receiver setup
12-18-2004 | 09:04 PM
#1
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (11)
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Smithfield, VA
receiver setup
i had a revelation this evening, and i think i may have screwed up. my plan was to install 2 r148dp receivers in my 35% carden extra. here was the setup:3
rx 1
1 - right aileron 1
2 -
3 - throttle
4 - rudder
5 - right aileron 2
6 -
7 -
8 - left elevator
rx 2
1 -
2 - right elevator
3 -
4 - rudder
5 -
6 - left aileron 1
7 - left aileron 2
8 -
the empty slots are open and can be used for batts.
i had planned on plugging all 4 aileron servos into the rxs and then mixing them together for the right and left sides. should i use a matchbox instead?? i was told its pretty easy to use 2 aileron servos per surface mixed with basic center and endpoint adjustments.
the rudder is a pull-pull using a swb self adjusting tray, so i can plug both those into ch4 without worrying about adjustments.
SO, the question is where do i plug in my choke servo??? should i have bought 149dp's instead??
thanks,
tony
rx 1
1 - right aileron 1
2 -
3 - throttle
4 - rudder
5 - right aileron 2
6 -
7 -
8 - left elevator
rx 2
1 -
2 - right elevator
3 -
4 - rudder
5 -
6 - left aileron 1
7 - left aileron 2
8 -
the empty slots are open and can be used for batts.
i had planned on plugging all 4 aileron servos into the rxs and then mixing them together for the right and left sides. should i use a matchbox instead?? i was told its pretty easy to use 2 aileron servos per surface mixed with basic center and endpoint adjustments.
the rudder is a pull-pull using a swb self adjusting tray, so i can plug both those into ch4 without worrying about adjustments.
SO, the question is where do i plug in my choke servo??? should i have bought 149dp's instead??
thanks,
tony
12-19-2004 | 01:58 AM
#2
Senior Member
My Feedback: (7)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Glen Robertson, ON, CANADA
RE: receiver setup
ORIGINAL: vatechguy3
i had a revelation this evening, and i think i may have screwed up. my plan was to install 2 r148dp receivers in my 35% carden extra. here was the setup:3
rx 1
1 - right aileron 1
2 -
3 - throttle
4 - rudder
5 - right aileron 2
6 -
7 -
8 - left elevator
rx 2
1 -
2 - right elevator
3 -
4 - rudder
5 -
6 - left aileron 1
7 - left aileron 2
8 -
the empty slots are open and can be used for batts.
i had planned on plugging all 4 aileron servos into the rxs and then mixing them together for the right and left sides. should i use a matchbox instead?? i was told its pretty easy to use 2 aileron servos per surface mixed with basic center and endpoint adjustments.
the rudder is a pull-pull using a swb self adjusting tray, so i can plug both those into ch4 without worrying about adjustments.
SO, the question is where do i plug in my choke servo??? should i have bought 149dp's instead??
thanks,
tony
i had a revelation this evening, and i think i may have screwed up. my plan was to install 2 r148dp receivers in my 35% carden extra. here was the setup:3
rx 1
1 - right aileron 1
2 -
3 - throttle
4 - rudder
5 - right aileron 2
6 -
7 -
8 - left elevator
rx 2
1 -
2 - right elevator
3 -
4 - rudder
5 -
6 - left aileron 1
7 - left aileron 2
8 -
the empty slots are open and can be used for batts.
i had planned on plugging all 4 aileron servos into the rxs and then mixing them together for the right and left sides. should i use a matchbox instead?? i was told its pretty easy to use 2 aileron servos per surface mixed with basic center and endpoint adjustments.
the rudder is a pull-pull using a swb self adjusting tray, so i can plug both those into ch4 without worrying about adjustments.
SO, the question is where do i plug in my choke servo??? should i have bought 149dp's instead??
thanks,
tony
With two receivers, you should be able to retain control on everything if and when you lose a receiver either with a bad crystall or for battery power.
And guess what, I know how to do that.
Roger
Forgues Research
12-19-2004 | 09:48 AM
#4
My Feedback: (162)
RE: receiver setup
I use hitec servos and a programmer so that I don't need the matchboxes etc. Here is how I have my setup. As you can see this greatly simplifies everything. I use y's to the rudder servos and to the ailerons in the wing so that there's only 1 extension being plugged in to the receiver. If you loose 1 receiver (which is the least likely possible failure of everything in the plane) you will still have control over half of the plane, aileron/elevator which you can still land with. I've seen it done 2 times in one meet. The cause wasn't a failed receiver though, it was a bad battery connection where it plugged into the receiver, loose connection. The plane was landed fine both times.
rx 1
1 - right aileron
2 - left elevator
3 - throttle
4 - rudder
5 -
6 -
7 -
8 -
rx 2
1 -
2 - right elevator
3 -
4 -
5 - choke
6 - left aileron
7 -
8 -
rx 1
1 - right aileron
2 - left elevator
3 - throttle
4 - rudder
5 -
6 -
7 -
8 -
rx 2
1 -
2 - right elevator
3 -
4 -
5 - choke
6 - left aileron
7 -
8 -
12-19-2004 | 11:42 AM
#5
My Feedback: (38)
RE: receiver setup
Flying half an airplane is no false sense of security, its easy, and flies better than one would think. So I would call it a good way to go.
Tony, put your choke on rx2.. you have 4 slots open there. From how Im seeing it you have plenty of room for everything.. or am I not seeing it right?
Tony, put your choke on rx2.. you have 4 slots open there. From how Im seeing it you have plenty of room for everything.. or am I not seeing it right?
12-19-2004 | 11:53 AM
#6
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (11)
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,056
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Smithfield, VA
RE: receiver setup
john,
the open slots on rx2 are used on rx1. there aren't any open slots that i could use to control the choke servo.
i have been looking at the equalizer II from smart-fly, the jr matchbox and the futaba msa-10. anyone ever used these to match dual surface servos??
how do they work?? how do you mount them??
thanks
tony
the open slots on rx2 are used on rx1. there aren't any open slots that i could use to control the choke servo.
i have been looking at the equalizer II from smart-fly, the jr matchbox and the futaba msa-10. anyone ever used these to match dual surface servos??
how do they work?? how do you mount them??
thanks
tony
12-19-2004 | 12:05 PM
#7
My Feedback: (162)
RE: receiver setup
Hi Tony,
With the hitecs I'm able to run my receivers like the diagram I listed. I'm not sure but if you use the matchbox's you may be able to run the same way and free up a lot of channels. You can see how much simpler my setup is as compared to the setup you listed. I'm running this way in my comp arf 40% extra.
If you can use a matchbox to link both aileron servos together you'll free up some channels. One thing I'm carefull about is putting 2 servos that are on 1 surface to 2 different channels using a program mix. On my futaba anyway, there's just a little delay between the servos using a mix that can cause a bind which is exactly what you don't want with the digital servos. For example. If you have a u can do with independant elevator servos and you use a second channel for the extra elevator servo. If you stand behind the plane and watch both elevator half's as they move (move the surface medium to fast speed) you'll notice a lag/slight delay in one elevator half. This will put a bind on the servo...... I mention this as I see you have all of the aileron servos on independant channels and I would also be a little concerned even about the rudder servos. Even though they are on channel 4 there can still be enough difference in receivers to put a bind on the servos. Just my .02 cents
Jon
With the hitecs I'm able to run my receivers like the diagram I listed. I'm not sure but if you use the matchbox's you may be able to run the same way and free up a lot of channels. You can see how much simpler my setup is as compared to the setup you listed. I'm running this way in my comp arf 40% extra.
If you can use a matchbox to link both aileron servos together you'll free up some channels. One thing I'm carefull about is putting 2 servos that are on 1 surface to 2 different channels using a program mix. On my futaba anyway, there's just a little delay between the servos using a mix that can cause a bind which is exactly what you don't want with the digital servos. For example. If you have a u can do with independant elevator servos and you use a second channel for the extra elevator servo. If you stand behind the plane and watch both elevator half's as they move (move the surface medium to fast speed) you'll notice a lag/slight delay in one elevator half. This will put a bind on the servo...... I mention this as I see you have all of the aileron servos on independant channels and I would also be a little concerned even about the rudder servos. Even though they are on channel 4 there can still be enough difference in receivers to put a bind on the servos. Just my .02 cents
Jon
12-19-2004 | 05:07 PM
#9
Senior Member
My Feedback: (34)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Virginia Beach,
VA
RE: receiver setup
Tony,
If you run matchboxes in each wing, you will free up two channels which will allow for the choke servo and possibly for smoke down the road if you decide on that option.
If you go with the matchboxes, I have found donald's hobby to be the cheapest. You can get a two pack for around $90 or lurk on RCUniverse's marketplace and pickup a set for even cheaper.
The other option is to simply not use a choke servo. Eliminates the extra weight, and keeps it simple.
If you run matchboxes in each wing, you will free up two channels which will allow for the choke servo and possibly for smoke down the road if you decide on that option.
If you go with the matchboxes, I have found donald's hobby to be the cheapest. You can get a two pack for around $90 or lurk on RCUniverse's marketplace and pickup a set for even cheaper.
The other option is to simply not use a choke servo. Eliminates the extra weight, and keeps it simple.
12-19-2004 | 07:46 PM
#11
RE: receiver setup
ORIGINAL: AEROSHELDON
I'm thinking of the Emcotec unit for 2 rx's that controls ALL servos if one rx poops out. Anyone have experience with that unit? It will be for my Carden 35% also.
I'm thinking of the Emcotec unit for 2 rx's that controls ALL servos if one rx poops out. Anyone have experience with that unit? It will be for my Carden 35% also.
ORIGINAL: AEROSHELDON
I'm thinking of the Emcotec unit for 2 RX's that controls ALL servos if one rx poops out. Anyone have experience with that unit? It will be for my Carden 35% also.
I'm thinking of the Emcotec unit for 2 RX's that controls ALL servos if one rx poops out. Anyone have experience with that unit? It will be for my Carden 35% also.
I am still waiting for the dual transmitter set up. I have never had a RX fail, but I have had 2 TX's die in my hands (encoder board failed in flight in one, fuse blew in another). I have also seen two guys literally have the gimbals come off in their hands !! But no one ever obsess about TX failure. Too rare I guess.
One thing that does amuse me is the terrible installations I see. RXs that are strapped to wing tubes, stuck to fuse sides and such. Oh yeah, a little Velcro is used, but that hardly insolates the vibration of the engine. It intrigues me that we used to wrap our RXs like they were made of glass when we flew smaller planes. Now we treat them like they are indestructible and then obsess about using two for redundancy sake.
Oh well. The Emcotec stuff is solid and like I siad, if I really felt the need for dual RXs this is the solution I'd use.
12-19-2004 | 07:55 PM
#12
Senior Member
My Feedback: (7)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Glen Robertson, ON, CANADA
RE: receiver setup
For true dual redundancy using two receivers, you have to have all controls work on either receivers should you lose one and this is what I offer.
Roger
Roger
12-19-2004 | 08:01 PM
#13
RE: receiver setup
ORIGINAL: aerografixs
For true dual redundancy using two receivers, you have to have all controls work on either receivers should you lose one and this is what I offer.
Roger
For true dual redundancy using two receivers, you have to have all controls work on either receivers should you lose one and this is what I offer.
Roger
12-19-2004 | 08:45 PM
#14
Senior Member
My Feedback: (7)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Glen Robertson, ON, CANADA
RE: receiver setup
ORIGINAL: aresti2004
How is your product different from the Emcotec box??
ORIGINAL: aerografixs
For true dual redundancy using two receivers, you have to have all controls work on either receivers should you lose one and this is what I offer.
Roger
For true dual redundancy using two receivers, you have to have all controls work on either receivers should you lose one and this is what I offer.
Roger
Try losing a receiver with Emotec.
Roger
Forgues Research
12-19-2004 | 09:36 PM
#15
My Feedback: (9)
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Findlay,
OH
RE: receiver setup
sounds like you need to research the product a little more...
the dpsi twin unit will automatically fail-over to a 2nd rx should the first fail for any reason...including if the rx has gone into fail-safe for a set period of time......and all channels are transferred.
the dpsi twin unit will automatically fail-over to a 2nd rx should the first fail for any reason...including if the rx has gone into fail-safe for a set period of time......and all channels are transferred.
ORIGINAL: aerografixs
Try losing a receiver with Emotec.
Roger
Forgues Research
ORIGINAL: aresti2004
How is your product different from the Emcotec box??
ORIGINAL: aerografixs
For true dual redundancy using two receivers, you have to have all controls work on either receivers should you lose one and this is what I offer.
Roger
For true dual redundancy using two receivers, you have to have all controls work on either receivers should you lose one and this is what I offer.
Roger
Try losing a receiver with Emotec.
Roger
Forgues Research
12-19-2004 | 09:47 PM
#16
Senior Member
My Feedback: (7)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Glen Robertson, ON, CANADA
RE: receiver setup
ORIGINAL: jmiracle
sounds like you need to research the product a little more...
the dpsi twin unit will automatically fail-over to a 2nd rx should the first fail for any reason...including if the rx has gone into fail-safe for a set period of time......and all channels are transferred.
sounds like you need to research the product a little more...
the dpsi twin unit will automatically fail-over to a 2nd rx should the first fail for any reason...including if the rx has gone into fail-safe for a set period of time......and all channels are transferred.
ORIGINAL: aerografixs
Try losing a receiver with Emotec.
Roger
Forgues Research
ORIGINAL: aresti2004
How is your product different from the Emcotec box??
ORIGINAL: aerografixs
For true dual redundancy using two receivers, you have to have all controls work on either receivers should you lose one and this is what I offer.
Roger
For true dual redundancy using two receivers, you have to have all controls work on either receivers should you lose one and this is what I offer.
Roger
Try losing a receiver with Emotec.
Roger
Forgues Research
no servos connected to the receivers.
Roger
Forgues Research
12-19-2004 | 10:41 PM
#17
My Feedback: (17)
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Beaverlodge,
AB, CANADA
RE: receiver setup
Why not buy the new power box and forget the 2nd receiver and matchboxes altogether.I believe it's a simpler and better setup.Just my $0.02.I have the powerbox and love it.
Jack
Jack
12-19-2004 | 10:41 PM
#18
RE: receiver setup
I asked you a specific question about your device. I was hoping to get a declarative statement detailing the differences and benefits of your device. I guess that was too much to ask for. I was truly only trying to get information.
12-19-2004 | 11:09 PM
#19
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Canberra, AUSTRALIA
RE: receiver setup
Vatechguy3
I am using a 6ch on the right side and a 9ch rx on the left.
The 9ch rx has the choke in ch 9 and the battery in the DSC port.
Works fine
Buzz
I am using a 6ch on the right side and a 9ch rx on the left.
The 9ch rx has the choke in ch 9 and the battery in the DSC port.
Works fine
Buzz
12-20-2004 | 07:29 AM
#20
My Feedback: (9)
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Findlay,
OH
RE: receiver setup
OK...I'm glad you brought this up...cause I have had a nagging question in the back of my mind about this for some time.
(Also, I'm not trying to start arguments...just gathering information....it's also not a debate between two products....both attempt to do the same thing through different means)...
anyway. so if we don't look at the redundancy aspect of your product....and just look at the fiber optic portion....are we really gaining much since we're still left with 2 copper wires for power?
I understand the fiber-optic signal line concept and agree its the best way I've seen yet to truely eliminate noise "IN THE SIGNAL WIRE"....but isn't it still possible to pick-up RF noise through the remaining 2 power wires running to each servo?
Are the power wires isolated in such a way inside the RX that any RF noise picked up is not an issue? This is the only explaination I can come up with that makes any sense to me.
If that's the case, then your product makes a lot of sense to me...and I have considered it's use in my 35%'s. It would probably be used with the emcotec unit....the emcotec box offers a lot of other features I want and need beyond redundancy and signal filtering.
OK, but mine replaces all signal wires with fiber Optic cable (optical isolation) and they are good for up to 200 ft.
no servos connected to the receivers.
Roger
Forgues Research
[/quote]
(Also, I'm not trying to start arguments...just gathering information....it's also not a debate between two products....both attempt to do the same thing through different means)...
anyway. so if we don't look at the redundancy aspect of your product....and just look at the fiber optic portion....are we really gaining much since we're still left with 2 copper wires for power?
I understand the fiber-optic signal line concept and agree its the best way I've seen yet to truely eliminate noise "IN THE SIGNAL WIRE"....but isn't it still possible to pick-up RF noise through the remaining 2 power wires running to each servo?
Are the power wires isolated in such a way inside the RX that any RF noise picked up is not an issue? This is the only explaination I can come up with that makes any sense to me.
If that's the case, then your product makes a lot of sense to me...and I have considered it's use in my 35%'s. It would probably be used with the emcotec unit....the emcotec box offers a lot of other features I want and need beyond redundancy and signal filtering.
OK, but mine replaces all signal wires with fiber Optic cable (optical isolation) and they are good for up to 200 ft.
no servos connected to the receivers.
Roger
Forgues Research
[/quote]
12-20-2004 | 10:12 AM
#22
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Jonkoping, SWEDEN
RE: receiver setup
Hi guys!
Have a look at this link (a new range of synthesized receivers with some really innovative features for dual receiver set-ups).
[link=http://www.acteurope.com/html/funktionen_dds-10.html]http://www.acteurope.com/html/funktionen_dds-10.html[/link]
IMHO this is the way to go! I'm in no way affiliated with the company but I have ordered two DSL-8 receivers that I am looking forward to put to use.
/Red B.
Have a look at this link (a new range of synthesized receivers with some really innovative features for dual receiver set-ups).
[link=http://www.acteurope.com/html/funktionen_dds-10.html]http://www.acteurope.com/html/funktionen_dds-10.html[/link]
IMHO this is the way to go! I'm in no way affiliated with the company but I have ordered two DSL-8 receivers that I am looking forward to put to use.
/Red B.
12-20-2004 | 11:28 AM
#23
Senior Member
My Feedback: (7)
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Glen Robertson, ON, CANADA
RE: receiver setup
ORIGINAL: jmiracle
OK...I'm glad you brought this up...cause I have had a nagging question in the back of my mind about this for some time.
(Also, I'm not trying to start arguments...just gathering information....it's also not a debate between two products....both attempt to do the same thing through different means)...
anyway. so if we don't look at the redundancy aspect of your product....and just look at the fiber optic portion....are we really gaining much since we're still left with 2 copper wires for power?
The culprit is allways the signal wire and not the power wire. You can use the ignition battery to power your throttle servo with the fiber Optics as long as this servo is in the engine box. This way, the only thing going back to the receiver is the a light beam going through the fiber optic cable.
I understand the fiber-optic signal line concept and agree its the best way I've seen yet to truely eliminate noise "IN THE SIGNAL WIRE"....but isn't it still possible to pick-up RF noise through the remaining 2 power wires running to each servo?
Again, no because with this setup the decoders/servos have there own battery so there is no physical connections between the servos and the receiver/s. Another benifit is if your wild with your 3D and draw a lot of current with the servos, the receiver/s never know it since you don't have any servos connected to the receiver/s. Also the receivers have a much cleaner signal since they operate in a much more linear fashion. You can power the receiver with as little as a 300 ma battery and still be good for 10 hours or so.
Are the power wires isolated in such a way inside the RX that any RF noise picked up is not an issue? This is the only explaination I can come up with that makes any sense to me.
Again check the last statement. Your servos are not connected to the receiver.
Another thing to consider, you signal voltage coming out of the receiver is at 4 volts at best, and this why a lot of people have been having problems with ganging up more then 1 servo on the one extension. But the Fiber Optic setup, you get the full 6 volts on the signal right at the servos and this has been tested with 7 large digital servos with no ill effects whatesoever.
If that's the case, then your product makes a lot of sense to me...and I have considered it's use in my 35%'s. It would probably be used with the emcotec unit....the emcotec box offers a lot of other features I want and need beyond redundancy and signal filtering.
Read this that was posted right here in RCU not long ago in the reviews
http://www.crbest.com/fiberoptics/
OK, but mine replaces all signal wires with fiber Optic cable (optical isolation) and they are good for up to 200 ft.
no servos connected to the receivers.
Roger
Forgues Research
OK...I'm glad you brought this up...cause I have had a nagging question in the back of my mind about this for some time.
(Also, I'm not trying to start arguments...just gathering information....it's also not a debate between two products....both attempt to do the same thing through different means)...
anyway. so if we don't look at the redundancy aspect of your product....and just look at the fiber optic portion....are we really gaining much since we're still left with 2 copper wires for power?
The culprit is allways the signal wire and not the power wire. You can use the ignition battery to power your throttle servo with the fiber Optics as long as this servo is in the engine box. This way, the only thing going back to the receiver is the a light beam going through the fiber optic cable.
I understand the fiber-optic signal line concept and agree its the best way I've seen yet to truely eliminate noise "IN THE SIGNAL WIRE"....but isn't it still possible to pick-up RF noise through the remaining 2 power wires running to each servo?
Again, no because with this setup the decoders/servos have there own battery so there is no physical connections between the servos and the receiver/s. Another benifit is if your wild with your 3D and draw a lot of current with the servos, the receiver/s never know it since you don't have any servos connected to the receiver/s. Also the receivers have a much cleaner signal since they operate in a much more linear fashion. You can power the receiver with as little as a 300 ma battery and still be good for 10 hours or so.
Are the power wires isolated in such a way inside the RX that any RF noise picked up is not an issue? This is the only explaination I can come up with that makes any sense to me.
Again check the last statement. Your servos are not connected to the receiver.
Another thing to consider, you signal voltage coming out of the receiver is at 4 volts at best, and this why a lot of people have been having problems with ganging up more then 1 servo on the one extension. But the Fiber Optic setup, you get the full 6 volts on the signal right at the servos and this has been tested with 7 large digital servos with no ill effects whatesoever.
If that's the case, then your product makes a lot of sense to me...and I have considered it's use in my 35%'s. It would probably be used with the emcotec unit....the emcotec box offers a lot of other features I want and need beyond redundancy and signal filtering.
Read this that was posted right here in RCU not long ago in the reviews
http://www.crbest.com/fiberoptics/
OK, but mine replaces all signal wires with fiber Optic cable (optical isolation) and they are good for up to 200 ft.
no servos connected to the receivers.
Roger
Forgues Research
