Carrying on from this thread http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php?topic=2111.0 (http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php?topic=2111.0)
I thought it would be as well to create a thread specifically for UK use of the OpenLRS for 459MHz.
OpenLRS would be better called OpenUHF in my opinion as at 100 mW transmitted power, 'Long Range System' it is not!
It is open source, which means you can change anything you like in the software (firmware) unlike all others which are closed source and you cannot change any of the functionality.
459MHz is completely legal in the UK for airborne model control
http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html (http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html)
The Tx and Rx can be bought from here
http://flytron.com/16-openlrs (http://flytron.com/16-openlrs)
So for under 150 dollars delivered, it's not a bad deal for 1 Tx and 1 Rx.
If you buy an Rx, check which kind of antenna connector you want (there are 2 types).
Or, from your favourite UK store...
http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/long-range-control-systems (http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/long-range-control-systems)
Forum with all the OpenLRS info:
http://forum.flytron.com/viewforum.php?f=7 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewforum.php?f=7)
I have now tested my first Tx and Rx on the bench and can get it to 459MHz without hardware modification.
As yet, I haven't flown it, but that will happen as soon as I can get some free time!
There are several nice features of the sysem that will develop further in the near future.
One of the novel things about this system is the ability of the receiver to become a transmitter (transceiver).
This will allow the Rx to Tx some info back to you whilst still receiving stick inputs.
It already has some basic additional functionality in that when you power up the Tx, it screams at you until you power up the Rx as the paired Rx transmits back to the Tx and tells it that it is alive and receiving valid data.
It has a basic RSSI feature, in as much as the Tx will beep 2 times per second if the Rx is receiving bad/incomplete data packets (eg in a weak signal scenario).
The Rx has an onboard i2C connection, so for example, you can add a Wii & Nunchuck controller directly to it (no need for additional controllers), barometer, telemetry etc.
More as it develops...
Nigel.
Latest default code is here:
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list)
I have modded my v1.08 code to set it to 459MHz:
Both the Tx and Rx software needs to be changed to equally match the changes.
NOTE: The Tx board and Rx board need 2 different cables for programming - for some reason, Flytron made the Tx & Rx board pinout different :+
------------------------------------
In the rfm22b tab,to set the band of operation to 450 - 459.9 MHz and 10kHz stepping
Stepping default values
The steps (channel spacing) are set in the rf22b.pde with the default line
_spi_write(0x7a, 0x06); // 60khz step size (10khz x value) // no hopping
So, for example, for 10kHz steps, I set:
_spi_write(0x7a, 0x01); // 10khz step size (10khz x value) // no hopping
Frequency default values:
// frequency formulation from Si4432 chip's datasheet
// original formulation is working with mHz values and floating numbers, I replaced them with kHz values.
frequency = frequency / 10;
frequency = frequency - 24000;
frequency = frequency - 19000; // 19 for 430–439.9 MHz band from datasheet
frequency = frequency * 64; // this is the Nominal Carrier Frequency (fc) value for register setting
For 459 MHz band use, change to as below:
// frequency formulation from Si4432 chip's datasheet
// original formulation is working with mHz values and floating numbers, I replaced them with kHz values.
frequency = frequency / 10;
frequency = frequency - 24000;
frequency = frequency - 21000; // 21 for 450–459.9 MHz band from datasheet
frequency = frequency * 64; // this is the Nominal Carrier Frequency (fc) value for register setting
This will correctly set the low band frequency register values 0x76 & 0x77
You also need to search for and change the following
_spi_write(0x75, 0x53);
and replace it with
_spi_write(0x75, 0x55);
------------------------------------
Then, in the config.h tab, change the default values from:
//######### TRANSMISSION VARIABLES ##########
#define CARRIER_FREQUENCY 435000 // 435Mhz startup frequency
#define FREQUENCY_HOPPING 1 // 1 = Enabled 0 = Disabled
To this for 459MHz
//######### TRANSMISSION VARIABLES ##########
#define CARRIER_FREQUENCY 459000 // 459 Mhz startup frequency
#define FREQUENCY_HOPPING 1 // 1 = Enabled 0 = Disabled
Also, the hopping channels can be defined in the config.h, for example, I have modifed mine:
//###### HOPPING CHANNELS #######
//Select the hopping channels between 0-255
// Default values are 13,54 and 23 for all transmitters and receivers, you should change it before your first flight for safety.
//Frequency = CARRIER_FREQUENCY + (StepSize(10khz) * Channel_Number)
static unsigned char hop_list[3] = {10,15,25};
The above gives me 459.100, 459.150 & 459.250 as my hopping channels.
It is NOT possible to get 25kHz steps, because the steps can only be set in 10kHz steps.
However, by setting the start frequency in config.h from 459MHz (as the above line in Transmission Variables, in red) to 459.025 (as in the line below, in blue) it is possible to get various steps of the allowed UK 459MHz frequencies using the line above for startup frequency
e.g.
#define CARRIER_FREQUENCY 459025 // 459.025 Mhz startup frequency
------------------------------------
I am open to correction as I am no software programmer !!
Nigel.
I made a simple quarter wave antenna for my Tx, similar to this
http://fpvlab.com/forums/showthread.php?382-Sander-style-(Ez)UHF-antennas (http://fpvlab.com/forums/showthread.php?382-Sander-style-(Ez)UHF-antennas)
For 459MHz, cut it to 163mm in length.
Mine is on a straight SMA connector as the right angled one is not suited to the OpenLRS module connector.
A simple dipole or turnstile antenna can also be made for the Rx which will perform better than the stock 'rubber duck' antennas.
Nigel.
Reserved - modifications
Sounds very promising, looking forward to your flight testing!
You managed to get it to 459 without hardware changes ? i thought the chip couldnt work that high up ?
Even more interesting now :)
Yes, it will go to 459MHz without hardware changes, BUT, I found it dropped a bit of power.
At 435MHz, I measured around 98mW output and at 459MHz I measured around 92mW output.
Simon contacted HopeRF and enquired about the suitability of the standard 430 module at 459MHz and they replied that they had tested it and it was 'OK'.
My take on that is that it is within 10% and therefore they deem that as 'OK'.
When I get a bit of time and my new glasses arrive ;D, I will change the modules components to better match the 459 output and report back.
Melih (Flytron inventor and supplier of this kit) is also going to test it at 459 and enquire of HopeRF about the 470 module (if HopeRF actually still produce it? ).
Nigel.
I don`t know your thoughts but 10mw is in my book an acceptable loss, especially at that high a frequency. Especially without the worry or hassle of changing board mounted components.
Can it run with a "emergency" or get out of trouble temporary high power mode ?
Looking forward to seeing how this works out. Wondering if you could get enough range to fly from Wales to Ireland (Specifically Fishgaurd to Rosslare) :+
BW
No Ian, the 100 mW limit is preset and you can't go past it.
It also Tx's at 50Hz (50 times per second) and this is how they keep the power consumption and heat levels down, which is why my cheapy frequency counter is thrown by it and I can't get it to lock on and give a reading.
I have a couple of PMR radios of similar frequency and power output and I can get a reading from them as they are 100% duty PA's (full output all the time) and they can get pretty warm and do flatten the batteries quickly if used agressively.
@ Badwolve1
60 miles on 100 mW is going to be difficult I can assure you, aside from the fact that an FPV spotter would be visually disadvantaged!
I'm also a radio amateur and at 433MHz (70cm band) I'd be struggling to make reliable contact with under 3 watts and would probably turn the wick up to my legally allowed limit of 400 watts :D
That's another good reason to get away from the 433MHz band for model control as you never know who'll be pointing their flame thrower in your direction.
Nigel.
UPDATE on 459MHz RF component conversion:
Got some time at the bench (it was raining, so what better to do!) and removed several components on the Tx board to better match the RF output at 459MHz.
Conclusion after 4 hours - no significant improvement was gained.
I measured the output at 435MHz before starting and again at 459MHz after modifications.
I calculated I'd gained a couple of milliwatts.
So, to sum up, I would not bother modifying the standard board and simply go with it as standard and accept the loss of around 6 milliwatts (unmodified, I get 98mW at 435 and 92mW at 459 and after mods, I got 94mW).
Melih at Flytron is also going to check the RF output at 459MHz and will enquire of HopeRF if they still make the 470MHz module, which is better suited to 459MHz.
Nigel.
I found out that David from rcexplorer.se has been an early tester of OpenLRS.
Look at the vid and you will see an OpenLRS mounted just behind the GoPro camera (no apparent issues at UHF ;) )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CPQgyGI0n4&feature=player_embedded#at=117 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CPQgyGI0n4&feature=player_embedded#at=117)
Nigel.
Very cool, wel done
At some point after I've actually learned to fly I may well be looking into LRS/UHF and would prefer to stay legal if possible, I doubt I'll be wanting to set any distance records LOL but a more reliable frequency when closr to the ground or with trees and such like would be a definate plus over 2.4ghz, it would also mean I could change my video to 2.4/1.2 and gain better reliability than 5.8
Nigel - this is fantastic. And as its arduino - right up my street. Not the only one interested, but am a few months away in reality.
I've got a few projects to complete and then I'll look forward to having a go at one of these.
Really fancy one for my tri - the 35mhz trailing wire is a bit annoying!
Hi Shikra,
It'll be good to have a UK programmer around as it's not my specialist subject!
I have a basic grasp of what's going on, but couldn't actually write code from scratch.
The product has some inovative benefits, not just to get it onto UK legal UHF airborne control.
I guess you've had a look at the features and maybe downloaded the code to give it a once over?
You can already add i2C devices directly to the Rx and the Rx can also Tx data back to the ground station.
OpenLRS + Wii Motion Plus (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqsIxCU548o#)
Nigel.
Quote from: Devonian on July 14, 2011, 12:13:42 AM
@ Badwolve1
60 miles on 100 mW is going to be difficult I can assure you, aside from the fact that an FPV spotter would be visually disadvantaged!
I'm also a radio amateur and at 433MHz (70cm band) I'd be struggling to make reliable contact with under 3 watts and would probably turn the wick up to my legally allowed limit of 400 watts :D
That's another good reason to get away from the 433MHz band for model control as you never know who'll be pointing their flame thrower in your direction.
Nigel.
I know a friend of mine is working with the MOD to produce long-range drones. I don't know what frequency he is using, based on the RX equipment he has, I think he is on 400MHZ and can maintain RC manual control 50KM away, and can continue flying on an auto pilot for 100KM before refuelling. He has also got licenses that mean he doesn't need a spotter ETC from the MOD, but he only tests them on MOD sites anyway. If there is anything you want me to talk to him about for you, please say and I will be happy to help :)
Thanks
BW
Hi Nigel,
I've been watching the progress of this proj for a while and would like to give a hand since I also want a sollution to our 459mhz limitation.
I've got decent skills in arduino programming (messing with my mega board all the time) and want to order myself an open lrs system to play with.
the only thing I can't figure out is how to connect the openlrs to my pc. my arduino mega simply hooks via usb.
do I need to get a special programmer and if u could point me in the right direction.
Cheers,
Mihai
Hi Mihai,
Welcome and great first post!
I use a 'normal' FTDI USB interface for programming, the same that is used for lots of Arduino projects.
http://www.skpang.co.uk/catalog/ftdi-basic-breakout-5v-p-442.html (http://www.skpang.co.uk/catalog/ftdi-basic-breakout-5v-p-442.html)
I made an interface cable to suit the OpenLRS Tx and the Rx (as the pinouts are different on both boards at present!).
They are simple enough as it's just 3 wires -- Tx, Rx & Gnd.
I cut a small slot in the Tx casing to easily connect my programming lead whilst it's still plugged in the back of my Futaba T9.
Nigel.
Aaa oki, thought that was it.
Think I saw one of those on the flytron website aswell so I can might aswell get everything in one go. Does that adapter in your post has a mini usb port?
Cheers,
Mihai
Yes, mine has mini USB and the one on Flytron site is not as nice as the one I linked to ;)
Nigel.
Oki I ordered myself evertlything I need ( I hope haha).
Ill let youknow when I've started playing with the openlrs :)
In the meantime if you have any arduino related questions let me know how can I help.
Cheers,
Mihai
Bit of a lapsed programmer I'm afraid. Not had to do anything for a few years. No call in work anymore....
Recently restarted a Diversity project that I left off about 3 years ago so starting to realise how much I've forgotten already! Anyway looks like you have a new guy on the block. Hope he has more time than me!
I've not had a look at the features at all. I just saw it on the Flytron site one day and made a mental note to revisit...
G
Quote from: Devonian on July 18, 2011, 11:07:45 PM
Hi Shikra,
It'll be good to have a UK programmer around as it's not my specialist subject!
I have a basic grasp of what's going on, but couldn't actually write code from scratch.
The product has some inovative benefits, not just to get it onto UK legal UHF airborne control.
I guess you've had a look at the features and maybe downloaded the code to give it a once over?
You can already add i2C devices directly to the Rx and the Rx can also Tx data back to the ground station.
OpenLRS + Wii Motion Plus (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqsIxCU548o#)
Nigel.
Small update:
Melih from Flytron has also been in touch with HopeRF technical team and below is their response to my findings for 459MHz when using the 430 module.
"...the sensitivity we tested at 459mhz has been reduced about 1-2dBm.
The output power you tested is 90-92mW（19.5dbm~19.6dbm,which is similar with our test result.
This little difference of sensitivity doesn't affect much on RF range..."
For reference, the module can only deliver 20dBm (100 mW) maximum anyway.
Nigel.
That doesn't sound too bad :)
My LRS shipped yesterday so 5 days and we can start developing :D
Talked to Bora Acar and apparently the new batch of openlrs systems are also based on the 430 module. Apparently it's a lot easier for them to get the 430.
Oh well, at least we can go 7W if we really get angry lol.
I had a quick look at the code and think we could squeeze a lot of nice features from this system.
First thing i'm going to do when I get the lrs is do a proper range test on 459 on Devonian's changes and report the findings and if that goes well I was thinking of implementing a nice LCD telemetry thing starting with RSSI readings back to the tx. Here's a project I did for uni:
http://www.youtube.com/thundead#p/u/6/kphz8NxG_Jk (http://www.youtube.com/thundead#p/u/6/kphz8NxG_Jk)
Soo, should be fun :D
Anyway, any ideas are welcome
Cheers,
Mihai.
Very tempted with this, Looking forward to the range test as that all thats holding me back
Mihai,
Excellent!
As I said before, good to have a UK programmer on board.
I think that we are going to have to live with the 430 module running at 459.
David of RCexplorer.se has flown to 4km on the standard 100 mW and got 100km+ with the 7W module!
For me, 100 mW is no problem and it's better to maximise the antennas rather than slapping on a booster (plus it's illegal in the UK).
Get registered on the Flytron forum and have a look around the code and the ideas floating around in there.
Tons of potential and with both the Tx and Rx able to transmit/receive (transceive) Telemetry is entirely viable.
Sean,
Range is very subjective, 3-4km in wide open moorland should be no problem but maybe only 300 metres in an RF poluted city?
Nigel.
Well that's why we need to get channel hopping on 459 working good :D.
if I get at least 3km out of the stock setup I'm more than happy considering I usually fly battery hungry planes haha. Anyway I'll let you guys know when I have the lrs :)
By the way, I'll probably have to trim the antennas down to better match them for 459 i think.
Cheers,
Mihai.
Yep, I have frequency hopping working on 459MHz.
I also made 'proper' length antennas for the Tx and Rx and don't use the supplied 433 'rubber duck' ones.
I have linked to info on both in the first couple of posts.
Nigel.
Saw the post but didn't have time to properly look over it :)
I'll have a look today and maybe start doing my antennas untill the modules arrive.
You did great work on the code. donno yet if we need to change anything. I'm still going through the data sheets though.
Mihai.
Excellent! I'm back from holidays and this has moved on loads since I went away - brilliant!
I'll order a set of OpenLRS, and the programmer jobby, up today and join in the fun. I'm not much of a programmer but I'm certainly good at testing!
Nice one Nigel and I can't wait to see what you come up with too Mihai
All the best
Simon
Good news everyone :D
Just got my openLRS today yeeey
just have to finish work and I can start playing muhaha \0/
Got my LCD screen aswell so can start the telemetry proj asap
I'll keep u goys posted,
Cheers,
Mihai.
Cool i nearly bought chainlink but will wait till i hear how your testing goes
Quote from: sheep600fx on July 28, 2011, 01:51:30 PM
Cool i nearly bought chainlink but will wait till i hear how your testing goes
i've got a chainlink aswell and it's a good system. Too bad it's illegal in the UK. I usually use it when I'm on holiday anywhere else in europe lol.
Not too sure if i have time today but I'll try testing the range with the stock antennas and hopefully I'll make some tuned antennas tomorrow and give it another go.
Cheers,
Mihai.
Thanks ;)
so, let me get this right - all you clever programmer types do all the hard work and get this longer range system working legally in the uk then upload the software into the public domain, programming halfwits like me can the buy the hardware, download the software created and programme the system and the total cost is at least $100 less than the cheapest (illegal) UHF system?
Quote from: tiggerbiker on July 28, 2011, 08:41:48 PM
so, let me get this right - all you clever programmer types do all the hard work and get this longer range system working legally in the uk then upload the software into the public domain, programming halfwits like me can the buy the hardware, download the software created and programme the system and the total cost is at least $100 less than the cheapest (illegal) UHF system?
to put it simple, yup :D
If you use the modified settings I posted in the first couple of posts of this thread, it will work on 459MHz :)
It's the really clever stuff to come that's going to be interesting ;)
Shame we can't attach anything to the forum posts, otherwise I would post my Tx and Rx files for all to share.
Total cost is ~$150 or ~£90 (make your own antennas and bin the 433 rubber duck ones).
Nigel
would you be so kind as to email the files to me if i PM you my email address?
is it only flytron that sells the items? i have set up an email reminder with them when stock arrives but i would like to get my hands on the hardware now!!
hey guys :)
bare with me 10-15 mins and ill show u something cool ;)
Mihai.
Tigger - be quick, I'm packing my suitcase to leave for hols tomorrrow morning and may not have time as the files are on my laptop in the mancave...
and yes, only Flytron sells the OpenLRS (more short to medium range than long range! I reckon it will be about the same as a good 35MHz setup) about 7-10 days for delivery.
Might be easier for Mihai to send you his files?
Mihai - you got my attention...
Nigel.
still debugging......
Tigger - 459 files sent.
Mihai - no worries, I'm taking my netbook and mobile broadband dongle on holiday (but no Arduino files on the netbook!).
Nigel.
Awesome stuff. This is going to be very interesting. I can't wait until they're back in stock of OpenLRS again so I can get involved too.
Oki, finally have something that works :D
Module running at 459Mhz << Thanks Nigel :)
did a small range test around my flat (tx inside flat, 2nd floor -- rx outside app) and was surprised the connection was working through all the walls haha. Proper range test coming tomorrow
Now for the interesting part: did a bit of coding and managed to hook up a Serial LCD onto the tx.
In the process i found that my 3.3v tx pin actually outputs my futaba's batt voltage (10v )!! so Nigel please check his and we have to let Melith know about this bug.
the LCD is currently showing RX RSSI. during the range test ive set the packet loss to 40 and indeed the tx started beeping when the display showed <40 yaay
here's a short clip of the thing in action :)
OpenLRS with LCD Display (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZgXJlC22t4#)
enjoy :d,
Mihai.
Pretty neat Mihai.
What's not so clear in the video is that you are actually getting the Rx RSSI from the Tx module via telemetry.
Goes to show that the Rx is a Tx at the same time - actually a transceiver (and so the Tx is also an Rx).
I cannot test anything for the next week (regarding the 3v3 Tx pin having 10v on it), but if you register on the Flytron forum and make a post in the OpenLRS section, I'm sure you will get some responses pretty quick.
Now all you need to do is put the LCD code in the Tx code to use the onboard Arduino, then there's no need for the external Mega.
Nigel.
Quote from: Devonian on July 29, 2011, 10:01:03 AM
Pretty neat Mihai.
What's not so clear in the video is that you are actually getting the Rx RSSI from the Tx module via telemetry.
Goes to show that the Rx is a Tx at the same time - actually a transceiver (and so the Tx is also an Rx).
I cannot test anything for the next week (regarding the 3v3 Tx pin having 10v on it), but if you register on the Flytron forum and make a post in the OpenLRS section, I'm sure you will get some responses pretty quick.
Now all you need to do is put the LCD code in the Tx code to use the onboard Arduino, then there's no need for the external Mega.
Nigel.
Morning Nigel,
Yup, the RX rssi is via telemetry.
The LCD code was running off the tx module, I used the Mega just to power it up (since the +v pin on the tx would have fried my lcd).
I'll post the problem in the Flytron forum aswell and see what's going on.
Have a nice holiday and we'll see what I can cook up untill you get back :0
Mihai.
Right, so here's the range check as promised :
My tx setup : My Futaba FF9 + OpenLRS + Sony Vaio UX1XN for reading tx,rx RSSI
OPEN LRS: 459 Mhz <<< thanks again Nigel!
(http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/2688/gopr0438.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/845/gopr0438.jpg/)
----------------------------------
I tried two antenna setups:
1. Stock Tx, Stock Rx
2. 1/2 Wave Tx, Stock Rx
----------------------------------
1. All Stock
---------------
On stock antennas I managed to get about 200 using the low power mode ( turning tx on with button pressed)
On full power, I managed to get 617m but with a pretty glitchy RX signal.
(http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/5240/gopr0440.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/84/gopr0440.jpg/)
(http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/7528/gopr0452.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/813/gopr0452.jpg/)
-----------------------------
2. 1/2 Wave Antenna on TX / Stock on RX
-------
After changing the antenna on my tx went for another go hoping to see some improvements in range.
So started walking....
300m ok .... passed the 617m ... rock solid signal ....
Finally ran out of space (end of the Aberdeen beach haha) at 1200m.
Checked the servo movements aand :o :o :o :o no glitches!!! . The RX was still receiving enough packets for a quality connection. Apparently the TX was beeping from time showing that two packets were lost occasionally but still!!!! I think it can do much better.
(http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/2336/snap20110729201206.th.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/820/snap20110729201206.png/)
----------------------------------
here's a comic of the range test haha
(http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2011/7/29/e0aeddd5-1cc6-488e-82cd-b2ad9ed27352.jpg)
-------------------------------
Conclusion:
System works well @ 459Mhz
Stock antennas MUST BE CHANGED!!! specially the tx one.
Anyway, more than happy with the results.
Next step: failsafe + test fly :D
Any questions, suggestions, improvements, ideas lemme know :D
Regards,
Mihai.
Wow sounds promising for the flight test, For me it needs to perform at least the same as 35mhz but ideally a bit better before I'd buy. Love the cartoons and thanks for the effort your putting in
Quote from: sheep600fx on July 30, 2011, 12:13:00 AM
Wow sounds promising for the flight test, For me it needs to perform at least the same as 35mhz but ideally a bit better before I'd buy. Love the cartoons and thanks for the effort your putting in
Well, considering I got 1,2km on ground, it should go much much further in the air. It's still a bit windy here in Abd but hopefully I'll get lucky on of these days. I'll keep u guys informed.
Cheers,
Mihai.
Looks good so far, the test does look promising.
this is great news a step in the right direction as i see..looking forward to seeing the results from the air..now
Well guys hang on tight :D
Off to the gym now but BBC weather shows only a 7mph wind here in Aberdeen so i'll be taking the LRS for a spin after I get back.
I currently have a 5.8G Tx/rx for vid with cloverleaf and skew antennas <<Thanks Simon!! so hopefully I'll get good range from that setup.
Wish me luck haha
Cheers,
Mihai.
Good luck, Getting excited for you :D
:popcorn:
Mark, shift over a bit mate... I can't see the screen.
What time does the film start ?
.
Mission successfull ;D
Going home :)
Gonna take a bit to upload the thing on utube but its worth it ;)
Anyway, long story short, 1,2 km, no glitches yaaay
Mihai
Mihai,
Great news, seems pretty good so far.
You could always try a tuned antenna on the Rx or maybe the stock Tx one on the Rx for a bit more range.
Waiting for the video...
I'm on holiday for the week, in north Cornwall, near Newquay (but far enough away ;) ) and only brought my little R/C Multiplex Fox to play with, oh and a couple of power kites, so got something to do, depending on whether the wind blows or not :)
Keep up the good work.
Nigel.
Oki, so my orange broadband finally decided to finish uploading the vid on youtube haha
First, some pictures :P
------------------------------------------
(http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/1769/gopr0473.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/14/gopr0473.jpg/)
(http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/26/gopr0468.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/34/gopr0468.jpg/)
(http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/6094/gopr0459.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/59/gopr0459.jpg/)
(http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/20/gopr0456.th.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/38/gopr0456.jpg/)
-------------------------------------------
And here's the video :D :flagUJ: :flying: :popcorn:
------------------------
OpenLRS at 459Mhz Flight Test (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE1ERmXmgEI#)
------------------------
As for me, :party: , :pint: aand :vomit: later if things get out of hand haha :D
Cheers,
Mihai.
And this is my 20th post finally :D
Sounds good Nigel :D I'll prob be moving my gear into my modified stryker sometime next week \0/
Sorr bout the crappy quality btw.
Enjoy,
Mihai.
OpenLRS has easily gone out to 3km...(not by me)
OpenLRS Rangetest (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piacWePtm0c#)
Nigel.
More than enough for me Nigel, Looks like it performs well,Have you had chance to fly with it yet?
Not as yet, been on holiday!
Nigel.
Im very close to getting this, As soon as I hear your report on it Nigel I will make a decision, but its very tempting.
Yaaay finally got my 11dbi patch antenna for my vid syatem.
Now waiting for some good weather to do another flight.
In the mean time, Im trying to build a diy antenna tracker.
Mihai.
Flytron email today saying the LRS Futaba transmitter module back in stock
http://www.flytron.com/openlrs/109-openlrs-m1-tx-module-for-futaba.html (http://www.flytron.com/openlrs/109-openlrs-m1-tx-module-for-futaba.html)
PK
Yup :) thinking of getting another rx module myself.
I also got the email and ordered a set, plus the Futaba adaptor. I'm looking forward to giving this stuff a go.
I also ordered one of the Turnigy 9x radios which can be re-flashed with an open source firmware. The OpenLRS will fit right into that.
I also ordered an Open Pilot Copter Control yesterday as well! Yesterday seems to have been open source day for me!!
Now where are the details of the programmer jobby I need to go with the OpenLRS. In this thread somewhere I believe.
Haha very nice :)
you will need a 3.3v FTDI cable. Think u can gwt one cheap from coolcomponents or even ebay. I'll post a guide on how to program the thing later on :)
Mihai.
Just a point on this kit...
If it's not truly LRS and the range is no better than a Futaba 2.4 system, what are the advantages of using it ?
Well it is a uhf system freq wise and it is still being tested.
The adv would be it is legal in the uk, cheapee than an ezUhf and has telemetry built in.
Apparently someone trsted it up to 3km.
I went 1183m and my sig was rock solid
So you'll be basically limited by your video range (that's if you are flying legal haha)
Mihai
Plus being UHF it is a LOT friendlier for handling situations where you 'may' end up with your plane accidentally going behind something like a group of trees, a haystack, a building..... with 2.4 you can almost guarantee the radio going into failsafe.
PK
Quote from: pk-surfing on August 18, 2011, 04:10:26 PM
Plus being UHF it is a LOT friendlier for handling situations where you 'may' end up with your plane accidentally going behind something like a group of trees, a haystack, a building..... with 2.4 you can almost guarantee the radio going into failsafe.
PK
Haha happened to me a few times. Another adv I see is you can have 2.4 for video which should be better than 5.8. Anyway.
Quote from: thundead on August 18, 2011, 04:13:22 PM
Quote from: pk-surfing on August 18, 2011, 04:10:26 PM
Plus being UHF it is a LOT friendlier for handling situations where you 'may' end up with your plane accidentally going behind something like a group of trees, a haystack, a building..... with 2.4 you can almost guarantee the radio going into failsafe.
PK
Haha happened to me a few times. Another adv I see is you can have 2.4 for video which should be better than 5.8. Anyway.
That's the only advantage I could think of, however, if the range is only 3km then 5.8 will do fine anyway, the last thing you want is video range exceeding rc range isn't it ?
Interestingly I have the FY21AP autopilot on one of my planes and it is quite a laugh trying to fly it out of LOS range using my 2.4 GHz FrSky moduled Futaba transmitter as I have the failsafe nicely set up for RTL.
Its like having it on an elastic band....
I fly directly away, loose 2.4 signal, failsafes to RTL and turns and heads back, I get control back, turn round to fly away, loose 2.4 signal etc etc (you get the picture)
If flying FPV on 5.8 (as I have) and you are fortunate enough to still have good 5.8 video (through good antenna selection and luck) its quite amusing having the plane suddenly turn round when you were enjoying flying away !
PK
I've got the frsky 2.4 aswell but never did a range test on it. I was on 5.8 when I did the lrs range test video. Fy1ap in there aswell haha. Im currently messing with my shiny new ardupilot mega and I can say it beats fy's butt. No more vibration problems. I had an unbalanced prop in my fy21 plane and at full throttle the ailerons would go mad. Found out that a good way to dampen some of the vibr is to mount the fy using velcro haha.
Mihai.
Quote from: thundead on August 18, 2011, 03:50:37 PM
Haha very nice :)
you will need a 3.3v FTDI cable. Think u can gwt one cheap from coolcomponents or even ebay. I'll post a guide on how to program the thing later on :)
Mihai.
I just ordered this: http://www.skpang.co.uk/catalog/ftdi-basic-breakout-5v-p-442.html (http://www.skpang.co.uk/catalog/ftdi-basic-breakout-5v-p-442.html) Is that wrong or is the 3.3v FTDI cable that you mentioned in addition to that? This is all new to me :-)
Should do the trick. Just remembered that im not powering the lrs from the ftdi cable so its all good :)
Cheers,
Mihai
Fortunately I ordered my 3.3v FTDI breakout board from Flytron when I ordered the LRS.
My FY worked perfectly straight out of the box, even the pots didn't need adjusting.
I have it in a SW and it is mounted on the dampening cradle that comes with the FY and I have the FY attached to the cradle with velcro, the whole thing is very well damped and I made sure all connecting leads to the FY had some free length on them so they did not transfer vibration to the unit.
The thing I like about the FY is how well it holds altitude as it uses a mix of on board barometric information and GPS to decide how high it is, rather than just GPS.
The two things I hate about it and FY should be ashamed of the first...
1) no provision for displaying rssi data when used with the 117 OSD
2) no tracking information
and to throw another thing in
3) no ability to change units from metric on any of the altimeter, speed, distance etc
PK
The thing that annoys me most is no throttle control. If you don't setup throttle with rtl when failsafe it will be bad haha. But good thing frsky and openlrs has fs on all ch :)
mihai.
Yew that lack of throttle linked to ground speed would be good.
I must admit I now test that failsafe works before each flying session by holding the plane and turning the transmitter off to make sure the motor goes to half throttle.
PK
Quote from: simondale on August 18, 2011, 03:43:34 PM
I also got the email and ordered a set, plus the Futaba adaptor. I'm looking forward to giving this stuff a go.
I also ordered one of the Turnigy 9x radios which can be re-flashed with an open source firmware. The OpenLRS will fit right into that.
I also ordered an Open Pilot Copter Control yesterday as well! Yesterday seems to have been open source day for me!!
Now where are the details of the programmer jobby I need to go with the OpenLRS. In this thread somewhere I believe.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1338412 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1338412)
Have a read through this thread and get the 'Sartieparts' board and back light kit. Then load with the custom firmware.
HTH
Firmware link
http://code.google.com/p/er9x/ (http://code.google.com/p/er9x/)
HTH
Quote from: ORCA on August 18, 2011, 11:43:31 PM
Firmware link
http://code.google.com/p/er9x/ (http://code.google.com/p/er9x/)
HTH
Great! Thanks!
You prefer er9x to the other 9x firmware projects then?
Quote from: ORCA on August 18, 2011, 06:24:26 PM
Quote from: simondale on August 18, 2011, 03:43:34 PM
I also got the email and ordered a set, plus the Futaba adaptor. I'm looking forward to giving this stuff a go.
I also ordered one of the Turnigy 9x radios which can be re-flashed with an open source firmware. The OpenLRS will fit right into that.
I also ordered an Open Pilot Copter Control yesterday as well! Yesterday seems to have been open source day for me!!
Now where are the details of the programmer jobby I need to go with the OpenLRS. In this thread somewhere I believe.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1338412 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1338412)
Have a read through this thread and get the 'Sartieparts' board and back light kit. Then load with the custom firmware.
HTH
Awesome! I love the custom board with "pogo-pins". Don't even have to solder to the board! Fantastic! Thanks Orca.
Good luck finding a Smartieparts board,t hey never seem to be available anywhere
I believe the next production run is in September - get in quick. The way they sell out indicates how good they are, although the 'pogo-pins' can sometimes be problematic.
I think the reason a lot of this stuff is sold out quickly is that most people are sick and tired of expensive, propritery hardware & closed source software that very often doesn't work with another bit of expensive hardware.
Open source supported hardware is going to get big in the future, in my opinion.
Just take a look at the OpenPilot CopterControl boards, OpenLRS etc that are selling like hot cakes now as more people take up the idea of open source and the ability to link it all together.
Nigel.
Hey everyone. been crazy @ work but finally took a few days off to continue my openLRS endeavors.
Just a quick insight in what I'm currently working on:
(http://s1.postimage.org/1bhr988qs/Clipboard01.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/1bhr988qs/)
---------------
Stuff so far:
Got GPS to transmit lat, lon and altitude over telemetry. Was quite tricky because I wanted max precision on the coordinates so I'm sending the data as 12 byte encoded floats, 4 bytes per reading.
Figured out the pan/tilt servo movements. Works great in theory (bench tested using google maps yaay).
I'll be using my arduino mega board as groundstation.
-------------
Still to do:
Link up the mega with the openLRS tx: I've got a couple of Xbees so I'll try to use that.
Add lcd screen
finally, make DIY PCB with voltage divider (show ground station battery status on LCD) and some buttons for set home and who knows what.
------------
I'll keep u posted on my progress and release full code etc when I'll get closer to finishing the tracker :D
----------
Quick question though, what do u think, should I do the calculations on the mega or on the LRS tx and send only pan,tilt via serial to mega ?
Any thoughts, ideas on what else to include in the design let me know :D
-------
Cheers,
Mihai.
'' Any thoughts ''
Yes.... your enthusiasm made me get the OpenLRS transmitter and rec plus the tiny usb connecting board thingy (everything delivered last week)
Now I have to figure out what to do with it all !! ;)
:funfunfun:
PK
Yaaay :)
I promise to put up a guide tomorrow.
Its terminator 3 for me now ;D
Mihai.
I would be tempted to send as little info as you can across the link, less chance of packet loss / corrupt code
Good news Mihai - thought it was a bit too quiet in here lately !
Send telemtry as often as you can (I presume therefore, the data packets should be as short as possible) and do the math on the ground station. For decent tracking, ideally 5Hz or greater.
This may also be an alternative to Xbee
http://www.goodluckbuy.com/apc220-wireless-communication-module-for-arduinousb-converter.html (http://www.goodluckbuy.com/apc220-wireless-communication-module-for-arduinousb-converter.html)
This module is being considered for CopterControl (OpenPilot)
http://wiki.openpilot.org/display/Doc/APC220+Transceiver+Telemetry (http://wiki.openpilot.org/display/Doc/APC220+Transceiver+Telemetry)
Seen this:
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1473207 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1473207)
and this:
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1490446 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1490446)
I have a CopterControl board and will use it and the 459MHz OLRS on a tri-copter I am trying to get built.
Soo damned busy myself + the wife is poorly with a very bad back, so I'm nurse maid for the last week or so.
Nigel.
That module is interesting :) But I'll use what I have available for now. RC stuff budget gone haha.
I'm finishing writing a guide for the UK openLRS.
I'll create another thread for the guide and tracker.
Cheers,
Mihai.
EDIT: post created and Guide + other stuff added:
http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php?topic=2925.0
Melih has now placed my 1.8 version of UK 459MHz firmware on the Google repository:
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list)
Nigel.
Subscribed - don't want to miss any of this....
Cheers,
New v2 Rx is due for release - read more...
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=142&sid=a0e6eccd5f4a22f888327e4e64ed3904 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=142&sid=a0e6eccd5f4a22f888327e4e64ed3904)
Nigel.
Version 2 OpenLRSs will be available from FirstPersonView.co.uk in the next few days.
Transmitters are listed here: http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/rc-control-systems/openlrs-m2-tx-module-for-futaba (http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/rc-control-systems/openlrs-m2-tx-module-for-futaba)
and receivers here: http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/rc-control-systems/openlrs-receiver-v2 (http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/rc-control-systems/openlrs-receiver-v2)
Pricing to be calculated ASAP.
I'm pleased to be able to be involved with the OpenLRS "movement"!
All the best
Simon
That's awesome news !!!!!
Well done Simon.
Does that mean UK developers now get a good discount for getting the system working on 459MHz ;) :D
Nigel.
I was looking at ways to hard case my Rx, especially for my Tricopter.
I found an empty case from a cheap 2.4GHz Rx that I had removed the PCB from and embedded in a Multiplex Fox conversion.
I had to file 05.mm from each side of the Rx PCB to make it fit the hard case and filed a little from the servo holes in the top of the hard case and - voila!
(http://s1.postimage.org/ein16u6c/DSCN0528.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/ein16u6c/)
(http://s1.postimage.org/eivavkn8/DSCN0532.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/eivavkn8/)
(http://s1.postimage.org/ej3kkb44/DSCN0533.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/ej3kkb44/)
Nigel
Hello Devonian
Thanks very much for supplying us non-programmer people something to work with when changing the OpenLRS system to work with 459Mhz.
I just need some more advise please. I have recently received the version 2 of the OpenLRS system from Flytron and have downloaded the 1.09 version firmware. Looking at your code changes to make it work for 459Mhz I have simply transfered the changes you have stipulated into the files for 1.08 onto the 1.09 firmware. The two versions are different (1.08-459 and 1.09) and I am not sure if you have a chance to see if any additional changes need to be made within the 1.09 firmware. If at all.
I have made the changes within version 1.09 and have uploaded them to the RX and TX and it appears to work just fine. However I have noticed that when I have a servo attached to the RX and move the sticks full travel the servo arm appears to have a lot of steps in the movement. It is not smooth when travelling from one end to the other.
I have also noticed that I don't appear to get full travel on the servo arm as well. Instead of around 120 degrees I get less than 90. Is this normal for this system? Do I need to make any additional changes in the firmware?
The model memory within the TX has been reset so I am back to all of the defaults so no mixes or sub-trims have been applied.
Many thanks for your help.
Hi,
Glad you found my 459MHz files useful, but as I said in the first post, I'm no programmer!!!
As best I understand it, the v1.09 and upwards firmware is for the v2 Tx & Rx boards - I'm still with the original v1, so at the moment, v1.08-459 files are enough for me.
I see in the Google repository, the 459 files been downloaded 18 times, so there must be a few who have/are tempted by OLRS in the UK.
My servo movement is similar to yours @ ~90deg, but as I have no need/knowledge to refine it further as it is on my Tricopter at the moment and does just fine for my current needs.
As an experiment, I compared the same servo on a 2.4HGz Tx/Rx and it is the same (Futaba T6 clone), but moving the servo arm by hand, it will move ~180 deg.
Don't be afraid to ask a question in the Flytron forum and possibly someone more knowledgeable will be able to help a little more than I can...
http://forum.flytron.com/viewforum.php?f=7 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewforum.php?f=7)
Nigel.
Quote from: Devonian on September 28, 2011, 07:01:59 PM
Well done Simon.
Does that mean UK developers now get a good discount for getting the system working on 459MHz ;) :D
Nigel.
Sure thing! I'm sure we can offer you guys plenty of discount if you're after more gear.
You've done a fantastic jobs and been everso helpful with it.
All the best
Simon
Thanks for the response Devonian. I will have to keep on digging and post something in the Flytron forum. The servo movement on the version 2 of OpenLRS is far to ratchety for my liking. Too many steps in the movement.
My servo movement is somewhat 'ratchety' as well - I can pretty much count the steps as I move the stick.
Maybe Mihai can help a bit as he is more a software type of guy...?
@ Simon - cheers!
Maybe I'll see what's left in the piggy bank for v2 hardware !!
Nigel.
Hi there,
Just had a quick look at the new firmware and apparently copy pasting the 459Mhz related settings for our UK firmware should be enough.
Regarding your servo movement, this is quite interesting but more debugging is needed to figure out itf it's a hardware/software issue.
Servos work ok with my v1 hardware.
Can you please check all the channels and see if the problem occurs every time
Try increasing the end points and see if that helps in any way.
Another thing you can try is disabling channel hopping. Maybe it's a transmission problem ?
If you have a FTDI cable you can enable debugging for the TX and RX and see what values are you receiving in the Arduino Serial Monitor.
Mihai.
Quote from: seibernator on October 02, 2011, 05:23:36 PM
Hello Devonian
Thanks very much for supplying us non-programmer people something to work with when changing the OpenLRS system to work with 459Mhz.
I just need some more advise please. I have recently received the version 2 of the OpenLRS system from Flytron and have downloaded the 1.09 version firmware. Looking at your code changes to make it work for 459Mhz I have simply transfered the changes you have stipulated into the files for 1.08 onto the 1.09 firmware. The two versions are different (1.08-459 and 1.09) and I am not sure if you have a chance to see if any additional changes need to be made within the 1.09 firmware. If at all.
I have made the changes within version 1.09 and have uploaded them to the RX and TX and it appears to work just fine. However I have noticed that when I have a servo attached to the RX and move the sticks full travel the servo arm appears to have a lot of steps in the movement. It is not smooth when travelling from one end to the other.
I have also noticed that I don't appear to get full travel on the servo arm as well. Instead of around 120 degrees I get less than 90. Is this normal for this system? Do I need to make any additional changes in the firmware?
The model memory within the TX has been reset so I am back to all of the defaults so no mixes or sub-trims have been applied.
Many thanks for your help.
Ooh forgot to add:
The new code adds binding (finally ;D) and Serial bridge via the telemetry protocol which is pretty useful if you plan on connecting anything to the RX port and want to send the data to the transmitter.
We'll see what else the code reveals :D
Mihai out
Yup, serial data is going to be useful...(GPS positioning for starter)
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=90 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=90)
Plus (daft) Star Wars beep/music ;D
Nigel.
Just saw the starwars thingy Brilliant! :)))
-REMOVED BY MODERATOR-
Felias: You need 20 posts minimum to post in the Classifieds section.
Hi guy
I hoping someone can tell me, in layman terms the advantages and rang of the OpenLRS M2 Tx Module for Futaba - for 459MHz and the OpenLRS Receiver v2 - for 459MHz
that Simon from FPVUK is selling.
I'm not being lazy and i'm sore all the info is hear in this thread, it will just take me ages to get my dim brane around it all, I'm a bit of a plug and play guy riley.
thanks :) G
Hi G,
It'll fit straight into your Futaba T9, also...
Advantages:
Legal for use in the UK
Unlikely to get 'shot down' if other users are close to you (as is possible with 35MHz)
Can be programmed for additional features (stabilisation, GPS data, telemtry etc) and anything else you want if you are a programmer as it's true 'open source'
2 way communication between the Tx and Rx (they can 'talk' to each other)
Cheapest UHF system on the market
... lots more to come I'm sure
Disadvantages:
Not really a 'Long Range' system (it's 100 mW output and should be treated as about the same as 35MHz - some have had 3km+ out of it so far...)
Not completely 'plug n fly' (although, maybe Simon at First Person View can make his units close to that)
Nigel.
Thanks Nigel
I was loving it all and getting more and more excited as I red on, 35 mhz rang is plenty fare enough, then you mentioned not quite plug and play, is it something a novice in electronics can cope with.
:) G
Hi Nigel, looking at getting a UHF system, but need a mininum 10 Channels. Could this transmit a 10 or 12 channel stream from a Turnigy 9X?
Thanks
Miles
@ Gordon,
There is nothing to do hardware wise to get this going on 459MHz (I'd recommend properly made and tuned antennas for 459MHz for best performance).
You will need a bit of basic software experience, but it's real simple stuff.
I put the 459MHz version of the firmware on the Flytron download site (v1 hardware).
I don't see a big deal to add it to the latest version of firmware (for v2 hardware).
It's all done in the Arduino software and is a piece of pi$$ cake to do.
Here is a beginners 'how to' that Mihai did to get you going.
Just read the bit about using the Arduino software...
http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php?topic=2925.0 (http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php?topic=2925.0)
If you get OLRS and get stuck with setting it up, PM me and we'll walk through it step by step ;)
@ Miles,
I guess anything is possible, and I'm no programmer, as I've said before, but looking on the forum, there is this regarding 12 channels...
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=30 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=30)
OLRS is Open Source, so the end user is free to do whatever they please with the code and the more people/programmers that come on board, the more there will be to share amongst one another.
For those that don't like coding, just use whatever there is as 'standard' and go with that.
Nigel.
that would be great Nigel thanks. I think it may be worth a go.
:) G
I've modified the v1.10 firmware and asked Flytron to post it on the Google download site (should run on v2 hardware - but needs someone to check it out for me/us)
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list)
If you want to check it out right now, get it from here
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=100 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=100)
I've also modded my 2nd post on this thread so you can easily see the few lines of code that need changing for 459MHz use (highlighted in red so you could simply cut n paste into any firmware version you choose to try).
Nigel.
Competition in the UHF market might be hotting up...using the same RFM22B module, it will still be 100 mW output.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=19617451&postcount=508 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=19617451&postcount=508)
I asked fmkit if it was to be open or closed souce (firmware/software) and he replied that it will be closed source using Cypress chipset.
Nigel.
Have a treat for all the openLRS lovers out there: proper RSSI OUT implementation :P . Check first post @ http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php?topic=2925.0 (http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php?topic=2925.0)
Regards,
Mihai.
Well done thundead...... :D
PK
Well done Mihai.
I'll test it as soon as I get 5 minutes to spare...
Nigel.
Be sure to check this thread http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php?topic=3642.0 (http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php?topic=3642.0) for updates :)
Funny you should suggest that thread I am there right now :) I am just reading about the RSSI, and the lightweight FW. I want the lightest FW possible as I dont see the point of bloating the Tx and Rx with code that I dont need, no telemetry wanted or needed through the OpenLRS but I do want good RSSI to feed into my EagleTree OSD Pro. What pin is the RSSI feed coming from on a V2 Rx board? can I feed my OSD direct or do I need a filter to smooth it out a little
nup, no filter needed. you could add a 1-2k reistor ion your sig line to limit the current drawn by the osd.
You're doing some great work Mihai. Keep it up.
I've got my OpenLRS sat on the bench here and haven't had the balls to fly it yet or fiddle with it, but my time will come :)
Cheers :) I'm still not confident enough on it to trust it with my tri but its getting there. Would be great if you could upload the current FWs and do some range checks/ FS checks etc. I will constantly try to improve the ultra light FW.
Mihai.
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on November 16, 2011, 08:47:50 PM
You're doing some great work Mihai. Keep it up.
I've got my OpenLRS sat on the bench here and haven't had the balls to fly it yet or fiddle with it, but my time will come :)
Quote from: thundead on November 16, 2011, 08:44:07 PM
nup, no filter needed. you could add a 1-2k reistor ion your sig line to limit the current drawn by the osd.
Where on the Rx is the RSSI output?
OOh dear forgot about that sorry. It's the servo channel marked R. Its the first one from the right.
Quote from: thundead on November 16, 2011, 08:56:53 PM
OOh dear forgot about that sorry. It's the servo channel marked R. Its the first one from the right.
Sorry if I am asking too much, Im on bed rest with pneumonia after the mother of all flu and I am going kinda stir crazy that I cant test out my OpenLRS. Getting all the facts straight so I have everything in place. There is no marking that you mention so I took a picture of my board and labelled it as I understand it. The schematic doesnt help a whole lot as it doesnt show me how the actual Rx is laid out and my brain isnt working great right now (sickness sucks) is my labelling correct I hope so ;)
(http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/4058/pinoutvw.jpg)
LOOOOOL riiiiight , you got the v2 board. I'm still on the v1 hardware haha
I'll have a look for the v2 boards and let you know but you got RSSI right, SCL SDA is for I2C protocol (sensors etc) and you program the thing from the 6 upper pins :) I'll draw u a diagram in a while
Yh V2 board here, brand new fresh out of the pack. Just waiting to be used and abused :) I know it isnt plug and play but some stuff really should be documented over at Flytron, as I am sure it wouldnt be hard to screw up the hardware without trying too hard
I know what you mean. I'm a commercial programmer and also studied electronics for 10 years. This doesn't make me helpful, it just makes me dangerous!
Soo true haha. My gf always keeps 5m distance from me, the soldering iron and any other things that I have around me when I'm in the workshop haha
SouthPawPaul,
if you know anything about random number generators with an initial seed and how to resync a sequence would be v helpful for the FHSS implementation :) I'll make a new thread for some brainstorming.
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on November 16, 2011, 09:39:15 PM
I know what you mean. I'm a commercial programmer and also studied electronics for 10 years. This doesn't make me helpful, it just makes me dangerous!
Quote from: thundead on November 16, 2011, 09:31:51 PM
LOOOOOL riiiiight , you got the v2 board. I'm still on the v1 hardware haha
I'll have a look for the v2 boards and let you know but you got RSSI right, SCL SDA is for I2C protocol (sensors etc) and you program the thing from the 6 upper pins :) I'll draw u a diagram in a while
I just looked over at Flytron at the V1 Rx and the Schematic for it, much easier to follow! all the connections are kinda obvious lol
Then I figured I would have a proper look at the V2 board and the pinout shown on the schematic, I would appreciate a double check but I think I got it right....
(http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/9080/txrxy.jpg)
Yup that seems right since the tx rx pins go straight into the arduino IC. It should follow the standard FTDI layout anyway :)
Mihai.
I'll find out soon enough ;D
Wish you luck :D I'm currently trying out a different FHSS algorithm. we'll see how it goes :D
Quote from: thundead on July 19, 2011, 02:16:33 PM
Aaa oki, thought that was it.
Think I saw one of those on the flytron website aswell so I can might aswell get everything in one go. Does that adapter in your post has a mini usb port?
Cheers,
Mihai
saw this video, is this what you were asking about?
OpenLRS Rx v2 Programming (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24ymP9mlQfM#)
OpenLRS just keeps getting better...
Now with MultiWii 'copter control embedded in the Rx code, just add components as required.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yco_i9vtnk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yco_i9vtnk)
From Flytron forum
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&p=1794#p1794 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&p=1794#p1794)
Nigel.
Hmm interesting but I think it;s a bit overkill for the atmega 328... better have stand alone controllers in my opinion :)
Quote from: Devonian on December 28, 2011, 07:53:19 PM
OpenLRS just keeps getting better...
Now with MultiWii 'copter control embedded in the Rx code, just add components as required.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yco_i9vtnk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Yco_i9vtnk)
From Flytron forum
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&p=1794#p1794 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&p=1794#p1794)
Nigel.
What frequency does the V2 reciever run at?
Thanks
Brett
Can run any frequency in the following ranges: 433-470 or 868 - 915 Mhz.
Uk firmware runs on 459Mhz
Here is the datasheet for more info: http://www.flytron.com/pdf/RFM22B.pdf (http://www.flytron.com/pdf/RFM22B.pdf)
Mihai.
Quote from: ghost2212 on January 08, 2012, 06:45:04 PM
What frequency does the V2 reciever run at?
Thanks
Brett
Quote from: thundead on January 08, 2012, 06:49:36 PM
Can run any frequency in the following ranges: 433-470 or 868 - 915 Mhz.
Uk firmware runs on 459Mhz
Here is the datasheet for more info: http://www.flytron.com/pdf/RFM22B.pdf (http://www.flytron.com/pdf/RFM22B.pdf)
Mihai.
Quote from: ghost2212 on January 08, 2012, 06:45:04 PM
What frequency does the V2 reciever run at?
Thanks
Brett
Sorry what I meant is what clock frequency the atmega runs at?
lol it's an 328p clocked at 16mhz :)
Quote from: ghost2212 on January 08, 2012, 06:53:02 PM
Quote from: thundead on January 08, 2012, 06:49:36 PM
Can run any frequency in the following ranges: 433-470 or 868 - 915 Mhz.
Uk firmware runs on 459Mhz
Here is the datasheet for more info: http://www.flytron.com/pdf/RFM22B.pdf (http://www.flytron.com/pdf/RFM22B.pdf)
Mihai.
Quote from: ghost2212 on January 08, 2012, 06:45:04 PM
What frequency does the V2 reciever run at?
Thanks
Brett
Sorry what I meant is what clock frequency the atmega runs at?
Quote from: thundead on January 08, 2012, 06:56:03 PM
lol it's an 328p clocked at 16mhz :)
Quote from: ghost2212 on January 08, 2012, 06:53:02 PM
Quote from: thundead on January 08, 2012, 06:49:36 PM
Can run any frequency in the following ranges: 433-470 or 868 - 915 Mhz.
Uk firmware runs on 459Mhz
Here is the datasheet for more info: http://www.flytron.com/pdf/RFM22B.pdf (http://www.flytron.com/pdf/RFM22B.pdf)
Mihai.
Quote from: ghost2212 on January 08, 2012, 06:45:04 PM
What frequency does the V2 reciever run at?
Thanks
Brett
Sorry what I meant is what clock frequency the atmega runs at?
But if its running at 3.3v then surely thats above the safe threshold that atmega recommend on their datasheet, according to that you need 3.86v to run at 16mhz. We put 16mhz on the DIY boards we are doing but cant get the first one to program(though we did burn the pcb a bit)
Thanks
Brett
you could try supplying 5v to the atmega and see if it works. it should run at 3.3v ok as well.
check your tracks as well might be something wrong there. ALso , the ICs dont come with a bootloader. So you need to burn a bootloader onto them before you can load any arduino code.
Does anyone know of a good source of 459mhz antennas? I'm working on designing and building an STM32F4 (with hardware FPU, much much faster than the ancient avrs) based receiver using chibios (http://chibios.org) RTOS, with inertial sensors and an RFM22B, and would like to do some proper testing rather than with the 433Mhz antennas I have so far!
(http://s17.postimage.org/a8va1tzij/IMG_0062.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/a8va1tzij/)
there you go mate http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/antennas/433459mhz?zenid=f2o2tks3o1bmvu3i6puhu6iv74 (http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/antennas/433459mhz?zenid=f2o2tks3o1bmvu3i6puhu6iv74) :)
Quote from: Badger on January 30, 2012, 11:14:35 AM
Does anyone know of a good source of 459mhz antennas? I'm working on designing and building an STM32F4 (with hardware FPU, much much faster than the ancient avrs) based receiver using chibios (http://chibios.org) RTOS, with inertial sensors and an RFM22B, and would like to do some proper testing rather than with the 433Mhz antennas I have so far!
(http://s17.postimage.org/a8va1tzij/IMG_0062.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/a8va1tzij/)
Hi All
Just been reading this thread with interest as I'm planning on getting into FPV (and possibly autopiloting). Seems there are a multitude of options for TX and RX (not thinking about video freqs at the moment), but 459 seems to have great range and is two way too.
I'm seeing a lot of talk about patch antennas, so was wondering if the EIRP rule applies to the 459MHz freq. For those that don't know, the EIRP (Equivalent Isotropic Radiated Power i think) is the power needed to produce the strength of signal that you've got using a patch antenna (for example) but by using an omni.
For example, if you've got 100mw tx and an 8db patch, to get the strength of signal the patch produces but by using an omni, you'd need 160mw tx. (number picked out of the air, but you get the idea.
In the UK, wifi frequencies, for example, are limited to 10mw EIRP, which basically means sticking a yagi on a 10mw tx makes it illegal.
Does the same rule apply to the 459MHz band. It would be bad to go to all this effort to remain legal if sticking a patch on it makes it illegal!
Hey ollyb,
Not sure about any EIRP rules in the UK, but if you want to use the openLRS for long range you need to get a booster (meaning you'll lose the bidirectional link) as the stock range is not so good (ground test aprox 500m).
Quote from: ollyb on February 18, 2012, 11:33:29 AM
Hi All
Just been reading this thread with interest as I'm planning on getting into FPV (and possibly autopiloting). Seems there are a multitude of options for TX and RX (not thinking about video freqs at the moment), but 459 seems to have great range and is two way too.
I'm seeing a lot of talk about patch antennas, so was wondering if the EIRP rule applies to the 459MHz freq. For those that don't know, the EIRP (Equivalent Isotropic Radiated Power i think) is the power needed to produce the strength of signal that you've got using a patch antenna (for example) but by using an omni.
For example, if you've got 100mw tx and an 8db patch, to get the strength of signal the patch produces but by using an omni, you'd need 160mw tx. (number picked out of the air, but you get the idea.
In the UK, wifi frequencies, for example, are limited to 10mw EIRP, which basically means sticking a yagi on a 10mw tx makes it illegal.
Does the same rule apply to the 459MHz band. It would be bad to go to all this effort to remain legal if sticking a patch on it makes it illegal!
We are allowed 100mW ERP (Effective Radiated Power) on 459MHz.
In reality, this means that the actual antenna is only allowed to radiate 100mW.
So, if the antenna has zero gain and is right on the Tx, with no cable or connector losses, the Tx should be at 100mW output power.
If however, in the extreme, you intend to run a 50 metre coax cable from the Tx to that same antenna and the cable loss is 10dB, you are allowed to increase the power of the Tx to account for that loss so that the antenna still radiates 100mW.
Same goes for an antenna with 10dB gain, when mounted right at the Tx with no losses, you must reduce the Tx power to account for the antenna 10dB gain.
HTH
Nigel.
Thanks for the quick replies.
Just to clarify, does this mean the traditional TX control has a greater range than receiveing telemetry back?
Quote from: Devonian on February 18, 2012, 11:51:11 AM
Same goes for an antenna with 10dB gain, when mounted right at the Tx with no losses, you must reduce the Tx power to account for the antenna 10dB gain.
This is the bit that I suspect is getting ignored for the most part. In effect, to stay within the law, you'd get no extra range by using more directional antennas.
Quote from: ollyb on February 18, 2012, 12:03:34 PM
Just to clarify, does this mean the traditional TX control has a greater range than receiveing telemetry back?
I'm not sure I fully understand your question.
Presuming the Tx and Rx have equal output power and antennas, then theoretically, telemetry should be equal to the full range of the equipment.
Quote from: ollyb on February 18, 2012, 12:03:34 PM
Quote from: Devonian on February 18, 2012, 11:51:11 AM
Same goes for an antenna with 10dB gain, when mounted right at the Tx with no losses, you must reduce the Tx power to account for the antenna 10dB gain.
This is the bit that I suspect is getting ignored for the most part. In effect, to stay within the law, you'd get no extra range by using more directional antennas.
Correct
Nigel.
Quote from: Devonian on February 18, 2012, 07:33:42 PM
Quote from: ollyb on February 18, 2012, 12:03:34 PM
Just to clarify, does this mean the traditional TX control has a greater range than receiveing telemetry back?
I'm not sure I fully understand your question.
Presuming the Tx and Rx have equal output power and antennas, then theoretically, telemetry should be equal to the full range of the equipment.
That's what I thought. But Thundead above said you lose the bidirectional link at about 500m. Given that the ranges discussed in this thread have been a lot longer than that, I thought he was talking specifically about the bidirectional nature of the link, ie getting the telemetry back drops off at 500m, implying normal tx goes further.
I was referring to ground range. Bidirectinal link should work as good as the rc link as long as you got matched antennas on both your tx and rx. Also i was saying you lose the bidirectional link if using a booster :)
For me the bi-directional link isnt worth having. And I have it turned off, if flying FPV its safe to assume you will have a OSD displaying information including RSSI so why have the Tx making a noise if you lose a few data packets as the RSSI indicator on your screen will report exactly the same.
The name OpenLRS is somewhat misleading, it is not a long range system and stock out of the box has less range than I get with my Dx7 and a HobbyKing 6ch Orange Rx without satellite. With some nifty firmware thats getting better each revision and the employement of a booster which ofcourse wouldnt be legal to use then you have a long range system! So its only long range if you up the power output, which to be fair is exactly what all the other UHF systems do to get long range. The real benefit of this system is you are on a UK legal frequency so Ofcom wont be on your case, and it free's up other frequency's like 2.4GHz to broadcast your video signal on.
Darn... haven't been getting emails about new posts.
well to keep it short S**T just got real :D 10ch hopping like the wind through Aberdeen's finest granite buildings = >500m ground range. fw will be released in a couple of days :D
Here is a peak preview of what;s to come:
(http://s18.postimage.org/50iuwr6ad/Clipboard02.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/50iuwr6ad/)
btw, I'm seriously thinking of not releasing any source code for this as I already spent way to much of my free time developing a proper fw and didn't get any help from anyone else in the community regarding code etc. and everyone seems to be keeping their stuff to themselves anyway. (excepting all who contribuited to the infamous pringles and redbull fund - Huge thanks to you all once again)
Quote from: papa_lazerous on February 23, 2012, 12:23:42 AM
Nigel I personally believe we will get better range on a static channel, partially because of how the RF module is not hopping so well. Mihai is working on something at the moment to give us a better hop without too much trade off as far as range goes but I guess we will have to wait for him to give more details as and when.
Adding diversity to an existing board would be too much work, but you can have diversity with 2 receivers at present that's what I run in my skywalker,
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Mihai the sneak preview looks sweet, a nice way of configuring things. I'm used to editing the config.h file now but definitely a nice touch. It's wrong that others aren't sharing as we could all benefit from people sharing. As it is the source code has remained static for months now. I think I'm good on the beer and Pringles fund right now ;). Serious note, if you get the hopping working without the RF module dropping out randomly like it does at present I'll happily donate enough pringles to make you sick of them :)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hopping already sorted mate :) it nicely jumps over "x" bad channels and resyncs with the tx :P
Quote from: papa_lazerous on February 24, 2012, 03:19:40 AM
Mihai the sneak preview looks sweet, a nice way of configuring things. I'm used to editing the config.h file now but definitely a nice touch. It's wrong that others aren't sharing as we could all benefit from people sharing. As it is the source code has remained static for months now. I think I'm good on the beer and Pringles fund right now ;). Serious note, if you get the hopping working without the RF module dropping out randomly like it does at present I'll happily donate enough pringles to make you sick of them :)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well as far as I can see it affordable legal UHF just became a whole step more viable. Thumbs up mate :)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
did I mentioned its got in-flight fs and very very reliable rssi as well ? :D
Quote from: papa_lazerous on February 24, 2012, 03:51:06 AM
Well as far as I can see it affordable legal UHF just became a whole step more viable. Thumbs up mate :)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh I need good RSSI, it's no use when it's going up and down all the time as you can't tell when you are getting low signal. Which was the problem before
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd loved to have helped with the firmware, but I've so often got my head buried in Delphi/Java/C++ at work that trying to get my head around yet another language after a full days work is often not the most appealing thought. :dazed:
Nice job though. Well done.
You seem to be putting way more effort into it than anyone else in the OpenLRS community (even the sellers!). :clap: :ohyeah: :respekt:
Hi Thundead,
I've been enjoying using my OpenLRS but haven't touched/ thought about the firmware since I first flashed it with, I think, the first 459MHz version. I simply haven't had any problems with it so I haven't touched it.
I don't do anything particularly clever with it, not even RSSI, but it is bi-directional (I know because it beeps when I turn the Rx off)!
Should I upgrade to a newer firmware now? What would I gain if I upgrade? Is there proper FHSS in your latest version? That would be great!
All the best
Simon
hey Simon,
the fw I'm currently working on should drastically improve the range of the openLRS, adding proper RSSI, in-flight fail safe and a proper hopping algorithm (over the 10 ISM channels for 459Mhz).
I will add the telemetry option in the upcoming version. Current version is aimed at long range so it's stripped of anything fancy just to make it more robust.
Mihai.
Quote from: simondale on February 24, 2012, 11:49:28 AM
Hi Thundead,
I've been enjoying using my OpenLRS but haven't touched/ thought about the firmware since I first flashed it with, I think, the first 459MHz version. I simply haven't had any problems with it so I haven't touched it.
I don't do anything particularly clever with it, not even RSSI, but it is bi-directional (I know because it beeps when I turn the Rx off)!
Should I upgrade to a newer firmware now? What would I gain if I upgrade? Is there proper FHSS in your latest version? That would be great!
All the best
Simon
Thundead: full kudos to you mate. Doing a fantastic job that we all appreciate.
I'm not a user yet - but will be as soon as I finish a couple of projects and get some funds together....
Hi Mihai,
Don't go keeping too much stuff to yourself, at least share with us on here ;)
When I first realised that OpenLRS wouldn't go to 459MHz, I asked for some assistance on Flytron & FPVUK forums and got nothing.
I then downloaded the data sheets and read up on which bits needed changing to get to 459MHz and posted it here and in Flytron forum.
I am no programmer and it took me a long time to work through the code and pick out what was relevant and what to change.
I got nothing out of it either, but then, it is opensource and that's what most of it is about - sharing the knowledge (and the work).
I agree that a lot of it is not under any kind of real control or versioning.
If I was a programmer, I'd be in there giving you a hand.
Keep up the good work and don't despair, there are many more who are grateful to you but just don't show it.
Cheers,
Nigel.
+1 to what Nigel said...
Don't think you would ever make any money out of this other than goodwill/beerfund stuff.
I know from speaking to one of the other UHF designers - he sells lots of FPV gear and its not enough to live off... Says its not worth his time for the money.
Its your call over the open source bit. I would be more annoyed at others taking your work and not giving credit.
Same for Alex on multiwii - he's put years of work into it. Just keeps on for teh love / donations.
But - your the dude man - be recognised for the guy that brought us this.
Yup , i'll share the source code anyway :) Specially with you guys! thanks you all for all teh support anyway :) here is a sneak preview :D
! Private video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_M5xwbRQlVE&list=UU7LKGWDpU9emvlqk4XJOJBg&index=2&feature=plpp_video&noredirect=1#)
Quote from: Shikra on February 24, 2012, 04:08:17 PM
+1 to what Nigel said...
Don't think you would ever make any money out of this other than goodwill/beerfund stuff.
I know from speaking to one of the other UHF designers - he sells lots of FPV gear and its not enough to live off... Says its not worth his time for the money.
Its your call over the open source bit. I would be more annoyed at others taking your work and not giving credit.
Same for Alex on multiwii - he's put years of work into it. Just keeps on for teh love / donations.
But - your the dude man - be recognised for the guy that brought us this.
It's possibly cause I'm a little bit too soon after your posting, but your vid is marked as private.
The video won't play for me there is a message saying "this video contains restricted content" :(
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
it should be working now. please recheck.
Quote from: thundead on February 24, 2012, 10:05:24 PM
it should be working now. please recheck.
It's working fine now :)
Looking good, stable RSSI
Attention - Please read below as it seems I made a mis-calcualtion in my original post
In my defense, I had the 10kHz thing on my mind and mis-calculated the StepSize (still thinking 10khz) :-[
From my original code...
In the rfm22b tab,to set the band of operation to 450 - 459.9 MHz and 50kHz stepping
Stepping default values
The steps (channel spacing) are set in the rf22b.pde with the default line
_spi_write(0x7a, 0x06); // 60khz step size (10khz x value) // no hopping
So, for example, for 50kHz steps, I set:
_spi_write(0x7a, 0x05); // 50khz step size (10khz x value) // no hopping
Also, the hopping channels can be defined in the config.h, for example, I have modifed mine:
//###### HOPPING CHANNELS #######
//Select the hopping channels between 0-255
// Default values are 13,54 and 23 for all transmitters and receivers, you should change it before your first flight for safety.
//Frequency = CARRIER_FREQUENCY + (StepSize(50khz) * Channel_Number)
static unsigned char hop_list[3] = {10,15,25};
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe we should just set the step size to 10kHz as it will then be easier to think about the calculations for stepping sizes, e.g.
In the rfm22b tab,to set the band of operation to 450 - 459.9 MHz and 50kHz stepping
Stepping default values
The steps (channel spacing) are set in the rf22b.pde with the default line
_spi_write(0x7a, 0x06); // 60khz step size (10khz x value) // no hopping
So, for example, for 10kHz StepSize, I set:
_spi_write(0x7a, 0x01); // 10khz step size (10khz x value) // no hopping
This will then make the hopping channels easier to think about and the original steps can remain the same (but modify the StepSize(10khz) value)...
Also, the hopping channels can be defined in the config.h, for example, I have modifed mine:
//###### HOPPING CHANNELS #######
//Select the hopping channels between 0-255
// Default values are 13,54 and 23 for all transmitters and receivers, you should change it before your first flight for safety.
//Frequency = CARRIER_FREQUENCY + (StepSize(10khz) * Channel_Number)
static unsigned char hop_list[3] = {10,15,25};
The above gives me 459.100, 459.150 & 459.250 as my hopping channels.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This was pointed out to me by 'ecbee' over on Flytron forum...
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&p=2325#p2324 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&p=2325#p2324)
Would someone like to check and confirm against the specs in data sheets available from the HopRF site
http://www.hoperf.com/rf_fsk/fsk/RFM22B.htm (http://www.hoperf.com/rf_fsk/fsk/RFM22B.htm)
If now correct (as above in blue) I will ammend my first post and those who have 459MHz firmwares should ammend their files and upload to the Tx and Rx.
I'll also get Melih (Flytron) to change the Google repository.
Nigel.
I noticed the post on Flytron earlier, tbh i never noticed myself, but will 10hz seperation give sufficiant spacing to still be effective Nigel ?
Hi Ian,
No, 10Khz is not enough and it doesn't fit with the 459MHz band channel plan either as the band plan calls for 25kHz channel spacing.
However, 10kHz multiplied by the number of channel 'spacings' (StepSize) you require will fit the band plan.
e.g. (from my example startup frequency and channel step size and step spacing above)
459.0 + (10kHz x 10 (= 100kHz)) (1st channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.100
459.0 + (10kHz x 15 (= 150kHz)) (2nd channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.150
459.0 + (10kHz x 25 (= 250kHz)) (3rd channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.250
Get the drift?
Whereas before, (in my error) the channel StepSize was defined as 50kHz and we ended up out of band!!
459.0MHz + (50kHz x 10 (500kHz or 0.5MHz)) = 459.5MHz (Just within legal band)
459.0MHz + (50kHz x 15 (750kHz or 0.75MHz)) = 459.75MHz (Outside legal band)
459.0MHz + (50kHz x 25 (1250kHz or 1.25MHz)) = 460.25MHz (Outside legal band)
Remember, the RFM22B cannot do 5kHz spacing, so we decide if we are going to startup on 459.0 or 459.025 so we can get a mix of channels to fit the band plan.
http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html (http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html)
Of course, if channel hopping is now robust enough, we could use the whole band from 458.525 - 459.475 in either even or odd channel steps.
I chose to only hop channels above 459.1 because below 459.1 is a shared part of the total band plan.
Nigel.
Ah right got ya :)
So going off that, you could have :
//Frequency = CARRIER_FREQUENCY + (StepSize(10khz) * Channel_Number)
static unsigned char hop_list[5] = {10,15,25,35,45};
459.0 + (10kHz x 10 (= 100kHz)) (1st channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.100
459.0 + (10kHz x 15 (= 150kHz)) (2nd channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.150
459.0 + (10kHz x 25 (= 250kHz)) (3rd channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.250
459.0 + (10kHz x 35 (= 300kHz)) (1st channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.350
459.0 + (10kHz x 45 (= 350kHz)) (2nd channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.450
Stay within the Uk band with 5 channel hopping ?
thundeadMod 3.3 on its way :)
Quote from: Coyote on March 04, 2012, 03:14:56 PM
Ah right got ya :)
So going off that, you could have :
//Frequency = CARRIER_FREQUENCY + (StepSize(10khz) * Channel_Number)
static unsigned char hop_list[5] = {10,15,25,35,45};
459.0 + (10kHz x 10 (= 100kHz)) (1st channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.100
459.0 + (10kHz x 15 (= 150kHz)) (2nd channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.150
459.0 + (10kHz x 25 (= 250kHz)) (3rd channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.250
459.0 + (10kHz x 35 (= 300kHz)) (1st channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.350
459.0 + (10kHz x 45 (= 350kHz)) (2nd channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.450
Stay within the Uk band with 5 channel hopping ?
I've attached a excel spreadsheet with some freq calc. will update my fw accordingly.
Cheers
Mihai.
Ive just modified my post Mihai, i had "char hop_list[3] = {10,15,25,35,45};" but it should be "char hop_list[5] = {10,15,25,35,45};" for 5 channels i believe ?
that is correct :) but your last channel needs to be 45 not 50 if you want to stay legal :)
Quote from: Coyote on March 04, 2012, 03:32:40 PM
Ive just modified my post Mihai, i had "char hop_list[3] = {10,15,25,35,50};" but it should be "char hop_list[5] = {10,15,25,35,50};£ for 5 channels i believe ?
kk got it cheers, ill modify posts
Ah i noticed my channels were at 45, only the channel list was 50, must have had a blonde moment :)
Yep, sounds good (the highest frequency should be 495.475 to allow for the bandwidth of the carrier not to overstep the 459.500 upperlimit).
e.g. (I've corrected a couple of typo's)
//Frequency = CARRIER_FREQUENCY + (StepSize(10khz) * Channel_Number)
static unsigned char hop_list[3] = {10,15,25,35,45};
459.0 + (10kHz x 10 (= 100kHz)) (1st channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.100
459.0 + (10kHz x 15 (= 150kHz)) (2nd channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.150
459.0 + (10kHz x 25 (= 250kHz)) (3rd channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.250
459.0 + (10kHz x 35 (= 350kHz)) (4th channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.350
459.0 + (10kHz x 45 (= 450kHz)) (5th channel hop from your defined base frequency of 459) = 459.450
By using 10kHz StepSize, all you have to do is add a zero after the hopping channel number.
Nigel.
Thanks Nigel, shouldnt char hop_list[3] be char hop_list[5] though ?
yes it should :)
Quote from: Coyote on March 04, 2012, 03:41:32 PM
Thanks Nigel, shouldnt char hop_list[3] be char hop_list[5] though ?
QuotethundeadMod 3.3 on its way :)
Cool, it moving on pretty well in just 1 week :)
Am i correct in thinking then, you could have two users, using the same channels in their hop, but still fly fine together as long as their headers were different ?
Quote from: Coyote on March 04, 2012, 03:47:42 PM
Am i correct in thinking then, you could have two users, using the same channels in their hop, but still fly fine together as long as their headers were different ?
That's the theory, how robust it would be is a matter of testing though I think. It would be good to get 2 OpenLRS users side by side to see how well it all performs. I would think with the headers being different your Rx will reject packets from the 'other' Tx but I if both are transmitting on exactly the same frequency at exactly the same time I think you will still see some issues. The reality is if you hop over 6 channels they will never be in sync so both Tx's will be transmitting not only with different headers but also on a different channel at any given time.
Yeah i think it wouldnt be as effective as hoped, which brings me to another potential idea for your firmware Thundead. An option in the program to choose a predefined set of channels.
I.e. If I were to flash mine and PK flashed with the same tool, we would be hopping on the same channels, but if an option of say channel sets for exampe A,B,C or D meant we could flash with different channel sets and know our channels wouldnt clash at all throughout the hops ?
So for example, one set 10,15,25,35,45, another set 12,17,27,37,47 etc etc
Then there would be seperation of sorts coupled with different headers would make it more effective
This is something you could implement yourself very easily if you see this section of code in the config.h for the Tx this is the hopping channels used, ofcourse the Rx's config.h would need altering too.
Quote
//###### HOPPING CHANNELS #######
#define CHNO 6
static unsigned char hop_list[10] = {0,45,5,40,10,35,15,30,20,25};
Yeah easily enough done, but i thought it could be a cool feature to add to Thundeads uploading software. Then you could just tick a checkbox, the checkbox defines a set, the sets are predifined in sketch and defines your choice in its rendering
Agreed, tbh I would like to see some other cool stuff implemented first. I wonder how much we can ask for before Mihai gets fed up (only joking mate)
I must say though that the OpenLRS configurator at the moment is exactly where OpenLRS should have been from the start, its great that Thundead/Mihai has done this but a crying shame that Melih at Flytron let this product out in the wild with very little backup, sure its open source but it pays to make it open to more people to sell more units. Something that Thundead has done :)
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 04, 2012, 04:08:34 PM
Agreed, tbh I would like to see some other cool stuff implemented first. I wonder how much we can ask for before Mihai gets fed up (only joking mate)
I must say though that the OpenLRS configurator at the moment is exactly where OpenLRS should have been from the start, its great that Thundead/Mihai has done this but a crying shame that Melih at Flytron let this product out in the wild with very little backup, sure its open source but it pays to make it open to more people to sell more units. Something that Thundead has done :)
Agreed too, thanks to Mihai for the work, and of course Nigel too :)
On the features though, im a great believe in keeping the features simple for now, then the system just works reliably. RSSI and telemetry is kinda cool though
v3.3 - RSSI moved to pin 7
- CH7 moved to pin 9
- SERIAL PPM fixed and on pin 8
- 459Mhz band fixed.
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list
Cheers,
Mihai.
Looks like my fw has started quite a following haha. Cheers for the support guys :D As long as this system will be robust enough for my application I'll constantly update it with more goodies :)
@ Coyote good idea with the hopping set for the configurator. what do u guys think would be better ?
1. pre-defined hopping sets ?
2. random sets (random button)
3. boxes for each hop sequence
all the above ? lol
Quote from: thundead on March 04, 2012, 04:18:45 PM
v3.3 - RSSI moved to pin 7
- CH7 moved to pin 9
- SERIAL PPM fixed and on pin 8
- 459Mhz band fixed.
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list
Cheers,
Mihai.
Pre defined hop sets imo, that way i would be on a specific set, then someone i fly with could ask me what set im on, knowing then if the select any other set, the channels are predifined so there is no clashes guaranteed ;)
With random theres no guarantee of clashes as with manual choice. But if you did what to do it manually, you can always edit your own sketches anyway
:yeahthat:
PK
:toiletbang: <<< LMAOO
After trawling around for a while i finally came across Sanders GoPro tests on UHF band.
(http://s12.postimage.org/ox14fye7t/Gopro_noise_459mhz_peak.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/ox14fye7t/)
I knew there was a spike at 459 mhz from the GoPro so i wanted to check to see how bad it was. After all some are having problems on "run of the mill" none Uk legal UHF locking out with GoPro`s
As you can see the GoPro produces noise @ 433mhz -63.60dBm, 0.44nW, which seems a tiny amount, but as history has shown it can and does down planes.
On 459mhz the Gopro spikes at -70.56dBm, 88pW that`s over 6db less than 433mhz spike :) Giving 459mhz another great advantage over 433
Correct me if I am wrong but the real interference from a gopro is experienced when using the TV out and having it as a live feed cam... otherwise its a non issue
btw have u guys seen melih @ flytron copied my interface idea ?
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=140 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=140)
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 12, 2012, 01:40:46 PM
Correct me if I am wrong but the real interference from a gopro is experienced when using the TV out and having it as a live feed cam... otherwise its a non issue
No Papa, its with / without TV out. Some claim the noise is less with tv-out used but there is no proof.
Not suprised Mihai, that's what Melih does.... He copies people and then sells it. nothing he sells is his own idea just a copy put into a good package.
Quote from: thundead on March 12, 2012, 01:42:19 PM
btw have u guys seen melih @ flytron copied my interface idea ?
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=140 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=140)
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 12, 2012, 01:40:46 PM
Correct me if I am wrong but the real interference from a gopro is experienced when using the TV out and having it as a live feed cam... otherwise its a non issue
Quote from: thundead on March 12, 2012, 01:42:19 PM
btw have u guys seen melih @ flytron copied my interface idea ?
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=140 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=140)
Oww blatant copy, but with channel number choice
Mihai,
Yes I saw it as well. I hope you get designer discount at his store for your configurator idea.
Papa,
I haven't tried my GoPro up against the OLRS Rx, but I have waved a UHF 500mW walkie talkie on transmit around it and didn't have any problems with the Rx.
It was a bench test with the OLRS Tx on 10mW and would have imagined the 500mW would have swamped it and affected the OLRS Rx if it was going to.
Nigel.
not for 459 lol :)
Quote from: Coyote on March 12, 2012, 01:45:03 PM
Quote from: thundead on March 12, 2012, 01:42:19 PM
btw have u guys seen melih @ flytron copied my interface idea ?
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=140 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=140)
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 12, 2012, 01:40:46 PM
Correct me if I am wrong but the real interference from a gopro is experienced when using the TV out and having it as a live feed cam... otherwise its a non issue
Quote from: thundead on March 12, 2012, 01:42:19 PM
btw have u guys seen melih @ flytron copied my interface idea ?
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=140 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4&start=140)
Oww blatant copy, but with channel number choice
Im just off out in a sec to range test Thundeads code on 100mw, then on dummy load, both with Gopro on/off
make me proud :D
Quote from: Coyote on March 12, 2012, 02:18:24 PM
Im just off out in a sec to range test Thundeads code on 100mw, then on dummy load, both with Gopro on/off
OLRS now has a great additional bit of software/code - a Spectrum Analyser !
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1617297 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1617297)
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=335 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=335)
First version of executable and code is here:
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=335&start=10#p2484 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=335&start=10#p2484)
Nigel
Very cool, Ill be giving this a go :)
I might be doing something hideously wrong but when I run the RX as a spectrum analyzer I am finding the peak for my thundead modded TX at 43900 not the 45900 that I was expecting. Am I doing something very silly or misinterpreting the results.
hey guys :) saw this over @ Flytorn. look interesting :D Been buried in uni crap but I'll have a quick look when I've got some spare time :)
Quote from: Splashy on March 20, 2012, 08:23:51 PM
I might be doing something hideously wrong but when I run the RX as a spectrum analyzer I am finding the peak for my thundead modded TX at 43900 not the 45900 that I was expecting. Am I doing something very silly or misinterpreting the results.
Can you put a screenshot of your GUI ?
I can't compile in Mihai's v3.3 RX.
It's OK if I just add the <code> in the Rx tab, but as soon as I add
// Enable spectrum-analyzer?
#define SPECTRUM_ANALYZER 1
in the config.h tab it bleats about...
thUndeadMOD3_RX:920: error: expected constructor, destructor, or type conversion before '(' tokenthUndeadMOD3_RX:923: error: expected unqualified-id before 'while'
in line
// When running frequency scanning we want 50 khz between each channel, meaning 200 channels = 10 mhz.
_spi_write(0x7a, 0x01); // 50khz step size (10khz x value)
Too tired and I need some sleep!
Nigel
Nigel it would seem the spektrum analyser software was written to work with Melih's FW it's entirely possible that it doesn't work with Thundeads
FW as its quite different in how it's structured and how it handles the RF module...
definitely won't work properly with my fw as I've changed everything in Melih's fw. lower baud, different packet structure etc.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 20, 2012, 10:22:22 PM
Nigel it would seem the spektrum analyser software was written to work with Melih's FW it's entirely possible that it doesn't work with Thundeads
FW as its quite different in how it's structured and how it handles the RF module...
Same error in Melih's v1.11.
I'm using Arduino v0023
What am I doing wrong?
Neeeed sleeeep
Nigel.
Nigel, as far as I can tell, you will need to comment out the rx or tx part inthe config.h
Quote from: Devonian on March 20, 2012, 10:40:57 PM
Same error in Melih's v1.11.
I'm using Arduino v0023
What am I doing wrong?
Neeeed sleeeep
Nigel.
Quote from: Coyote on March 20, 2012, 09:37:35 PM
Quote from: Splashy on March 20, 2012, 08:23:51 PM
I might be doing something hideously wrong but when I run the RX as a spectrum analyzer I am finding the peak for my thundead modded TX at 43900 not the 45900 that I was expecting. Am I doing something very silly or misinterpreting the results.
Can you put a screenshot of your GUI ?
(http://s13.postimage.org/3rvfunfur/Open_LRS.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/3rvfunfur/)
the relevant bit in my OpenLRS_RX.pde is :
//############ MAIN LOOP ##############
void loop() {
unsigned char i,tx_data_length;
unsigned char first_data = 0;
receiver_mode = check_modes(); // Check the possible jumper positions for changing the receiver mode.
load_failsafe_values(); // Load failsafe values on startup
if (receiver_mode == 1) Red_LED_Blink(3); // 3x Red LED blinks for serial PPM mode.
Red_LED_ON;
RF22B_init_parameter(); // Configure the RFM22B's registers
frequency_configurator(CARRIER_FREQUENCY); // Calibrate the RFM22B to this frequency, frequency hopping starts from here.
to_rx_mode();
sei();
//Hop to first frequency from Carrier
#if (FREQUENCY_HOPPING==1)
Hopping();
#endif
RF_Mode = Receive;
time = millis();
last_pack_time = time; // reset the last pack receiving time for first usage
last_hopping_time = time; // reset hopping timer
//Spectrum_Analyzer();
// ========================================================================================================
// Spectrum-analyzer part
// ========================================================================================================
#if (SPECTRUM_ANALYZER_ENABLED == 1)
unsigned char read_serial =0;
char serial_buf =0;
int temp_buf[3] = {0,0,0};
unsigned char buf_index =0;
long totalreading;
int rssi_max = 0;
int rssi_min = 255;
long number_average = 100;
int start_freq = ((430-240)/10);
int end_freq = ((440-240)/10);
// When running frequency scanning we want 50 khz between each channel, meaning 200 channels = 10 mhz.
_spi_write(0x7a, 0x05); // 50khz step size (10khz x value)
// Run infinite loop..
while (1==1) {
// Empty line when a full scan is completed
Serial.println();
// Scan from 240 mhz to 470 mhz.
for (unsigned int k = start_freq; k<end_freq;k++) {
// 0x40 = 240 mhz.
// 0x41 = 250 mhz
// 0x42 = 260 mhz.
unsigned int center_frequency = 0x40+k;
_spi_write(0x75, center_frequency);
_spi_write(0x76, 0x00);
_spi_write(0x77, 0x00);
// Scan 200 x 50 khz = 10 mhz.
for (unsigned int i =0; i < 200; i++) {
_spi_write(0x79, i);
delay(1);
if (_spi_read(0x0C)==0) {RF22B_init_parameter(); to_rx_mode(); }// detect the locked module and reboot
totalreading=0;
rssi_max = 0;
rssi_min = 255;
// Used to average readings and find max if using frequency-hopping transmitter.
for (unsigned int j =0; j < number_average; j++) {
// Always check for incoming serial-data:
if (Serial.available()) {
serial_buf = Serial.read();
if (serial_buf == 35) {
read_serial =1;
}
else if (read_serial == 1) {
if (serial_buf == 44) {
buf_index++;
}
else if (serial_buf > 47 && serial_buf < 58){
temp_buf[buf_index] = temp_buf[buf_index]*10 + (serial_buf-48);
}
else if(serial_buf == 10) {
j=30000;
k=30000;
read_serial =0;
start_freq = (temp_buf[0]-240)/10;
end_freq = (temp_buf[1]-240)/10;
number_average = temp_buf[2];
temp_buf[0] =0;
temp_buf[1] =0;
temp_buf[2] =0;
buf_index =0;
delay(100);
/*
Serial.print("Start_freq: ");
Serial.print(start_freq);
Serial.print("End_freq: ");
Serial.println(end_freq);
*/
}
}
}
Rx_RSSI = _spi_read(0x26); // Read the RSSI value
totalreading += Rx_RSSI;
if (rssi_max < Rx_RSSI) {
rssi_max = Rx_RSSI;
}
if (rssi_min > Rx_RSSI) {
rssi_min = Rx_RSSI;
}
rx_reset();
delayMicroseconds(250);
}
//Serial.print("Channel: ");
Serial.print(24000+k*1000+i*5);
Serial.print(",");
totalreading = totalreading / number_average;
Serial.print(rssi_max);
Serial.print(",");
Serial.print(totalreading);
Serial.print(",");
// Serial.print(i);
// Serial.print("\t");
//Serial.print(" RSSI min:");
//Serial.print(rssi_min);
//Serial.print(" RSSI max:");
Serial.print(rssi_min);
Serial.println(",");
//Serial.print(" RSSI avg:");
}
}
}
#endif
// ========================================================================================================
// Spectrum-analyzer part END
// ========================================================================================================
and in my rfm22b i replaced the frequency_configurator with
void frequency_configurator(long frequency){
// frequency formulation from Si4432 chip's datasheet
// original formulation is working with mHz values and floating numbers, I replaced them with kHz values.
unsigned int frequency_constant = 19000;//default 430-440Mhz
if ((frequency>=400000) && (frequency<410000)) frequency_constant = 16000; // 16 for 400–409.9 MHz band from datasheet
if ((frequency>=410000) && (frequency<420000)) frequency_constant = 17000; // 17 for 410–419.9 MHz band from datasheet
if ((frequency>=420000) && (frequency<430000)) frequency_constant = 18000; // 18 for 420–429.9 MHz band from datasheet
if ((frequency>=430000) && (frequency<440000)) frequency_constant = 19000; // 19 for 430–439.9 MHz band from datasheet
if ((frequency>=440000) && (frequency<450000)) frequency_constant = 20000; // 20 for 440–449.9 MHz band from datasheet
if ((frequency>=450000) && (frequency<460000)) frequency_constant = 21000; // 21 for 450–459.9 MHz band from datasheet
if ((frequency>=460000) && (frequency<470000)) frequency_constant = 22000; // 22 for 460–469.9 MHz band from datasheet
frequency = frequency / 10;
frequency = frequency - 24000;
frequency = frequency - frequency_constant;
frequency = frequency * 64; // this is the Nominal Carrier Frequency (fc) value for register setting
byte byte0 = (byte) frequency;
byte byte1 = (byte) (frequency >> 8);
_spi_write(0x76, byte1);
_spi_write(0x77, byte0);
}
That's deffo showing your channels are on 433 not 459
But I am definitely running Thundeads Mod on 459 Mhz.
Even I could not have got it wrong on 3 modules ... better scurry away and check though..
I take it that everyone else is getting the peak on 459
I ve not tried but ill flash an rx tomorrow and let you know
On a side note, nice looking product in the making...
http://blog.ckdevices.com/?p=119 (http://blog.ckdevices.com/?p=119)
I understand they will be sold here when available
http://www.lipoly.de/index.php?main_page=advanced_search_result&search_in_description=1&keyword=ckdevices&language=en (http://www.lipoly.de/index.php?main_page=advanced_search_result&search_in_description=1&keyword=ckdevices&language=en)
Nigel.
1st link was very interesting Nigel, not sure what the second link was meant to show? Dont know if you noticed but you can buy the modules and a breakout board seperately from Flytron since a few weeks ago. Obviously this doesnt include a processor like the option you linked but still opening up other doors I think
http://www.flytron.com/open-source-hardwares/171-rfm22b-beakout-board-pcb.html (http://www.flytron.com/open-source-hardwares/171-rfm22b-beakout-board-pcb.html)
http://www.flytron.com/openlrs/157-rfm22b-s2-20dbm-wireless-transceiver.html (http://www.flytron.com/openlrs/157-rfm22b-s2-20dbm-wireless-transceiver.html)
The 2nd link is where the 1st link will be sold, when available (as I understand it).
You can buy the breakout boards/shields/RFM22B from Sparkfun and their distributors as well.
I use Proto-Pic or SK Pang in the UK.
I don't think Melih has got the market cornered any longer for open source/low priced UHF kit ?
Nigel.
I hadnt looked anywhere else for the breakout board, but I do use proto-pic from time to time. To be honest I dont think Melih had the market cornered at any point in time, he doesnt seem interested in supporting and pushing his product. Without Mihai coming along and completely re-writing the firmware we would all still be stuck with the copy and paste job that Melih did. More people should be using this system, and on a price point alone there should be more people buying it but I think it will take some more time to happen and only if the FW continues to grow and mature
Hmm, setup mine, same result as Splashy, on Thundead V3.3 code my Analyser shows my TX is on 433 too :)
(http://s16.postimage.org/i7mygvju9/Untitled2.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/i7mygvju9/)
Ian,
Try this.
Open the Tx pde in Arduino and search for
_spi_write(0x75, 0x53);
and replace it with
_spi_write(0x75, 0x55);
Verify it and load it to your Tx.
Fire it all up and run the spectrum analyser s/ware.
You may just be the first one to actually be on 459MHz.
It would appear I missed something in my original take on Melih's code and nobody spotted it -- until now.
Dennis and Mihai seem to have it sussed...
Let us know how it goes (I have to go to my eldest son's and won't be back until late).
Nigel.
Ok Nigel, I'm at work, but ill do it before I go to bed in the morning
Quote from: Devonian on March 21, 2012, 07:35:47 PM
Ian,
Try this.
Open the Tx pde in Arduino and search for
_spi_write(0x75, 0x53);
and replace it with
_spi_write(0x75, 0x55);
Verify it and load it to your Tx.
Fire it all up and run the spectrum analyser s/ware.
You may just be the first one to actually be on 459MHz.
It would appear I missed something in my original take on Melih's code and nobody spotted it -- until now.
Dennis and Mihai seem to have it sussed...
Let us know how it goes (I have to go to my eldest son's and won't be back until late).
Nigel.
Hi, I think I might be the first to be on 459 !!
(http://s16.postimage.org/5k7pb9ycx/config3.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/5k7pb9ycx/)
haha so i fixed it then :) better get a new version up then.
Doesn't that then mean the rx code needs updating too ?
Quote from: thundead on March 21, 2012, 09:50:03 PM
haha so i fixed it then :) better get a new version up then.
Yes, you did.
Useful things those Spectrum Analyzers. I wonder how long we would have gone on without the useful application for the RX.
I guess that means we need to do some more range tests ... maybe explains why the results were so good with the stock 433 antenna.
Good point, but at least its fixed :)
Nice one guys!
I did say I wasn't a programmer when I originally interpreted Melih's code for adapting to 459MHz.
Ah well, I got some of it right - not bad for an old 'un and actually a mechanical engineer by trade rather than an electronic/software engineer.
In my defence, nobody else spotted my 'deliberate' mistake either ;)
Thank goodness for Dennis' software spectrum analyser.
If you want something machining, welding or knocking into shape with a BFH (Big F***** Hammer) - I'm your man :D
Nigel.
Nice one Nigel, not bad for an ole duffer :) Excellent find !
It's all good, if it was that easy everyone would be doing it lol You can write what I know about coding on a stamp bud
Yes we wouldn't have even known if it wasn't for the spectrum project, but now we have it all muhahaha :)
You did a great job in bringing OpenLRS into the UK and it was only 20Mhz! We all appreciate your efforts and those of Thundead.
The past day has really shown the power of Open Source and what a great development OpenLRS is.
Nigel,
So when you changed the rf circuit component values and experienced an 8mw drop in power output, it was still running on 433mhz (that would now make sense!)
Wonder if you still have that modified vtx ? and if so, I wonder what difference in power output there is when actually on 459 ?
Well, if you want to change the little bit of code before Mihai releases his 'fix' - then just find & change the one line of code in both the Tx and Rx pde, upload to the Tx & Rx and you're good to go.
All's well that ends well and nobody lost anything, thankfully.
Dennis has just realesed v3 of his spec an' software - looks pretty clean and sharp now...
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=335&sid=8897d1094050de89667488556e818c7b&p=2545#p2545 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=335&sid=8897d1094050de89667488556e818c7b&p=2545#p2545)
I still have the RFM22B hardware I modded and will check the output if I can find the little RF head I built (I think I robbed it for the coax?).
It was such a s*** to mod the board, I wouldn't risk doing another, it really tested my soldering ability to the limit.
Nigel.
Quote from: BigMouse on March 22, 2012, 12:25:33 AM
Nigel,
So when you changed the rf circuit component values and experienced an 8mw drop in power output, it was still running on 433mhz (that would now make sense!)
Wonder if you still have that modified vtx ? and if so, I wonder what difference in power output there is when actually on 459 ?
Using my newly acquired OpenLRS spectrum analyzer it shows a peak value of 121 for running at 439 Mhz and 157 for running at 459.
This is of course not definitive but the antenna I used on the spectrum analyzer RX was a 433 antenna whilst the TX antenna was tuned to 459. Distance from TX to RX was a couple of meters but I would not say that any decrease in output power is experienced and if anything there may be a power increase.
anyway, new thUndeadMod fw will be out tomorrow with the 459Mhz band fixed (again lol) hopefully for good this time + some extra goodies in the config app :D
Cheers for everyone who tested out the fw and pointed out the bug.
Mihai out :D
Nice one Nigel :) My kinda graph :)
(http://s14.postimage.org/p3568cca5/Untitled.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/p3568cca5/)
After closer analysis it still appears to be transmitting on two channels not 5, 459.05 and 459.35mhz
The default firmware only have around 18-20% active send-time. With 5 channel hopping, that makes it 4 % of the time, the signal on the single channel is actually present. With around 50 hz update-rate, each channel will be seen as 10 hz. That means you actually have to stay at the same channel for around 100 ms to see the channel - and only 4 % of the samples will actually be taken while the signal is present (that's the reason why it's just barely visible on the average readings, while it's clearly visible on max).
So in short, if you want to get a good picture of the channels, you should increse "Nr avg" to something like 250-500, and if you have a little patience you can also set step-size to 2 or something like that. Unfortunatly, fast scans will/can miss frequency-hopping devices, at the signal is only present rarely.
Hi Dennis, welcome to Fpvuk. Loving your work man :)
I tried the test at Nr. Avg 500 Step size 1
(http://s9.postimage.org/4dpql3k63/Untitled.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/4dpql3k63/)
And Nr. Avg 1000 Step size 2
(http://s15.postimage.org/gwtt5b8zb/Untitled.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/gwtt5b8zb/)
wow alot seems to have happened since last time i looked at this thread....
well done on your work guys! :)
so... will the v3.3 FW work @ 459mhz now?
im itching to have a test now but i have 459 antennas and dont really want to use it on 433...
really want to get the best out of it...
thanks,
simon.
Yes Simon, my pictures above show V3.4 FW loaded and running on 459mhz
yes :)
just found the 3.4 on the google thing..
thanks!
simon.
I have just done a bit of testing to see how well the RFM22B module performed when used outside the normal 433 mhz frequency band, and figured it might be of interest to you guys, since you use 459 mhz.
Test was done with OpenLRS configured to frequency-hopping between 23 channels, and a receiver as frequency-analyzer. I'm sending at 245 mhz, 255 mhz..... 465 mhz.
First test with the modules connected directly with a cable and 60 dB attenauter:
(http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showatt.php?attachmentid=4730905&stc=1)
- and with stock antennas:
(http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showatt.php?attachmentid=4730906&stc=1)
In relation to the frequency-response of the module, the test with cable is the interesting part. I have the XML-file if you want the data, but this is the key-data:
Freq RSSI:
245 162
255 166
265 166
275 166
285 166
295 165
305 164
315 164
325 165
335 163
345 162
355 161
365 154
375 158
385 169
395 175
405 176
415 180
425 188
435 192
445 192
455 189
465 182
Now for you guys, the interesting is around 459 mhz. It's clearly that the RSSI value has dropped a bit.
A quick plot in excel gives this around 459 mhz:
(http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showatt.php?attachmentid=4730938&stc=1)
My guess is something like 186 RSSI value compared to 192 around 435 mhz. The difference is 6 rssi value ~= 3 dB. That should be about 50% of the power available at 435 mhz.
(http://s15.postimage.org/iajk7lffb/total_sweep_cable_1.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/iajk7lffb/)
(http://s16.postimage.org/vzpqxk4td/total_sweep_antenna_1.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/vzpqxk4td/)
(http://s16.postimage.org/omacylkrl/rssi_459.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/omacylkrl/)
so that concludes that the olrs operates optimally at 435 mhz right ?
Quote from: thundead on March 24, 2012, 05:19:14 PM
so that concludes that the olrs operates optimally at 435 mhz right ?
It was a quick test, but it seems so yes. I have just tested your new firmware, will post a quick scan in a moment :)
thUndeadMod V3.4.
The frequency is now at 459 MHz as expected :P
I just chekced, the frequency-spacing have been set to 10 khz, and the default channels (with 6 channels jumping) are 0-45, meaning 459 mhz - 459.32 mhz. A pretty narrow frequency-span.
The seperate channels can't be seen, as they are simply too close to each other. The channels are:
0,5,10,35,40,45
You can see a tiny seperation between channel 10 and 35.
(http://s15.postimage.org/6umdoksif/459_mhz_scan.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/6umdoksif/)
haha that's indeed barely noticeable. We'll have to repeat the range tests to see how bad that 3db drop affects the range... (lets hope its not cutting the range right in half).
Cheers for your tests Dennis :) I'll drop u a PM.
Mihai.
Just tested with a RF-meter:
On top, thUndead software:
Bottom, default firmware.
The interesting thing is the refresh-rate and send-time.
Do you use packets a lot larger than default firmware? And what about refresh-rate? From what I can see it seems to be 25 hz compared to the default 50 hz.
If so, I suppose the frequency-hopping is 25 hz as well. Isn't that gonna give more "dead-time", if a channel is missed?
(http://s14.postimage.org/714o5er0t/thundead_default.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/714o5er0t/)
haha I'm actually using fewer packets (8byte payloads) at 9600 baud. frequency hopping is set on purpose to 25hz because the chip needs time to settle before hopping again (otherwise the rssi goes nuts and unreliable). that's what I saw anyway.
Melih's runs at 57600 baud, 17bytes payload.
I really cant see it being an issue, it was a known factor from the beginning that this RF module wouldnt be at it's most efficient power at 459Mhz. I would be interested to know if the antennas used during the sweep where tuned for 459Mhz or another frequency?
Arh 9600 baud, - that makes more sense. The lower payload should also help quite a bit, great.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 24, 2012, 06:18:02 PM
I really cant see it being an issue, it was a known factor from the beginning that this RF module wouldnt be at it's most efficient power at 459Mhz. I would be interested to know if the antennas used during the sweep where tuned for 459Mhz or another frequency?
Quote from: Dennis Frie on March 24, 2012, 02:27:10 PM
- and with stock antennas:
(http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showatt.php?attachmentid=4730906&stc=1)
- The sweep with antennas was done with the standard antennas from flytron, which should be tuned for 430 MHz.
The sweep where the modules have been connected directly with cable and 60 dB attenuater is the interesting sweep.
It might not be an issue, but if the range turns out to be 50% of the range at 433 mhz it might be an issue for some.
Well there are enough who fly on 433 and just keep quiet about it.... ;)
I'll have to get my finger out and test the only RF22B module that is physically tuned for 459MHz output.
I changed several components on my Tx board and it is an exercise I will not be repeating!!!
My Rx board is still 'default' values.
Laters...
Nigel.
OK, am I being a bit dim or what?
Do I just paste the Spectrum Analyzer code into the Rx pde and add the line
#define SPECTRUM_ANALYZER 1
into the config.h
When I do that, it won't compile due to errors (Arduino version 0023).
Also, do we connect the FTDI to the programming port or channel 9 servo out (where Mihai outputs RSSI)?
Sorry, age, end of a long day an all...
Nigel.
Ian congratulations on winning the largest cut and paste of the week competition :P
I flew with OpenLRS and Thundeads V3.4 code today. Not far, but I flew 1.3km on 50mw ( yes not 100mw ) with no glitches.
However, with anything higher than 50mw output power my Picture was wrecked and couldn`t fly at first. We established it was my Fatshark Dominators were the problem, his Fatshark base goggles were fine. After a while we narrowed it down to my in built 2.4ghz rx in the Dominators, I removed it and goggles were fine again
Nope, still won't compile in Arduino v0023.
@ Dennis,
Can you send me your sketch/pde for thUndeads 459 Rx with spec analyser code inside?
If it's OK, PM me and I'll let you know my private email address.
Nigel.
It doesn`t work with Thundeads rx code Nigel, just Melih`s rx code
I think it works just fine with thUndeads version as well (I will give it a try). I'm not able to send PM at this forum (probably due to too few posts), but feel free to e-mail me at Dennis.frie REMOVETHIS@ gmail.com
Just did a quick test. Probably due to the lower baud-rate settings etc. it needs a lot more time to get stable readings with theundead mod. I would recommend to use the default firmware for spectrum-analyzer. I'll ask Melih to include it as standard in next version.
Hi, please find attached a zip of the 1_11 version of the code modified for the Spectrum analyzer.
The code is only to be used for the Spectrum Analyzer ..
Quote from: Splashy on March 24, 2012, 09:48:51 PM
Hi, please find attached a zip of the 1_11 version of the code modified for the Spectrum analyzer.
The code is only to be used for the Spectrum Analyzer ..
That's the old code - please don't use that.
This is what I use, please ignore the ekstra GPS implementation etc.
Quote from: Dennis Frie on March 24, 2012, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: Splashy on March 24, 2012, 09:48:51 PM
Hi, please find attached a zip of the 1_11 version of the code modified for the Spectrum analyzer.
The code is only to be used for the Spectrum Analyzer ..
That's the old code - please don't use that.
oops, it worked for me!
Quote from: Splashy on March 24, 2012, 10:40:37 PM
Quote from: Dennis Frie on March 24, 2012, 10:10:05 PM
Quote from: Splashy on March 24, 2012, 09:48:51 PM
Hi, please find attached a zip of the 1_11 version of the code modified for the Spectrum analyzer.
The code is only to be used for the Spectrum Analyzer ..
That's the old code - please don't use that.
oops, it worked for me!
Well, the new GUI is almost backwards compatible - but the code for the receiver have been rewritten and now supports 1 MHz interval at start/stop instead of 10 MHz. If you set the start-frequency to say 458 MHz with the old code and the new GUI it shouldn't work very well ;)
Quote from: Dennis Frie on March 24, 2012, 02:27:10 PM
My guess is something like 186 RSSI value compared to 192 around 435 mhz. The difference is 6 rssi value ~= 3 dB. That should be about 50% of the power available at 435 mhz.
OK that is pretty damn significant. I will now move to 458MHz instead of 459.5MHz so it's a little bit closer to 435MHz. Would be interesting to see what that means in real-world performance.
Also first post!
I'll test later.
Once again, thanks to Dennis for this Spectrum Analyser tool, we would probably still be unaware that we were not actually on 459MHz without it.
Have a virtual beer on me, in fact, everyone can have one :laugh:
Attached is Dennis' latest (v05) spectrum analyzer software.
Nigel.
OK, tested my modified/re-tuned Tx for 459MHz.
Rx is still standard and best around 435MHz.
Both Tx and Rx are using homebrewed 1/4 wave antennas cut for 459MHz.
Tx was 5 metres away on 100mW output and running thUndeads v3.4 code.
Spectrum Analyzer software is v05.
I also have a wireless weather station in my home running on 433MHz...which is exactly why we should run on 459MHz for UHF model control.
(http://s18.postimage.org/oj3085chx/Spec_An_459_Modified_Tx.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/oj3085chx/)
If anyone else is crazy enough to want to modify their RF board, I attach AN435.pdf for your info.
I used the values for 470MHz.
Be warned, you may ruin your board if you are not extremely careful - just take a look at those grains of sand on the board, that is what you have to remove and replace with components of the correct value - never again!! ;D
Shame HopeRF stopped making the board for 470MHz....
Nigel.
thanks for the tests Nigel.
For people that want to forfeit telemetry for range, it will be much easier if we can find a lower power version of the 7W booster, and use it to control output to the full 100mw for general transmission (hence regaining any losses due to freq change) and have the facility to switch to higher power level to get out of trouble.
Also I might experiment with a mildly directional tx aerial mounted on a tracker complete with the rf board, instead of the board being mounted on the tx itself, just ideas for now though, too many projects on the go as it is, and with the summer season approaching fast...
This is making me wonder now, while I was flying 1.3km out on 50mw yesterday, was i actually on 50mw ? or 25 ?
Quote from: Coyote on March 25, 2012, 12:38:50 PM
This is making me wonder now, while I was flying 1.3km out on 50mw yesterday, was i actually on 50mw ? or 25 ?
What do you mean Ian? If you had the booster option set as one in the Tx FW then you where running at 50mW why would it be 25mW?
If the power output on 459 is half that of 433, I assumed I was on 50mw, I might have been, but just wondering if it was in fact lower
Quote from: Coyote on March 25, 2012, 02:03:51 PM
If the power output on 459 is half that of 433, I assumed I was on 50mw, I might have been, but just wondering if it was in fact lower
If the loss is 3dB maybe 1.5dB of the power is lost on the tx, and a further 1.5dB lost on the rx? So maybe you were sending like 40mW, but more like 25mW once it gets through the rx front end. Really need more tests...
really exited today...
got olrs fitted to the gaui 330xs flashed with v3.4 on 459mhz and...
it was glitching bad! very noticeable as it turned the osd on and off everytime :/
i was only getting 20ft or so before it started doing it :((
That sounds like a voltage drop more than a Open fault ?
This speculation about the power output and range from OpenLRS on 459 Mhz is very disconcerting.
Surely someone has a power output meter that they can use to determine the power output on 459MHz. Does Flytron not have the ability to give us a figure in mW.
I have purchased one of the 0.3-3Ghz RF Signal Sensors which returns a voltage value for the output power but without some idea of how voltage translates to power I cannot use this to give a definitive answer.
If the power output of OpenLRS at 459Mhz is as low as has been suggested then it would be foolhardy to use it for anything other than short range use.
I think that OpenLRS is a great product but we need to know whether a modified version of the TX unit is required for 459 Mhz or another alternative is required such as using a version of the booster which will give the option of raising the power output.
Im going to repeat my 100mw range check I did the other day when I got to 4km + and still had loads to go, I`ll document my findings, to see if it at least matches it
I will also take my laptop and record the spectrum analysis at the same points so someone that can understand it more than myself can draw conclusions comparing against close range ( in house ) analysis
I have an RF-meter and can do a quick power-test later, but as it's made for 1000mw max, it's hard to see a deviation around 100 mw.
The problem is that the Tx is 'pulsing' at 50Hz and unless you have 'peak hold' on your RF meter, you will have a problem to measure the RF.
You will also need to set the module for single frequency output.
MY RF-meter is good to 1Kw - 100mW doesn't even make the meter twitch.
I made an RF-head and used a DVM to measure the voltage to then calculate the RF output.
I seem to remember reading that you can program the module for continuous output (at reduced RF level) -- or did I dream that?
Nigel.
I just use an oscilloscope or a microcontroller, works perfect ;D
Actually, on this previous test with RF-meter it actually seems like 459 mhz have higher output. Not quite sure I would believe that.
(http://s18.postimage.org/xg31xo6fp/square_from_openlrs.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/xg31xo6fp/)
(http://s13.postimage.org/koa6j6ulf/thundead_default.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/koa6j6ulf/)
Quote from: Dennis Frie on March 26, 2012, 11:11:44 AM
I just use an oscilloscope or a microcontroller, works perfect ;D
Actually, on this previous test with RF-meter it actually seems like 459 mhz have higher output. Not quite sure I would believe that.
(http://s18.postimage.org/xg31xo6fp/square_from_openlrs.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/xg31xo6fp/)
(http://s13.postimage.org/koa6j6ulf/thundead_default.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/koa6j6ulf/)
With my little test using the Spectrum Analyzer I found that the output at 459 Mhz was higher than that at 439.
Was that test with normal antennas or with the transmitter and receiver connected directly with attenauter?
It was with 459Mhz tuned antenna.
Quote from: Devonian on March 26, 2012, 10:23:24 AM
I seem to remember reading that you can program the module for continuous output (at reduced RF level) -- or did I dream that?
Nigel.
I think you can use the PN9 Mode, Register 71h, Modulation Mode Control 2, p35 in the si4432 data sheet. Basically it will continuously output random data based on a polynominal:
QuoteThe primary purpose of this mode is for use as a test mode to observe the modulated spectrum without having to load/provide data.
For antenna-measurements with SWR-meter I have just changed the standard-firmware a bit. You can pretty easy get almost continuous output and make frequency-sweep. Can't remember exactly what I changed, but think I just removed all unnecessary time-consuming code, increased the FIFO-buffer to max and repeated to send random packets.
Hi,
I was wondering why we have not had any posts in the last 120 days. I am always a little slow of the mark so the silence has passed me by. Its a great pity as I was about to try "459 MHz UHF legal" but have a number of questions:
Have you all moved your comments to another Forum?
How do I connect to a Futaba 35Mhz 9X with square "buddy lead socket"(Connection diagram Please),
Has the issue of power drop at 459 been resolved?
Where can I find instructions on building/making/obtaining tuned antenna ?
Is it worth my time/effort and money in obtaining and using this system for medium range FPV on fixed wing and Hex copter. My Video gear is 2.4Ghz so I am unable to use my Futaba 10C and have to revert to 35Mhz 9X with the disadvantage when flying my quad with a long trailing antenna. I have read most of the 20 pages of this forum thread and had a quick look on the Flytron forums but specific answers to the above questions seem to be missing.
Any help or advice welcome
Regards
John
??
I'm currently using a Dagonlink and would like to use the Orange LS stuff on 459 (if it works).
So what happened to this thread and where is everyone now??
Was this project abandoned?
hey mate :) everyone moved to this thread lol: http://www.fpvhub.com/index.php/topic,5002.645.html (http://www.fpvhub.com/index.php/topic,5002.645.html)
regards,
Mihai.