sidgates

My Feedback: (2)

Rob,
I post #197 David inducates he is talking about his BC. I think he was talking about it also in the previous post when he describe the antenna mounting. I too would like to see pictures.

David Gladwin

Really nothing to photograph. One aerial runs along the fuselage side parallel to the longitudnal axis under the canopy sill in a plastic tube. The other runs to the center of the canopy are and is vertical. Thats it. Works fine. The receiver is mounted on the fuselage side usinga ply plate, thin rubber insulation and held in place with rubber bands !

Do a range check, if the red error light stays out at 100 yards, go fly, then enjoy looking at your data via GigaControl. !

Regards,

David.

Gandalv

Maybe of topic and maybe a dumb question, but here goes

If there is about 1meter from the turbine to the mounting place of the receiver, it seems that the blindspot/shadow behind the turbine for the receiver is about 1m at a distance of 5meter behind the plane (and I guess this shadow will be increasing further back?).

Wouldn't longer antennas be better to help out the shadowing or is this not a problem in real flight ?



Thanks.

Regards from
Gandalv

CraigG

My Feedback: (40)

Gandalv,

It's not a problem in real flight. It is however, a little more of an issue with 2.4 since the wave length is considerably shorter than 72mhz (and 35/36mhz I presume) and there is less opportunity for the signal to be "seen" by the antenna or to "bend" around objects such as the turbine. That's why JR, Futaba and now Weatronic recommend at least 2 antenna, oriented 90 degrees to each other. With that antenna arrangement it virtually guarantees at least one antenna will always have a good signal.

Craig

GrayUK

On the FASST system and also it appears the W’tronics system, no issue is found, refer to my testing thread you will see that is the case.
Paul

HarryC

My Feedback: (1)

Gandalv makes a very valid point about the cone of blocked signal beyond any conductive mass. The cone will contain the rx aerials and hence be in a "dead zone". However my experiments with my Spektrum when I got it a year ago suggest that 2.4Ghz is not blocked nearly as badly as the early dire warnings would have us believe. I put the 7000 rx in a metal saucepan with metal lid but slightly open to let a servo wire out so that I could see the servo operate. To compensate for the slight opening I put another large steel saucepan lid against the first so there could not be any line of sight from the DX7 tx to the rx. I then stood 30 feet away with another steel saucepan on its side pointing away from the rx with the tx aerial inside that saucepan. The servo continued to work fine with 3 layers of saucepan thick metal between tx and rx. It only struggled when I pressed the low-power range-check button. When 2.4GHz first came out we were often told it was line of sight only similar to light waves in that it would be blocked by anything conductive, but my experience is that while conductive material will weaken the signal thus reducing the ultimate range, it doesn't simply block it in the way we were lead to believe initially.
Harry

Robrow

The owners manual says that it is only the last 29mm of the Rx antenna that is the working portion and that they should be mounted as far apart as possible and at 90deg to each other. What I intend doing with the Bobcat is send one antenna forwards and tape it in a horizontal position underneath the cockpit sill, then route the other rearwards but bend the end through 90deg so the working portion is oriented vertical, then also tape that to the fuselage side. Do you think that will be OK?

Would be interesting to see any other 2.4 antenna installs.

Rob.

gerhardp

Hi Rob,
With the live data streaming while turned on, you can do a fairly easy assessment and validation of your antenna installation. Just use a peace of tape to hold each antenna in a particular position, do a range check while rotating the model through different positions and look at the data. With two guys it goes even faster. Just make sure that you document your placements, so that you can later repeat them. Then do a flight in which you don't fly away too far and check the data once you are back down. After that you can expand the envelope farther out. If you find an antenna that is consistently weaker, move it around and see if you find a better position. It is so nice to be able to validate the signal data live and on card as well.

Thanks,

Gerhard

Robrow

Thanks Gerhard, how do I know what contitutes a good/bad, strong/weak signal reception?

Rob.

David Gladwin

That's exactly what I have done and I KNOW it works, I have the data to prove it !

After you have done a range check, just go and fly the thing like we did at Scampton last May, it works, and works very, very well !

Not a single frame loss or failsafe frame in 20 flights.

Now that we have the best RF link ever all we have to do is get Weatronics Germany to answer their important emails in reasonable time !

Regards,

David.

gerhardp

Hi Rob,
This area is really touchy and there will always be more opinions around, than there are people who even care about it.
Here is my guess. - Anything that is in the way or near to the antennas (receiver) may contribute. Let common sense and intuition guide you.
In addition I also think, that reflection plays a big role in the link of signals. That is most likely one of the reasons why some of the tests with metal covers, pots etc have limited influence. That might also tell why raindrops and moisture act as diffusion obstacles and have a greater effect than many of the "obstacles" that have been introduced in some of the tests shared in the forums. My opinion is that true live tests with real conditions (flying) are the ultimate way to make sure that signals are good etc. Weatronic is so far the only system that truly allows to evaluate live and afterward.

Just my two cents (or pennies) on this..
Thanks,

Gerhard

GrayUK

Robrow.
All of the installs below have been used and fully flight tested using FASST, i see no reason why they would not do just as well with Wea.
The last one has 1 antenna inside the pilots head, the other runs along the base.
Zero issues with any of them, in over 2 years flying.

Paul

GrayUK

Here is one i would not do, but a friend has, it works perfectly and has been for around 2 years.
One of them is taped to the UAT.

Paul

Robrow

Thanks gents, I'll complete the install today, just made up the 'y' leads for channels 11+12. I'll let you know how things go with range checks, etc and post some pics later.

Rob.

sidgates

My Feedback: (2)

GrayUK
Thanks for the ideas and pics.

GrayUK

No problem.

Paul

loukos

My Feedback: (2)

Gents,

After the saga of trying to get my weatronics 2.4 set, I have made the installations and came up with a few problems that no one seems to have encountered in this thread, i would thus be gratefull if anyone can help, i have also written to weatronic but i think ill get a response from you guys before them.

Here goes, I have the system installed on my Graupner MX22 with an 8ch receiver. The transmitter and receiver have been bound however:

(a) The voltage on the transmitter screen is flickering and is not constant (i jad this issue when testing the old Graupner IFS, which I scrapped and got the spectrum system which worked flawlessly for 2 years, now back to square 1)[]

(b) I cannot get the giga software thinggy to identify my transmitter on my computer, keep getting errors.

(c) the transmitter module seems to have something loose inside is this normal?

In my workshop the system works ok but with the issues above i dont think i will be trying it out tomorrow until i get a heads up.

HEL PLS

David Gladwin

A few things to try:

1. If the screen voltage problem has occurred with a previous unit I suspect YOUR transmitter.

2. Try reinstalling the USB driver and make sure you are using software V 2.06 , mine would not work at all with an earlier version. Also try inserting the USB cable into a different comms port.

3. Shake them and they rattle ! I wanted to look inside the module to see why but they are glued together not screwed. The big switch unit for the larger DR also rattles when shaken

Mine is ready again for a day's flying at Scampton tomorrow.

Any advice on how to get Weatronics to reply to emails would be appreciated. I have a few queries on the software before finalising the Giga control article for the next RCJI !

All I want to do is support them, they have created a fantastic product which could change the face of RC !

Regards, David Gladwin.

gerhardp

Hi Loukos,
a) I would make sure that the contacts for the transmitter battery are clean and have a solid connection. I had a similar issue with my Futaba which is a spring contact.
b) What is the operation system of your computer? Did you download the USB-driver? You can get the current one that I have on my website. When your computer detects the USB-port and asks for software, direct it to the file location where you downloaded the USB-driver to.
http://www.weatronic-usa.com/index.p...d=16&Itemid=31
If you still have problems, try reinstalling the software.
c) Tolerances between the plastic injection molding housing and the print board - together with temperature differences can cause things to be looser to one another. It is not critical and can be dealt with additional changes in the injection mold tooling. It might happen down the line.

Let me know if you have any other problems,

Gerhard

jetnuno

Hi

I have been following a bit this thread and the more I read, the more I doubt of my empirical beliving from several years.

Here is the issue:

I am running a weatronics rx and a Futaba FG12 tx in my F18. I have arround 50 flights with no issues. When I made the plane set-up, I program the rx and tx to use PCM, because I have always felt in the past, that it is safer than PPM.

Since I am using Futaba PCM 1024, I only have 8 channels and use the wetronics amazing programming to do the rest. I could use the extra 4 channels if I use PPM and believe me that I really NEED THOSE.

My question is the original thread's one. Should I change to PPM, if I am using PCM with no issues?

I could make one flight in PPM and see if the rx strenght signal data (RSSI) in the card is the same or better that in PCM(usually arround 0,65 with PCM)?

Is the signal strenght the only thing that matters in rx link, or there other issues to consider in PPM versus PCM modulation?

Regards

Nuno

loukos

My Feedback: (2)

David,

Thanks for the swift response, your advise is always thorough and to the point

I suspected my transmitter also, however it does not do this with the spektrum model i am using now, and did not do this with its original 35mhz module. If i send it off to Graupner, they will only check it with one of their own modules, not with the spectrum or weatronics..

I did use the v 2.06 software but there seems to be a problem getting the computer to link my transmitter with the software, Gerhard p has also comented on this will follow his advice also see how it goes.

P.s waiting for rcj to read your article always very helpful!!

loukos

My Feedback: (2)

Gerhard,

The service you are providing weatronics Germany on this site is fantastic (since they take ages to reply to emails)

will check the contact on the module and transmitter see if that changes anything.

Regarding the software, i have downloaded everything from your site conserning the 2.4 system, unzipped them. The giga software program opens however it does not recognise my transmitter. Also my computer states it has found new hardware when i connect it to the usb port, but when i use the wizard that comes up it reaches a certain stage and then give me an error message ("an error has occured")

Is there something i missed during the installation?

My computer operating system is windows xp.

regards

Loukis

loukos

My Feedback: (2)

OK now im FRUSTRATED!

David, Gerhard, i have tried everything you advised me and the results are as follows:

The battery connection and module connection are solid, when I have te weatronic module on the battery flickers, when i switch to the spektrum or graupner 35mhz, the battery is stable?!?!?.

I have downloaded all the files from weatronic usa, my computer goes through the new hardware wizard only to come out with an error message at the end saying "there was an problem in installing this harware an error has occured during the instalation of this device and the harware cannot be installed". I have tried this countless times over and over again. Gerhard as per your advice i guided the computer to where the USB file is and nothing. Please confirm the files on the download page of you website are ok, the USB file is quite small.

Regards

Loukis

cairoman

Louki,

Try another USB cable. I, also had problems opening the Giga software on my Vista computer, then I downloaded the software on my XP computer and the program opened. Then I found out that I could only use one of my numerous USB cables to connect the module to the computer, so that the software can recognise it.

Chris

HarryC

My Feedback: (1)

Nuno, I think the original question is about which type of data the tx should provide to the Weatronics 2.4GHz module, not about which type you should actually transmit. The Wea 2.4GHz module will transmit its type of digital data exactly the same regardless of whether your tx gives it PPM or PCM servo data - the data is converted into Wea's spread spectrum format and it is that format that is transmitted. It is not PPM or PCM data that is transmitted in 2.4GHz. The only difference is how many channels and what refresh rate your tx can provide to the Wea 2.4GHz module when in PPM or PCM mode. So there is no disadvantage to providing PPM data rather than PCM data to the Wea 2.4Ghz module, and if your Tx can provide more channels in PPM mode then there is an advantage to doing so.

Harry