Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > RC Jets
Reload this Page >

Jeti CB 100 Mini Redundant System w/Telemetry, Dual Rx/Bat, Wireless Sw. (3 oz./75g)

Notices
RC Jets Discuss RC jets in this forum plus rc turbines and ducted fan power systems

Jeti CB 100 Mini Redundant System w/Telemetry, Dual Rx/Bat, Wireless Sw. (3 oz./75g)

Old 07-20-2017, 06:48 AM
  #1  
ZB
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: , FL
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes on 10 Posts
Default Jeti CB 100 Mini Redundant System w/Telemetry, Dual Rx/Bat, Wireless Sw. (3 oz./75g)

Jeti Central Box 100 Power Distribution Unit (Mini Dual Redundant System)


The Central Box 100 is a switchboard designed for the complete management of servos in a model with an emphasis on safety. The Central Box has a unique design that provides overload protection at each servo output. The Central Box can manage up to eight servos and fully supports the Jeti EX telemetry system. Up to two receivers with serial (PPM, EX Bus) output can be connected at the same time to the Central Box for complete RF signal redundancy.

With Jeti Duplex 2.4GHz DC/DS transmitters, the full potential of the Central Box can be used, such as an easy way to wirelessly configure the Servo Outputs, EX Telemetry, Fail-Safe Setting or Fast Servo Response.

Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1002.jpg
Views:	111
Size:	36.3 KB
ID:	2225088
Fail-Safe Setting
Switches ON/OFF of the Fail-Safe function. If the Fail-Safe function is deactivated, there is no signal generated in any Central Box outputs at the signal loss. If you activate the Fail Safe function, you can also select how the Central Box responds at signal loss for each of the individual outputs.

Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1003.jpg
Views:	52
Size:	29.0 KB
ID:	2225090
Servo Mapping
Servo No. - Assigning outputs of the transmitter to the Central Box outputs.
Group - Assigning specific output to the group of output impulses that will be generated from the receiver in the same time.

Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1004.jpg
Views:	51
Size:	39.0 KB
ID:	2225092
Duplex Telemetry
Temperature - Temperature of the Central Box
Shorted Outputs No. - Number of Overloaded Outputs
Voltage - Voltage of Individual Outputs of the Central Box
Current - Current Drawn from the Battery
Capacity - Capacity Taken from the Batteries

Jeti Central Box 100, Dual Receiver Batteries, DSM 10, Dual R3/RSW Receivers and R3/RSW Wireless Switch are Used for Building Mini Dual Redundant System.
Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1006.jpg
Views:	47
Size:	67.5 KB
ID:	2225094
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1002.jpg
Views:	42
Size:	36.3 KB
ID:	2225079   Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1003.jpg
Views:	37
Size:	29.0 KB
ID:	2225080   Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1004.jpg
Views:	32
Size:	39.0 KB
ID:	2225081   Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1006.jpg
Views:	65
Size:	67.5 KB
ID:	2225082   Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1002.jpg
Views:	34
Size:	36.3 KB
ID:	2225083   Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1003.jpg
Views:	31
Size:	29.0 KB
ID:	2225084   Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1004.jpg
Views:	36
Size:	39.0 KB
ID:	2225085   Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1002.jpg
Views:	26
Size:	36.3 KB
ID:	2225086  

Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1006.jpg
Views:	33
Size:	67.5 KB
ID:	2225087   Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1003.jpg
Views:	28
Size:	29.0 KB
ID:	2225089   Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1004.jpg
Views:	43
Size:	39.0 KB
ID:	2225091   Click image for larger version

Name:	jeti-central-box1006.jpg
Views:	116
Size:	67.5 KB
ID:	2225093  

Last edited by ZB; 07-20-2017 at 06:50 AM.
Old 07-21-2017, 02:18 AM
  #2  
Mark Vandervelden
 
Mark Vandervelden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Bournmouth UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 495
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Hi Guys
I have used the CB100 in smaller air frames in the past and they work fine but cant see me using them again any time soon.

The reasen why is that I found economically they make no real sence and ergonomically give very "very" little advantage.

From the economic point of view the CB100 costs $119 (£90) a pair of R3 receivers are $130 (R-Sats in europe £110) then a DSM10 at $69 (£50) adds up to $318 (£250)

Were as the CB200 will give you battery redundacy, 15ch or 12ch+3x Ext outputs or combernation off for $265 (£213) giving you at least an extra 7ch for $53 lower cost?The CB200 will also be far more useful for the next project down the line that may well have more than just 8ch?

Ergonomically, even though the CB200 is twice the size of the CB100 it is still very small at only 63x38x17mm and extremely light at only 30 grams!

If the CB100 could be offered at a combo price with 2x R3 or R-Sats (perhaps even with a DSM10) down to a point were it makes economic sense it might be viable?

Last edited by Mark Vandervelden; 07-22-2017 at 01:53 AM.
Old 07-21-2017, 02:51 AM
  #3  
F1 Rocket
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Melbourne, FL
Posts: 584
Likes: 0
Received 47 Likes on 31 Posts
Default

I've used the CB100 in several airplanes but only with a single pack. This is where the real space and weight saving are. Using the available ports in the pair of R3's allows up to 14 outputs. This is IMO the perfect setup for the smaller jets. I'm comfortable with a single pack especially in these airplanes. In fact I use the CB100 setup in my DA70 powered 93" AJ Laser. Everything is run from the CB100 including the ignition.
Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6283.JPG
Views:	198
Size:	2.36 MB
ID:	2225145  

Last edited by F1 Rocket; 07-21-2017 at 02:54 AM.
Old 07-21-2017, 05:52 AM
  #4  
wfield0455
My Feedback: (7)
 
wfield0455's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Holliston, MA
Posts: 1,299
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by F1 Rocket
I've used the CB100 in several airplanes but only with a single pack. This is where the real space and weight saving are. Using the available ports in the pair of R3's allows up to 14 outputs. This is IMO the perfect setup for the smaller jets. I'm comfortable with a single pack especially in these airplanes. In fact I use the CB100 setup in my DA70 powered 93" AJ Laser. Everything is run from the CB100 including the ignition.
Danny, according to the CB100/200 manual the Rx1, Rx2 and EXT1 ports aren't current protected and have a 300 ma MAX rating. As a result nothing should be connected to the servo ports of the receivers connected to a Central Box if it will cause the load to increase beyond 300ma as it will DESTROY the central box. Unfortunately I found this out first hand..
Old 07-21-2017, 05:54 AM
  #5  
Mark Vandervelden
 
Mark Vandervelden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Bournmouth UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 495
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by F1 Rocket
I've used the CB100 in several airplanes but only with a single pack. This is where the real space and weight saving are. Using the available ports in the pair of R3's allows up to 14 outputs. This is IMO the perfect setup for the smaller jets. I'm comfortable with a single pack especially in these airplanes. In fact I use the CB100 setup in my DA70 powered 93" AJ Laser. Everything is run from the CB100 including the ignition.
Hi F1, Thanks for the post , nice neat install in the pic.

I must mention that probably the single biggest reason for loss of control of an RC aircraft now and in the past has been battery failure.
With so many available and proven battery redundancy systems available its simply crazy not to take advantage of them.

There is "no weight or space saving" using a single battery as a battery's capacity is directly proportionate to its weight.
In other words a battery of a given capacity weighs "virtually" the same as two battery's of half its capacity but ends up giving the same capacity overall.

Using a smaller battery rarely saves weight, I cant remember the last time battery's were not useful in adjusting the models CG, in many cases I end up using a far bigger battery than is necessary just to help attain the correct CG.

Only using a single R3 with a CB100 will save you just 6g that realy is not very much at all but denies you one of the most desirable features of the Jeti system ie "Duel path"
If you realy need to save space and can not fit a CB200 you would be much better off using a dedicated Rx with an R3 as a secondary Rx and then be able to use Duel Path all be it without the overload feature of a CB100.

Plugging extra servos into an R3 that is being used as a Sat Rx is not a good idea at all, certainly not a single R3 as its your only RF connection to the Tx were if its compromised would result in total loss! If there were two R3 RXs being used R2 perhaps could have some very low power items plugged in to it leaving R1 as an un-compromised RF connection but I would not recommend that ether. Using an sat Rx for more servo outputs were the CB100 has run out may give you the extra channels you need but a better still use the CB200.

You may have had many successful flights with your IC engines ignition plugged directly in to your RF system, shearing its battery but this is defiantly not a good idea at all.I know of no R/C or Engine manufacturer that would recommend or endorse this practice.

We all have our own way of doing things and will get varying levels of success and I wish you many more successful flights but I can not endorse the setup you have shown us and sincerely recommend others do not follow suite.

Last edited by Mark Vandervelden; 07-22-2017 at 02:02 AM.
Old 07-21-2017, 07:23 AM
  #6  
F1 Rocket
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Melbourne, FL
Posts: 584
Likes: 0
Received 47 Likes on 31 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by wfield0455
Danny, according to the CB100/200 manual the Rx1, Rx2 and EXT1 ports aren't current protected and have a 300 ma MAX rating. As a result nothing should be connected to the servo ports of the receivers connected to a Central Box if it will cause the load to increase beyond 300ma as it will DESTROY the central box. Unfortunately I found this out first hand..
When connecting devices to the RX servo ports we add a lead from one of the CB's servo ports to the RX. We do the same when connecting a Cortex Pro.This supplies the additional power needed and is approved by Jeti.
Old 07-21-2017, 07:52 AM
  #7  
F1 Rocket
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Melbourne, FL
Posts: 584
Likes: 0
Received 47 Likes on 31 Posts
Default

[QUOTE=Mark Vandervelden;12353754]

Hi F1, Thanks for the post , nice neat install in the pic.

I must mention that probably the single biggest reason for loss of control of an RC aircraft now and in the past has been battery failure.
With so many available and proven battery redundancy systems available its simply crazy not to take advantage of them.

There is "no weight or space saving" using a single battery as a battery's capacity is directly proportionate to its weight.
In other words a battery of a given capacity weighs "virtually" the same as two battery's of half its capacity but ends up giving the same capacity overall.

I cant remember the last time battery's were not useful in adjusting the models CG, in many cases I end up useing a far bigger battery than is necessary just to help attain the correct CG.

[/QUOTE}

Everyone has their own experiences. My experience in 40+ years of playing with flying model toys is that most battery issues went away with NiCad and NiMH type cells. I've always taken care of my stuff and never have had a battery related issue that wasn't a direct result of me not charging the thing in the first place. Today's battery tech is pretty good. This combined with the active feedback given via the radio is enough for me but people should do their own testing and adjust their equipment accordingly. I prefer the simplicity of the single pack. In fact the main reason I use dual packs with the CB200 is its usually easier to fit two small packs in place of a big one. Plus the CB200 is already setup for that


Only using a single R3 with a CB100 will save you just 6g that realy is not very much at all but denies you one of the most desirable features of the Jeti system ie "Duel path"
If you realy need to save space and can not fit a CB200 you would be much better off using a dedicated Rx with an R3 as a secondary Rx and then be able to use Duel Path all be it without the overload feature of a CB100.


The CB100 has dual RX ports. Dual Path? No problem

Plugging extra servos into an R3 that is being used as a Sat Rx is not a good idea at all, certainly not a single R3 as its your only RF connection to the Tx!
If there were two R3 RXs being used one perhaps could have some very low power items pluged in to it leaving the other as an un-compromised RF connection but I would not recommend that ether. Using an Rx with more servo outputs instead of the CB100 will give you any extra channels you need or better still use the CB200.


Please see my reply in the previous post

You may have had many successful flights with your IC engines ignition plugged directly in to your RF system, shearing its battery but this is defiantly not a good idea at all.
I know of no R/C or Engine manufacturer that would recommend or endorse this practice.

We all have our own way of doing things and will get varying levels of success and I wish you many more successful flights but I can not endorse the setup you have shown us and sincerely recommend others do not follow suite.
The device I use for this is an IBEC from Tech Aero. Used by many. Works great. Never a problem. But as I said before; people should do their own testing and adjust their equipment accordingly.
Old 07-21-2017, 08:56 AM
  #8  
Mark Vandervelden
 
Mark Vandervelden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Bournmouth UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 495
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Hi Danny

"With so many available and proven battery redundancy systems available its simply crazy not to take advantage of them".

Yes battery's are much more reliable now than the ones that you and I were using in the seventy's but I think with our much more sophisticated and more demanding airframes costing from several hundreds of dollars to several thousands of dollars a single battery install is simply not worth the risk to the model or life and limb in this century.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The CB100 has dual RX ports. Dual Path? No problem

Yes I am aware of that, sorry if I assumed you had only used just one R3 which would be daft to say the least, but now your at the same cost as a CB200!
Why not simply use a CB200 that is my point, the space and weight saving is negligible, you gain extra servo outputs instead of risking using the ones on the R3 Sats, you get a free battery backup system and extra Ext out puts, its a no brainier?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Everything is run from the CB100 including the ignition"

"The device I use for this is an IBEC from Tech Aero."

You did not mention the IBEC in the first post and it implied you plugged the ignition directly to the CB100, a better setup for shure but I still would not "Share a battery" its simply a short cut to many.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I still stand by "not plugin servos" or anything else in to the R3 its simply not worth the risk, 300ma is very little currant and the Rx (Ex) lead is not replaced by a "fly lead" but simply placed in parallel with it. If you can cut one of the leads from the Ex port that might be a option but its still all an unnecessary "risk"

This of course is not a chosen option here in Europe so not a risk taken as we are inclined to use the dedicated R-Sats that simply do not have servo outputs.

Last edited by Mark Vandervelden; 07-22-2017 at 01:49 AM.
Old 07-21-2017, 04:36 PM
  #9  
VK96
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Hooksett, NH
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by F1 Rocket
When connecting devices to the RX servo ports we add a lead from one of the CB's servo ports to the RX. We do the same when connecting a Cortex Pro.This supplies the additional power needed and is approved by Jeti.
While trying to troubleshoot the issue I spoke with you about today Danny a question came to mind. Do the ports of the Cortex Pro share a common power bus? Just thinking that if the patch lead to port 4 exceeded the limitation for the RX ports of the CB100/200 it may cause an issue. Chris
Old 07-21-2017, 06:40 PM
  #10  
gooseF22
 
gooseF22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Posts: 2,603
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by F1 Rocket
When connecting devices to the RX servo ports we add a lead from one of the CB's servo ports to the RX. We do the same when connecting a Cortex Pro.This supplies the additional power needed and is approved by Jeti.
Guys, IMO this is extremely important. Especially on the PRO IMO... because 2 diodes in parallel do not carry double the current. ALL the current tends to do through 1 diode... So if you have just RX1 and RX2 providing power to the PRO and 2 R3's, you could exceed the power capability of the ports.. ITs estimated that one port can hold 200mA, but we really don't know, thats just what its spec to.. so Logic tells you that Rx1 and 2 could do 400 mA, but thats not the case.. Because the Pro has a common bus, all the power would tend to travel through one of the ports until it fails, then the other.

If the Pro exceeds that current capability of one port, PLUS, the current of both Receivers all riding on one port. This is why the jumper is so important.. It will carry all the load because the voltage is higher, and it can do it with no problem.

Cut the signal lead and put those jumper wires in there..I wish I could put out an Air Directive for this..

VK, you need to check each RX port of the CB200 to make sure they function now, separately.. Just unplug RX2, and the jumper( if installed), and see if RX 1 is powered (rx 2 will be powered too, but won't be talking to the CB200. Then switch ports, and it should relink.. If it doesn't, take out the Pro and set it up the old way and trouble shoot from there. It will either work or it won't.. Wayne found this out, and could elaborate

Last edited by gooseF22; 07-21-2017 at 06:49 PM.
Old 07-21-2017, 06:41 PM
  #11  
gooseF22
 
gooseF22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Posts: 2,603
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by VK96
While trying to troubleshoot the issue I spoke with you about today Danny a question came to mind. Do the ports of the Cortex Pro share a common power bus? Just thinking that if the patch lead to port 4 exceeded the limitation for the RX ports of the CB100/200 it may cause an issue. Chris
Yes, its a common bus.. see my post above

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.