem after I soldered the lead that I had go bad on the ground just before I was due to fly! So there's 3 of us that's had same problem and I am sure there are others as well!

Alan

Ps also if we used the same connectors for our servos, how long do you think that would have lasted? 100% for sure if the Tx to module cable had used our standard servo connectors we would have see zero problems with this cable..

luv2flyrc

My Feedback: (6)

Thanks Alan, I remember seeing your post. I went back and had a look at it, it's post # 1535 for anyone else trying to locate it, I think I'll experiment with your "fix" on the bad cable when I get home tonight and see what comes of it.

Mike

asimace

I too went that way since my day 1 with Weatronic, 1 and half year ago.
I directly soldered the cable to the transmitter unit and module adapter, easy fix although you must work a little to "break" the modules apart along the glued joint.
I chose to do this mod after reading all the complaints on this thread and knowing the level of expertise of all the contributors no way I would take a chance and assume these problems as user errors.
The connectors used in this case are not up to the job, period.
Of course my decision was easy as I have an MX-22 exclusively used with the Wea module and do not need to ever pull out the module.
I'm also looking forward to the BAT-60, but I think I'll wait a while before jumping on it!
Unless Weatronic offers me one for free as beta-tester of course!
Mauri

fireblade5437

Mike

The trick is obviously a small iron but you need to get heat in quick then feed in very small diameter solder, then I finished off with a small amount of Hysol to seal etc

Alan

fireblade5437

I would like to see inside a Bat first just in case they have used 'that' cable anywhere!

Also not buying any more Weatronic until I get the ENGLISH VOICE FILE !!!!

Alan

tms-ger

...it seems that christmas has been pulled forward for those who waited for the english voice output for their Weatronic equipment

Here it finally is:

http://www.weatronic.com/de/index.ph...igacontrol.php


http://www.weatronic.com/en/UserFile...l-Setup(1).exe


Also see some new pictures of the tray-type TX on the web site...


best regards

Tom

fireblade5437

Tom

Sorry just noticed your post, I just answered on voice file posts as Oli had started this etc...

Alan

Edgar Perez

My Feedback: (13)

Guys,
Im going to update all the way from 2.33 to the latest. Need to confirm the right order to avoid losing my setting across several Rx.

1- install the newest GC software in the PC.
2- Use the new GC to connect with the TX/RX (still using older firmware). The do a save in the local PC of the current setting in the Tx/RX.
3- Do #2 with all the RX that need to be updated
4- Proceed with the TX firmware update
5- Proceed with the RX firmware update
6- Open GC and send to the TX/RX the seetings saved in step #2 above.
Did I got it right?

richbran

Edgar.

If You have a week or so patience, I can send You a step-by-step working flow chart, what to do when and how. In gave this file to some friends who are not experienced updaters and it works.
I only need to translate it from my native language which is Dutch and I have some flying to do this weekend plus a few days vacation afterwards.

You can prepare a few things beforehand, You need:
The USB/micro USB cable that connects the TX to Your PC/Notebook
The update cable for the receivers
a Micro SD adapter for the small Micro SD card, that You can insert in Your PC/Notebook. Format the Micro SD card again with FAT32 and remove it all the time from Yr PC with the option: "safe removal of XX hardware". in order not to damage the data.
Load the necessary files on it, which are in the update pack, or can be uploaded seperately. You need: the TX file (You probably have an older DV3 transmitter set), The RX files for the type(s) you have in use. The speech file.
A 5 cell battery ( for those receivers that are not built in a model.)
To stay on the safe side, save the current models with your current GC software.
I am not sure the newest GC can read those older models, so if You have not extensively modified Yr receiver data, it is worthwhile to make general notes of what You adjusted over times, just in case nothing works from the older files and You have to reprogram all.

Edgar Perez

My Feedback: (13)

Hi Richard,
Thanks for the information. I have done Wea upgrades before so i have the required cables and adapters. I was confused with some other posters unable to use their saved files after updating. I though the trick was to use the new Gigacontrol to read the settings from the TX/RX before updating their firmware.

olnico

I have had Weatronic modules on all my 4 transmitters: JR10X, 12X, Fubaba 12FG and 14 for over 4 years.
I have had one instance of a loose contact from the cable. I change all my cable every year. Only a few $ and worth the few seconds of work. Also I check the cable regularly by slightly moving them at the plug area sideways to see if it triggers any loss of frame.

richbran

Edgar

I save a file of a model after EACH adjustment I make on the settings, so I always have the current version in reserve on my PC, just in case You F^&% Up the settings on the active receiver accidentally.
The results after a firmware upgrade differ. Here on the German forum people claim having lost the failsafe settings or changed mid point settings. Some claim a hard rebinding, some say a soft rebind is enough.

Brgds,

olnico

I believe that there has been no EDF data posted yet.
Here is a typical measurement made on our new EDF jet: the eScorpion MK2.
This is interesting because some ESC/ EDF combo are known to create lots of EMI.
Our eScorpion is equipped with a Tamjets TJ-90 and Ice HV2 120 ESC. The Weatronic system returns very solid results on this plane.

Type of receiver: Micro 10, fw 2.63
Type of Tx: JR 10X with DV4 module, fw 2.63
PPM mode
Region USA
Antennas angle at 90 degrees, antenna one along the roll axis, antenna two along the pitch axis.


The data analysis for the flight:

Lowest RSSI 1 rx: -80.5 dB
Lowest RSSI 2 rx: -79.5 dB
Lowest frame rx1: 69 ( RX2 at 96 at this time )
Lowest frame rx2: 74 ( RX1 at 100 at this time )

Average RSSI rx values: 99
Failsafe: no
losses of feedback communication ( 136/168 events ) for a total of x seconds: no


Lowest RSSI 1 tx: -89 dB
Lowest RSSI 2 tx: -88 dB
Lowest frame tx1: 69
Lowest frame tx2: 71

Average RSSI tx values:80



This series of flights was made at Scobee Field in Houston. This field provides a very good electro-magnetic environment with low EMI throughout the airspace.

roger.alli

Hi Oli
I don’t really want to re-hash this too much, however I do not think that this is likely to be a patch cable issue. The cable in use was an early suspect, but I tested it vigorously, and could never repeat the fault on the bench.

Below is Jens Ackermans thoughts when he reviewed the data.. (I was not particularly impressed with his idea that it may have been a metal fence s or similar!!!) He did however identify that the RX frames received malfunction came in waves!!!!, with a period of almost exactly 5 seconds!!!. Expanding the graphs shows this “wave” period beautifully. Rx 1 leading Rx2 by a second or so : The same phenomenon is going on with the TX packets as well, but RSSI is consistent.. This cycle started at the same time the throttle was advanced for take off roll. Prior to that, results were normal.



There are a lot of unanswered questions here. Why this 5 sec cycle? Why are the frames so poor when RSSI is good?? The data is clearly telling us something, but I doubt we will ever know. I can’t really see how a faulty patch cable would produce this result, or perhaps I am missing something. I have attached the log file (as a PDF) in case you or anyone else wants to review it again..

[ATTACH]1939134[/IMG]

I have learned a lot about the system after studying these log files, looking for a reason for this crash, but like most lock outs, it will likely remain a mystery. I've moved on, built a new model, and am now having complete success with my Wea gear.. Loving the voice program, especially with a pitot fitted..

Roger

olnico

Hi Roger.

Obviously not a patch cable issue with this type of pattern.

Here is an example of a flight conducted close to a very powerful military radar with firmware 2.08.
The plane experienced locouts with a pattern of 5 seconds. You can see on this log exactly the same pattern as your with a 5 seconds cycle which coincides with the swipe frequency of the radar.
Also the RSSI recorded on your flight has a slight 5 second pattern. The reception can be strong, if the jamming effect is stronger, then the frames drop.



By the way there is nothing in this receiver with a frequency of 0.2 Hz. So I do not see any reason for having a pattern like this from a hardware or firmware point of view.
Do you still have that receiver?