Bump? Is that a technical term or an Irish colloquialism?

Jim O

Edit: Bring Up My Post ?

:D

Hi Jim,
I had asked a question, then thought the better of it - so replaced it with that .
I'll bet that's got you wondering some more :)

Brian

Hi,
Finally got some nice weather for testing.
So two TT's have now got test flown in Ireland. Mine and Niall's (hope he chimes in ).
I took some ground measurements with batteries of various qualities and settled on a compensation factor of 25 for my YGE/Neu Contra combo.
I found this setting worked spot on with the better batteries (not quite top quality) from the get go and was very consistent all through the flight.
The need for extremely careful throttle management for the first few manoeuvres was gone - no runaway horses any more.
The poor to mediocre packs were a little dead for the first manoeuvre or two but then came on and were as good, or better, at the end of the sequence as at the beginning.
Cold packs will likely be similar.
mA consumption was down some, however I was also testing some modified props at the same time and this is not my objective for the TT.

I have to say that the TT is 'a god send' for those wishing to fly 'Euro style' (please excuse the use of the term) a slow constant and or consistent pace. I'm sure, batteries allowing, it will help with consistency for fast paced flying also, but I won't be trying that anytime soon.
The TT/Contra combo is the nicest power/thrust source that I've flown with. It more or less brings IC consistency to the E table without negating any of the other benefits of E power. For the Contra it enhances the pre-existing constant speed qualities. It is easy to set up and to adjust.
Just need some more time on it now.
Don't want to say too much till then but I must say that I'm really happy so far.

Also want to thank Ed for his help and customer service - very professional.

Brian

.
How is this device any different from utilizing the RPM governor feature already built into the ESC for helos? Wouldn't that give you consistent top end power thru the flight as well?
.
Also, can someone explain to me again how this device doesn't violate this rule:
.
4.4: Equipment Functions. Radio
control equipment shall be of the open loop type
(i.e. no electronic feedback from the model to the
ground). Auto pilot control utilizing inertia,
light, gravity, or any other type of terrestrial
reference is prohibited. Automatic control
sequencing (preprogramming) or automatic
control timing devices are prohibited.

.
Since it sits between the recevier and ESC and automatically sequences a preprogrammed adjustment to the throttle signal without input from the pilot during the duration of the flight, I can't think of a more clear violation of this rule.
.
Just sayin' . .
.

1) There is no electronic feedback from the model to the ground.
2) It is not an autopilot using…
3) It is not an automatic sequencing or control timing device.

One could write a rule to prohibit it but my advice is to remove all of these rules and let's have some fun. No lawyers desired.

Jim O

Keith

The Throttle-Tech effectively functions as a voltage regulator to ensure the motor sees the same voltage for a given throttle position regardless of battery charge level. It can be preset to the desired level, essentially the same function as an adjustable voltage regulator for the radio system used to ensure constant servo voltage. No violations of rule 4.4 in that.

.
I'm just trying to figure out what problem this device solves when you could just use the built-in governor feature of the ESC to maintain a consistent top-end thru a battery run?
.

I haven't tried the latest governors, early ones were fine at fixed throttle where the load changes (like a heli) but went nuts when the throttle was manipulated as we do in pattern. If you give the new ones a try, let us know how they work.

Roger that!!

Hi,
Started using the Throttle Tech this week. I am using a Contra with Neu motor. I am very impressed. The first thing I noticed was how smooth the throttle felt in the early part of schedule, the "Zoom" sensation was gone from the first few Manouveres and the throttle response stays the same for the entire flight. I have approx 10 flights on it and I am seeing my mAh usage drop from approx 3500-3700 to 3200-3400 for P15. The batteries are definitely cooler coming down than before.

I definitely think this is a step forward for our electric setups. Nice job guys :cool:

Niall

Some Jeti radio owners have used the new telemetry features in the latest software release to put together an emulated version of what the Throttle Tech does ... sort of
See post 10653 and the one at the bottom of the page
It's kind of an interesting use for a new function in the radio...

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showt...ht=TT&page=711

If this works, and I'm pretty sure it will, it will definitely violate the intent of Keith's rule. The question then becomes is it fair to ban a function that transmits data from the plane to the transmitter and allow the function if it is performed completely within the plane?

just askin'...

Jim O

.
Its not my rule, its the AMA's rule.
.
Not sure why it matters where the processing is done whether in the Tx or in a microprocessor in the plane. Both systems modify the open loop signal from the pilot to the ESC in a preprogrammed manner. Thus violating Rule 4.4.
.
But guys can "interpret" and "ignore" any rule they wish. Like you said, why bother?
.

Jim,

Good luck in getting the FAI to agree to any kind of sensible rule change, we are still weighing glow models without their fuel and electric models with.

Also as Keith says people can and do bend the rules as they wish, for example Jeti ESCs have a preprogramed braking facility which times the start, initial braking level, final braking level and ramp time fully automatically. When was the last time you saw someone penalised for using a Jeti controller despite the fact that the FAI Sporting Code says:

NOT Permitted: 2. Pre-programming devices to automatically perform a series of commands.

Malcolm

Hi Niall, the saving of power consumption is very impressive. May I know what motor and prop size you are using?

Hi Kevin,
I am using the Neu motor with the Brenner contra, 22x20 rear and 22x18 front prop. The model is the Accuracy Bipe..


Niall

Would this also work on cars?

After having read the whole thread and the manual, I think it should theoretically work, just the low throttle set point needs to be higher than the neutral position on the trigger (?)
I think the current consumption in cars is much more "spikey", will that make a difference for the device?

Are you racing? If so you don't want to limit the power. Think of the TT as a rev limiter. Are you sure you want to do that in a car?

Jim O

No racing, just driving for fun.

Problem I have is that the throttle feel more or less constantly changes while the pack voltage goes down over time, just like you aircraft guys. Losing some topspeed and power is no problem, it can accelerate from zero to 90mph in under 4seconds with half-depleted pack.
The car is very powerful with a Castle 1717 on 6s weighing only 3.6kg. Just when I have found out how much throttle I can apply to get a smooth and fast acceleration for a given type of asphalt/temperature/tire combination it will already be different. The line between just the right amount of wheelspin (something around 5-10% I guess) and way too much wheelspin (resulting in loss of traction and possible crash) is very thin.

Here's a video of it:
http://youtu.be/EVJkGJpTDKI

The Throttle-Tech should do what you want then. Looks like fun.

Jim