Poll
Question:
Any Bugs So Far ?
Option 1: Nope, thing is rock solid!
Option 2: This hopping algorithm is rubbish!
Option 3: I want More options in the config app!
Option 4: I'm still using the stock FW
Option 5: RSSI Is Awesome !
Option 6: RSSI is rubbish!
Option 7: Range is amazing!
Option 8: Range is ok I guess
Option 9: Range is crap
Final thUndead Firmware for the openLRS
Changelog:
- v2 RX Pinout reverted back to 3.1 (RSSI on pin 8)
-RSSI is not rock solid as it was before
- Serial PPM on pin 9
- Hopping algorithm and recovery improved.
- 459 should be nice and reliable (tested 3km on ground)
- 433 should be even better
- Fixed nasty frequency change bug in GUI
- added channel selection dialog in GUI
DISCLAIMER
- Use this fw at your own risk. I cannot be held responsible for plane crashed, exploding rx/tx modules, aliens making contact etc lol.
- big thanks to papa_lazerous and ghost2212 for bothering to test out this new fw.
Background data
- Ground test was carried out on the 459Mhz band
Was tested up to 3km with some spare rssi left (ground test)
huge thanks to papa_lazerous for bothering to test this thing.
- rx/tx were stress tested for about 4h without any module lockouts / resets / etc (tx on micro mode in my Faraday microwave oven lol)
- RSSI was rock solid over this 4h period with slight variations (+/- 0.06v max)
so I can say that if this fw is doing weird stuff then you might be doing something wrong. (unless I can reproduce the bug and eat my words :) ) I challenge anyone to prove me wrong hehe.
Nuf said, now go flying :D
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/detail?name=thUndeadMod3_6FINAL.zip&can=2&q=#makechanges (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/detail?name=thUndeadMod3_6FINAL.zip&can=2&q=#makechanges)
OLDER STUFF
---------------
[b]thUndeadMod v3.5
--------------------[/b]
v3.5
-------------------------------------
- RSSI now fixed on v2 rx
- Remapped channels on v2 rx
- added Hardware help in config app
-------------------------------------
Well, here is what everyone has been waiting for but first:
-------------------------------------
The Infamous Pringles Hall of Fame (no specific order)
- Gary Moscardini
- Coyote
- pk-surfing
- papa_lazerous
- simondale
- Melih (@ Flytron.com)
- CrashingDutchman (@ Flytron.com)
- dramida
- Technoweenie
- Devonian
- seeers
- acid_g
- Webe
- palton
- chrisbrit81
- SouthPawPaul
^^^ please let me know if I forgot to add you in here
-------------------------------------
############
# Disclaimer #
############
- this FW is dedicated to all you UK FPVers so this will be the main thread for anything related to my work. Please ask me before sharing my FW anywhere else and if you do so, be sure to always link back to this thread.
thUndeadMod v3 Readme
Features
- 9600 baud
- reliable RSSI
- in flight Fail Safe
- Optimised frequency hopping algorythm that just works
- Configurable hopping channels
- Range!!!! (3km ground range stock)
Upcoming feature list for 3.5
- Diversity
- Basic Telemetry
- bug fixes if any
RSSI - 3.2v = Max rssi / 0v = fail safe / on PIN 7
SERIAL PPM - PIN 8
In flight Fail Safe - just hold the tx button presed until you hear
a long beep and that's it
Hopping Channels - you can chose how many channels the system hops.
less channels = faster recovery times but
less interference protection
please post any bugs so I can make the necessary changes :D
Quick How To Guide
(http://s16.postimage.org/yjydskscx/confighelp.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/yjydskscx/)
Enjoy :D
Downloads
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list)
archive password = "fpvuk"
CHANGELOG
v3.4 - 459Mhz band fixed for good this time.
v3.3 - RSSI moved to pin 7
- CH7 moved to pin 9
- SERIAL PPM fixed and on pin 8
- 459Mhz band fixed.
v3.2 - added RX working as TX mode in config app
v3.1 - added 8th channel to pin 9 on Rx
thUndeadMod v3.0 - initial Release
----------------
BUGS:
- none so far...
FW ready for the grabbing :D
Excellent work, tried it out, exported all the configs, works great :) Im very impressed
glad to hear that :) Added a poll in there as well just to see what ppl think of the thing after flying it.
Quote from: Coyote on February 25, 2012, 02:59:09 AM
Excellent work, tried it out, exported all the configs, works great :) Im very impressed
oh great stuff! ;D
cant wait to have a play with the new fw
thanks!
Awesome Work!! ;D :P
Small token sent to the RedBull / Pringles fund!! May it power many more nights of programming goodness.
Thanks for this Thundead, I'm going to try it out this weekend
PK
ok it's 8am I am just finishing off coffee and toast, I have just got all my gear ready and once the girlfriend has gotten herself ready for the off (could be minutes or hours, strange creatures are lady folk) I will be commencing operation range test to see how stable it is. Will report back in a few hours:)
Cheers :) added u to the hall of fame :D
Quote from: Technoweenie on February 25, 2012, 05:47:21 AM
Awesome Work!! ;D :P
Small token sent to the RedBull / Pringles fund!! May it power many more nights of programming goodness.
Make me proud :D RSSI is on pin 8 btw.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on February 25, 2012, 09:08:00 AM
ok it's 8am I am just finishing off coffee and toast, I have just got all my gear ready and once the girlfriend has gotten herself ready for the off (could be minutes or hours, strange creatures are lady folk) I will be commencing operation range test to see how stable it is. Will report back in a few hours:)
Stupid question, in pre config options it has Header DoMo, whats a header ?
Quote from: Coyote on February 25, 2012, 03:23:14 PM
Stupid question, in pre config options it has Header DoMo, whats a header ?
It's important you change the header and make sure you have the Tx and Rx the same as each other. The 4 characters in your header are a way of the Rx and Tx knowing to listen to each other. If a packet of data doesnt have that header then it will be ignored
Couldn't have said it better myself :D any news from the range test ?I'm gonna do my own in a couple of hours down @ the beach :)
Just done some basic range tests along my street in low power mode (10mW)
First off I flahsed the FW with no hopping as a bench mark, I walked to the end of my road which is only 200metres and i had great signal with no glitches. I observed the RSSI to be consistent, in that it went down in a linear fashion as I was walking away from the Rx and didn't jump around.
I then proceeded to goto 3 channel hopping and did the same test, also got to the end of the street with no issues,
I then ramped it upto 6 channel hopping and got to the end of the road but had a few hiccups, I was at the end of my signal but it seemed robust enough to hop past bad channels and I think I could certainly fly like that if I had to.
I live in a tree lined street and we know 459Mhz is a band thats absorbed by big dense trees and I was only in 10mW micro power mode so I am pleasantly surprised to be getting that range.
Next I am going down the park to test 6ch hopping @100mW previously my ground range was only 430metres on 100mW so hopefully I will exceed that.
I will report back later with full results
Ah cheers for the explanation :)
Very interesting results so far Papa, I think ill go with 3 channels hopping, i dont see any reason to go higher on the clean band.
Just got back from a full range check, on 6 channels. Lets just say nobody who is actually flying within range of what you can see needs to worry. Absolutely amazed, it was rock solid and the RSSI works perfectly :)
Coyote 3 channels hopping is not robust enough for my liking, it might be a mostly vacant band on paper but I bet there is enough RF noise out there from numerous sources that a little extra security of hopping on more channels is a must for me.
My next move is to change the antenna on my Tx, I will make an antenna tuned to 459Mhz as there is likely a noticable loss from using a 433Mhz antenna on the Tx. I have a tuned antenna on the Rx that I made today, took me about 5 minutes from scratch and works like a charm.
Much Kudos to Mihai and all the hard work that has gone into this excellent and massively improved Firmware :cooldance:
ok guys, back from my range test and I'll let the image below say everything
(http://s12.postimage.org/6kxlwbjvd/Clipboard01.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/6kxlwbjvd/)
So the conclusion ? Eating Pringles and Red Bull Like a Bauss - it will prob kill me some day / countless nights on this fw - worth it :D
FW config:
459,8 Mhz
6 CH
100mw
1/2 wave 433 antenna on tx and crappy 433 antenna on rx (the one it comes with)
Well if we are posting pics......
(http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/4416/v3olrsrange.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/834/v3olrsrange.jpg/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
Ver 3.1 UP !
- ADDED 8th channel to pin 9
Quote from: thundead on February 25, 2012, 08:08:54 PM
Ver 3.1 UP !
- ADDED 8th channel to pin 9
Just flashed it and it's working good :)
Thank you so much for all the work you have put into this.
I am a developer and am currently working 7 days a week and very long hours so understand the work involved in something like this.
I do not have any Pringles to give you but I have been making some 459 Mhz tuned antennas (Sanders Style). If you would like to pm me your address I will send you a pair of these.
Some antennas would actually come in handy :) PM sent.
Mihai,
Looks like very good work, well done.
Not tested yet, but will report in the next couple weeks as I am decorating at home so no time to spare for R/C :(
Donation made to Pringles/Red Bull fund.
Nigel.
Cheers Nigel :) added you to the hall of fame :D
Sounds exciting! I'm going to put this on mine tomorrow. Unfortunately my quad is in 3 bits after flying (crashing) on Saturday but seeing that I live 200 metres from the beach I think I should get in on this seafront range testing lark!
eagerly waiting for your range test :D
Quote from: simondale on February 26, 2012, 11:40:20 PM
Sounds exciting! I'm going to put this on mine tomorrow. Unfortunately my quad is in 3 bits after flying (crashing) on Saturday but seeing that I live 200 metres from the beach I think I should get in on this seafront range testing lark!
UPDATE
----------
thUndeadMod v3.2
- ADDED RX working as TX in config app.
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list)
Quote from: Capello1986 on February 27, 2012, 03:49:37 PM
So hold on a minute, where do I get one of these units so I can get into this whole openlrs? Easy enough to install and so on?
Flytron (http://flytron.com/16-openlrs)
It started here:
http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php/topic,2551.0.html (http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php/topic,2551.0.html)
Buy from the UK agent ;)
http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/rc-control-systems/rc-control-separates (http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/rc-control-systems/rc-control-separates)
or Flytron
http://flytron.com/16-openlrs (http://flytron.com/16-openlrs)
Be aware, this is not really plug n fly - you will need to some bits for yourself.
Nigel.
Oh bloody hell ! lol I didnt know Simon did it or i would have ordered from him :(
But you have mentioned it :) Do enlighten us :)
u cant do that Simon..... give us a clue please...
New hardware going to be the OpenLRS multicopter edition??
And Ian I replied to your post over at the flytron forum
Cheers answered mate
Sounds great, looking forward to seeing what crops up :)
*Thread pruned after off topic posts*
The new v3.2, is this so you can use the second rx as a tx for telemetry i take it ?
Quote from: Coyote on February 27, 2012, 11:03:47 PM
The new v3.2, is this so you can use the second rx as a tx for telemetry i take it ?
Rx as a Tx means instead of buying a Tx in a case and mounting it in a module you can literally get an Rx put this FW on it and connect power and PPM in from your transmitter and the Rx will work as a transmitter..... Albeit with a few extra pins lol. It's good for people that don't have a futaba or a radio that will accept a futaba module they can buy a cheaper Rx and internally mount in their Tx and have a UHF antenna in the normal place and it also looks unmodified :)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cool, thats handy to know, just missing a buzzer but ive just read you can impliment that too with coding, gotta love the flexibility of this system :)
thanks for the explanation :)
@Coyote - telemetry + diversity will be in the next fw update but first I'll wait a bit more to see other range tests to confirm the current fw is working ok so I can fix whatever bugs are found.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on February 28, 2012, 01:05:52 AM
Quote from: Coyote on February 27, 2012, 11:03:47 PM
The new v3.2, is this so you can use the second rx as a tx for telemetry i take it ?
Rx as a Tx means instead of buying a Tx in a case and mounting it in a module you can literally get an Rx put this FW on it and connect power and PPM in from your transmitter and the Rx will work as a transmitter..... Albeit with a few extra pins lol. It's good for people that don't have a futaba or a radio that will accept a futaba module they can buy a cheaper Rx and internally mount in their Tx and have a UHF antenna in the normal place and it also looks unmodified :)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yet another happy thUndeadMod User:
(http://s17.postimage.org/mhp173j0r/range.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/mhp173j0r/)
thank you for the picture Daniel :)
~3km on the ground and still signal to spare - not bad ;)
Nigel.
I really like my DX8! I find the menus really easy to navigate and is feels nice to use.
Now it has 3km range and all the other benefits of OpenLRS.
(http://s17.postimage.org/5ylo3jvnv/IMG_0582.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/5ylo3jvnv/)
A matching pair of 459 antennas I made.
(http://s17.postimage.org/hc87er66j/IMG_0587.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/hc87er66j/)
The power comes from the LiPo (4000mAh) and the PPM input to the OpenLRS RX (being used as a TX) comes from the Trainer Port.
Hmmm I am pretty tempted by this system now! :)
Nice antennae too, its an impressive range test for sure. How was the new firmware ? Did you have RSSI displayed ?
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 (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list)
Cheers,
Mihai.
Excellent work bud :)
Turned out to be a bad connection on soldering so i tidied up the thread.
All 3 rx`s working great, no binding like othe LRS which i really do like :)
So far all tests have been flawless with 5 channel hopping, custom headers.
Only range checks to do now, then game on !
Seen this ground test?
http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=54&p=2346#p2346 (http://forum.flytron.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=54&p=2346#p2346)
It gets better by the day.
Nigel.
Cool, 2km on the ground with diamond and dipole on 6 channels :)
Im on a diamond and ive made some 459mhz rx antennas straight off the board, but ive factored in 0.9 as a velocity factor so ended up with 147mm elements
Hmm, I calculate the elements need to be 163mm @ 459MHz for each 1/4 wave part.
300 / 459 / 4 = 0.163 metres (163mm).
Velocity factor only applies to coax and were not overly concerned about that in this scenario.
Nigel.
Its not so much the co-ax but ive got my elements inside piping, only active element too ( on the quad )
Hay guys, this all looks and sounds great, the thing that puts me of, is every time I look at these posts, my mined is switched of with all the scents.
your tests and antennas are great Splashy, are you going to put up a post on how to make them, if I thought that I could get a safe 2 to 3km out of this system, I would jump on board, but electrics puzzles me and I think I would end up, not being able to get it working properly and wast yet more money.
:) G
The antennas are as easy as it gets G, two wires, one going up 163mm from center pin of rx, the other ging down 163mm from outer pin. Make sure the one going up is as straight as possible and you have a dipole ;)
thanks Coyote, is that the same as the Dragon link antenna then, not specifically the length, but one up and one down configuration, if so. can I use the DL TX transmitter antenna on the TX model.
:) G
Yeah same as Dragon, Chainling, Rangelink etc etc ............
But they are tuned to 433 mhz not 459
You can use a dragonlink tx antenna on a OpenLRS tx if thats what you meant
cool, thanks its a little bit clearer now.
;) G
Quote from: g.collins on March 07, 2012, 11:22:18 PM
Hay guys, this all looks and sounds great, the thing that puts me of, is every time I look at these posts, my mined is switched of with all the scents.
your tests and antennas are great Splashy, are you going to put up a post on how to make them, if I thought that I could get a safe 2 to 3km out of this system, I would jump on board, but electrics puzzles me and I think I would end up, not being able to get it working properly and wast yet more money.
:) G
I can make you a couple of antenna if you like.
I got some 0.8mm MIG welding wire, RG58 SMA connectors and a snake set for a Easy Star.
I solder a length of the wire onto the SMA then very carefully measure 163mm from the edge of the SMA connector and cut the wire. I then put on the inner snake so it goes right up to the soldered bit and cut to length. Then the outer snake and cut. Finally I put some heat shrink on the top and where the snake joins the SMA connector.
It is not a difficult job if you have the right components and the right soldering iron with a fine tip.
Hi Mihai,
Just loaded v3.3 and don't get RSSI voltage changes on pin7 (channel 7) ??
Nigel.
what hw version are u using ?
pin7 for v2 hardware. rssi should be on pin 9 for v1 hardware I think.
Quote from: Devonian on March 08, 2012, 01:07:28 PM
Hi Mihai,
Just loaded v3.3 and don't get RSSI voltage changes on pin7 (channel 7) ??
Nigel.
Mine is v1 hardware - didn't realise it was different output for different h/w.
I'll check again later...
Nigel.
Quote from: Splashy on March 08, 2012, 12:14:46 AM
Quote from: g.collins on March 07, 2012, 11:22:18 PM
Hay guys, this all looks and sounds great, the thing that puts me of, is every time I look at these posts, my mined is switched of with all the scents.
your tests and antennas are great Splashy, are you going to put up a post on how to make them, if I thought that I could get a safe 2 to 3km out of this system, I would jump on board, but electrics puzzles me and I think I would end up, not being able to get it working properly and wast yet more money.
:) G
I can make you a couple of antenna if you like.
I got some 0.8mm MIG welding wire, RG58 SMA connectors and a snake set for a Easy Star.
I solder a length of the wire onto the SMA then very carefully measure 163mm from the edge of the SMA connector and cut the wire. I then put on the inner snake so it goes right up to the soldered bit and cut to length. Then the outer snake and cut. Finally I put some heat shrink on the top and where the snake joins the SMA connector.
It is not a difficult job if you have the right components and the right soldering iron with a fine tip.
thanks mate, that's kind of you, I guess the making of them isn't a problem, it's just getting my head around it, I have made my own clovers and thy came out great, but I found pictures of the procedure before I did it.
:) G
Quote from: g.collins on March 08, 2012, 05:51:35 PM
thanks mate, that's kind of you, I guess the making of them isn't a problem, it's just getting my head around it, I have made my own clovers and thy came out great, but I found pictures of the procedure before I did it.
:) G
How about a swap .. I need a 5.8 Ghz clover. I will swap you the two 459 Mhz for a 5.8 Ghz clover. Don't worry if you are not set up to make these at the moment, just pm me your address and I will send you a pair of antenna.
RSSI out does seem to be on pin9 (ch 9) on v1 hardware.
I connected a little meter to display from 0 - 100 measured in percentage of RSSI signal.
I also used dummy loads so I didn't have to walk more than a few metres to see the signal drop away.
Click the pics to go super-size!
Full Tx output
(http://s17.postimage.org/8n9968twr/DSCN0741.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/8n9968twr/)
No Tx output
(http://s17.postimage.org/47vvy3nu3/DSCN0742.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/47vvy3nu3/)
Somewhere in between
(http://s14.postimage.org/noq8vheml/DSCN0744.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/noq8vheml/)
Before you ask, the meter is this one
http://www.dpcav.com/xcart/product.php?productid=16562&cat=0&page=1 (http://www.dpcav.com/xcart/product.php?productid=16562&cat=0&page=1)
Just need some spare time to do a range test with 1/4 wave antennas connected.
Nigel.
Quote from: Splashy on March 08, 2012, 09:33:28 PM
Quote from: g.collins on March 08, 2012, 05:51:35 PM
thanks mate, that's kind of you, I guess the making of them isn't a problem, it's just getting my head around it, I have made my own clovers and thy came out great, but I found pictures of the procedure before I did it.
:) G
How about a swap .. I need a 5.8 Ghz clover. I will swap you the two 459 Mhz for a 5.8 Ghz clover. Don't worry if you are not set up to make these at the moment, just pm me your address and I will send you a pair of antenna.
I don't need a antenna yet, so don't worry about sending me one yet, but I do have the stuff to make you a clover, send me your frequency and I will make you one up, I haven't got any SMA, but i'm sure you could put one on.
;) G
Cool, and bookmarked the screen :)
Deleted, RSSI fine, Telefly OSD not reading it right ??
Ok, all RSSI`s check out fine. Has anyone done any range tests with dummy load on tx by any chance, to compare too ?
Hi
In your first post when you refer to v3.3 it says 459mhz band fixed. what was the problem before?
Thanks
Brett
It was an error on my part from the initial frequency steps/spacing.
They were set at 50kHz and are now set at 10kHz - keeps the channel hops inside the allowed frequency on 459MHz ;)
Nigel.
Quote from: Devonian on March 11, 2012, 09:29:59 PM
It was an error on my part from the initial frequency steps/spacing.
They were set at 50kHz and are now set at 10kHz - keeps the channel hops inside the allowed frequency on 459MHz ;)
Nigel.
Could this lead to reduced range? On the DIY boards I have made I can only get about 750m with one line of trees in the way using a DIY 1/2 wave on the TX and a 1/4 wave on the RX.
Many Thanks
Brett
On any version of the UK 459 firmware before theUndead's v3.3, then yes, it's possible as some of the frequency hops would have been above 460MHz.
Even so, 750m seems a bit low range.
Try with Mihai's v3.3 firmware.
Nigel.
hey guys :)
@Nigel: cheers for the rssi tests :) looking good.
@ghost2212: people are getting between 2.6 and >3km with the current firmware so something might be wrong with the diy gear :)
@everyone else: keep the range tests and good news coming :D
Mihai.
Quote from: Devonian on March 11, 2012, 10:29:03 PM
On any version of the UK 459 firmware before theUndead's v3.3, then yes, it's possible as some of the frequency hops would have been above 460MHz.
Even so, 750m seems a bit low range.
Try with Mihai's v3.3 firmware.
Nigel.
OK I'm back from my range test using OpenLRS and Thundeads code
To be honest, i`m disappointed :(
Disappointed I didn't have enough petrol or LOS left !!!! :)
Point to note during ground test :
1) This was a ground to ground test
2) TX was at 433MHz
3) Tx antenna was a Diamond SRH771 SMA 433MHz
4) Hopping was 5 channels
5) A GoPro was on and recording through the whole test
6) Gopro was 12" from the OpenLRS Rx
7) My OpenLRS antenna was not fitted as recommended directly to the Rx but on a 24" RG318 tail
8) 5.8ghz vtx was running the whole test with a linear antenna so to cause as much effect on results as possible. It shouldn't, but anything that was gong to be switched on while flying was.
The result was .............. Inconclusive ! But i will edit and attach in this post the pictures and video of the test showing at 4.352km ground to ground, OpenLRS had ZERO glitches at a RSSI voltage of 1.36 !!!
Oh yes, no failsafes, and strong RSSI at 4.35km !
I first took the plane out the car at 3.2km and it showed RSSI of 1.40
Least to say, I'm impressed, very impressed in fact :)
The plane was glitching in the metal cars interior obviously most the time past 2km, but as soon as it was out the Faraday cage all back to normal. I was glad this was happening, it proved that the OpenLRS had not froze but was indeed going from failsafe back to connected
So, ground test on OpenLRS with Thundead V3.3 code 4.352km +
Google earth claims 4.4km
(http://s13.postimage.org/rp98wejcz/Untitled.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/rp98wejcz/)
Glad you had good results Coyote, all we need to do is get some air range tests.... I plan to fly this coming weekend if the weather holds.
Me too if my Vtx`s turn up :)
I think today has show me, and others too, that OpenLRS is more than capable of reliably controlling your plane on legal UK channel's and within power limits without any worry at all your going to ever run out of range at all. Which really was the whole point of it for 459mhz users.
yup :)
Quote from: Coyote on March 13, 2012, 05:35:29 AM
I think today has show me, and others too, that OpenLRS is more than capable of reliably controlling your plane on legal UK channel's and within power limits without any worry at all your going to ever run out of range at all. Which really was the whole point of it for 459mhz users.
Is anyone using the openLRS with a spektrum or JR radio?
thanks
Brett
Quote from: ghost2212 on March 17, 2012, 06:44:35 PM
Is anyone using the openLRS with a spektrum or JR radio?
thanks
Brett
I am using with a DX8. Works very well and is very easy to do. I did post earlier in this thread giving some details.
thUndeadMod v3.4 now online
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list)
Mihai.
Quote from: thundead on March 22, 2012, 08:52:52 PM
thUndeadMod v3.4 now online
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list)
Mihai.
It asks for a password?
pass is on the 1st post :) "fpvuk"
Quote from: Cat695 on March 22, 2012, 09:09:52 PM
Quote from: thundead on March 22, 2012, 08:52:52 PM
thUndeadMod v3.4 now online
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list)
Mihai.
It asks for a password?
Cheers dude mucho grassyarse
Thanks for the new FW mate! Appreciated as always :)
Thanks again dude :)
;)
I go to buy 2 Rx's off simon and he only has one left....damn :(
well least my EZOSD is a step closer
Quote from: Cat695 on March 22, 2012, 09:36:23 PM
I go to buy 2 Rx's off simon and he only has one left....damn :(
well least my EZOSD is a step closer
You can always buy direct off Flytron. I have 3rx at home one is brand new in the packet of you are desperate for 2 and don't want to wait a week for one to come from Turkey
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 22, 2012, 09:47:17 PM
Quote from: Cat695 on March 22, 2012, 09:36:23 PM
I go to buy 2 Rx's off simon and he only has one left....damn :(
well least my EZOSD is a step closer
You can always buy direct off Flytron. I have 3rx at home one is brand new in the packet of you are desperate for 2 and don't want to wait a week for one to come from Turkey
I'm always desperate!
If its ok I will have it off you?? just PM (or email
[email protected]) me what you want etc and I'm guessing PayPal ok??
its really appreciated mate!
I have just PM'd you but I think I would get one TX and one RX.
Quote from: Cat695 on March 22, 2012, 09:54:38 PM
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 22, 2012, 09:47:17 PM
Quote from: Cat695 on March 22, 2012, 09:36:23 PM
I go to buy 2 Rx's off simon and he only has one left....damn :(
well least my EZOSD is a step closer
You can always buy direct off Flytron. I have 3rx at home one is brand new in the packet of you are desperate for 2 and don't want to wait a week for one to come from Turkey
I'm always desperate!
If its ok I will have it off you?? just PM (or email [email protected]) me what you want etc and I'm guessing PayPal ok??
its really appreciated mate!
Am at work right now (night shift) and using a phone. Will pm you off my pc tomorrow to arrange
Hi all,
I'm having hard time getting RSSI to work :(
I own OpenLRS TX&RX v2, both uploaded thundeadmod v3.4 firmaware configured for 433band.
RSSI readings im getting are 3.33V then TX is nearby, 1.44V then there are lost packets (red led blinks) and 0V then there no signal at all. I've attached my multimeter on pin 7 (if holding RX board with MCU in front of me it is 7th pin from the left).
Any help would be appreciated...
Edit: Same three steps readings I'm getting and with my CL-OSD flashed GOSD2 :(
Thats exactly what it should be doing. 3.3 is 100% 0v 0% on pin 7.
Quote from: Coyote on March 26, 2012, 07:37:53 PM
Thats exactly what it should be doing. 3.3 is 100% 0v 0% on pin 7.
Sorry forgot to mention - Im not getting ANY values in between. Seems like there's only 3 steps of RSSI output voltage :( Maybe there should be some low pass (RC) filter to measure it correctly? Or just a capacitor of 10-20uF?
Just did a little research: ASCII output of RSSI values are meaningful, bet still only three steps of voltage :S
Uncommented debug output:
68
71
71
70
71
71
70
68
67
71
69
69
70
71
71
71
70
69
70
71
72
78
75
73
74
74
73
75
78
73
74
75
77
72
77
79
78
75
76
77
90
90
90
90
90
98
94
93
96
92
105
109
110
109
108
108
108
108
113
114
112
111
111
111
113
113
111
104
109
112
110
111
113
114
114
115
113
114
113
114
115
114
113
113
109
114
103
109
111
97
110
110
109
109
109
110
101
107
114
114
114
106
109
112
102
111
107
107
113
102
112
109
106
112
101
112
111
105
112
102
113
113
108
112
110
114
114
114
113
113
113
114
115
113
114
114
113
113
113
116
114
113
113
114
115
116
115
114
113
114
114
115
110
110
111
101
113
111
105
114
115
119
try it with a multimeter first and see if the RSSI drops gradually. if you are using a OSD to read the value it is recommended to have a buffer between the rx and OSD :)
Quote from: thundead on March 26, 2012, 08:08:47 PM
try it with a multimeter first and see if the RSSI drops gradually. if you are using a OSD to read the value it is recommended to have a buffer between the rx and OSD :)
Multimeter was the first thing I used to check RSSI values :) It shows only those three levels... I've tried to attach 0.1uF and 2.2uF capacitors between RSSI out and GND - nothing changed.
Continuing my research:
Used my sound card as osciloscope and got servo output PWM's just right, but these nothing on RSSI (PIN7). Well there is a little low amplitude noise... See attachments.
I've tried to change code to output RSSI on PIN6 and servo signal on PIN7. After flashing I've got servo output on PIN7 and "nothing" on PIN6 :S
I'm confused! Seems like FW is not generating PWM using analogWrite() :S
EDIT: I'm using Arduino 0022, selected board is: Duemilanove 328
Any other thoughts?
hmm weird... has anyone else encountered this problem ? could you please try thundeadmod 3.3 as well and see if it's doing the same thing.
I've tried 3.3 - same thing :(
Just tried changing board to Pro 5v, 16MHz - nothing changed :S
Seems like I'm going to write my own little test software to check PWM generation and report back.
PS. I've background on electronics and AVR programming, so that problem to me looks very strange...
yup you should definitely be using the 5V 328 pro mini in the boards selection.
if 3.3 doesn't work check the actual hardware and see if u have any bad solder joints. might be a bad connection.
Also careful when making changes in my code as I haven;t commented anything lol so the comments from Melih's stock fw might still be there.
another thing you can try, search for this line:
//Serial.println(map(constrain(Rx_RSSI,45,120),40,120,0,255));
and see what the function is outputting.
The code is clean, nice and understandable :) I even have few ideas for adding some features, but that after I get RSSI working.
Well, I've tried some test code - PWM output on PIN7 works as charm, but your code doesn't generate it :(
I'll try getting to my friend who has "normal" osciloscope to see what is going on on that damn pin then your code is running.
And yes, i've tried outputing RSSI values to serial - they are few posts above, seems pretty nice values - then i move TX away they are getting lower.
atm, I have no more ideas. Let's hope real scope will ring the bell.
Good night ppl :)
yes, found a bug lol. investigating and will release patch :) sorry bout that . I'm open to any ideas :)
Quote from: webe on March 26, 2012, 11:02:45 PM
The code is clean, nice and understandable :) I even have few ideas for adding some features, but that after I get RSSI working.
Well, I've tried some test code - PWM output on PIN7 works as charm, but your code doesn't generate it :(
I'll try getting to my friend who has "normal" osciloscope to see what is going on on that damn pin then your code is running.
And yes, i've tried outputing RSSI values to serial - they are few posts above, seems pretty nice values - then i move TX away they are getting lower.
atm, I have no more ideas. Let's hope real scope will ring the bell.
Good night ppl :)
Yey! Good news!
Should I cancel my trip to my bed? :D
if u bare with me 10 mins then yes :D
Quote from: webe on March 26, 2012, 11:06:39 PM
Yey! Good news!
Should I cancel my trip to my bed? :D
Why does mine appear to be working then on ground test ?
no friggin idea! I've hooked mine on the multimeter and its either solid 3.28, 1.4 or 0. very very weird but I found the problem and fixing a solution for it :D
Quote from: Coyote on March 26, 2012, 11:08:09 PM
Why does mine appear to be working then on ground test ?
Ah well that tally with my ground test, it was 1.4 at 4km, hmm, I really will have to repeat the range test for sure now. I know its good for that range, but with fully working RSSI I might be in for a nice suprise
Coyote,
on which band you'll be repeating ground range test?
I'm getting ready to do it on 433 using stock OLRS antennas and stock DragonLink antennas I've got today from Virgis21.
Guys I really need help with flashing the firmware
I get no error message...just 'done uploading' but the light on the Rx is solid bright red
I've been going at this about 2 hours now
It should be solid red until RX sees valid packets from TX.
Double check config for you TX and RX. Must be same band, same channels count, same channels and same header chars.
Quote from: webe on March 26, 2012, 11:15:39 PM
Coyote,
on which band you'll be repeating ground range test?
I'm getting ready to do it on 433 using stock OLRS antennas and stock DragonLink antennas I've got today from Virgis21.
On 459@100mw
Quote from: webe on March 26, 2012, 11:19:47 PM
It should be solid red until RX sees valid packets from TX.
Double check config for you TX and RX. Must be same band, same channels count, same channels and same header chars.
I'm slapping myself......so i did it right the frickin first time :'(
I haven't done the TX yet!!!
Solid rx means rx is on, blue means its reading the tx, so one doesnt match the other, check your headers and bands match, and set no.
Quote from: Coyote on March 26, 2012, 11:20:56 PM
Quote from: webe on March 26, 2012, 11:15:39 PM
Coyote,
on which band you'll be repeating ground range test?
I'm getting ready to do it on 433 using stock OLRS antennas and stock DragonLink antennas I've got today from Virgis21.
What antennas are you going to use?
I'm very interested to see difference on 433 and 459 :)
On 459@100mw
Well RSSI may not tell me much if it wasnt working. All it will confirm I suppose is 459 will go 4km+ on the ground
Quote from: Cat695 on March 26, 2012, 11:21:52 PM
Quote from: webe on March 26, 2012, 11:19:47 PM
It should be solid red until RX sees valid packets from TX.
Double check config for you TX and RX. Must be same band, same channels count, same channels and same header chars.
I'm slapping myself......so i did it right the frickin first time :'(
I haven't done the TX yet!!!
Ah, go into the corner and have a quiet word with yourself lol :)
I think so....frickin newbies heh
The FTDI flashed like a maniac for awhile then the rx turned solid red
That sounds exactly right
well I flashed it about 67 times...correctly
Well practice makes perfect......thanks guys for being patient
problem seems to be something else. I'll get to the bottom of this and release a fix by tomorrow.
Cheers Mihai look forward to it :)
got the wrong person lol
lol so I have, I keep getting you two mixed up sorry lol
anyway Think I found out what;s wrong with the RSSI.... the PWM is messed up because the fw uses timer1 to drove the servos... so need to find a way round this.
Yup, found the culprit... Will move RSSI on pin 1 and re-arrange all the ports like this:
R 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. bed time now though lol.
Cheers webe for pointing out this nasty bug.
Mihai Out :D
Quote from: thundead on March 27, 2012, 12:36:26 AM
anyway Think I found out what;s wrong with the RSSI.... the PWM is messed up because the fw uses timer1 to drove the servos... so need to find a way round this.
Good news then :)
Does this explain my RSSI being 100% and jumping down then back up? Only had this on recent FW change been driving me mental lol
yep, sorry mate my bad. everything got fked up when i changed the pin fron 8 (timer2) to 7 (timer1).
Quote from: thundead on March 27, 2012, 01:03:41 AM
yep, sorry mate my bad. everything got fked up when i changed the pin fron 8 (timer2) to 7 (timer1).
All's well that ends well, appreciated you have sorted it so quick. I was pulling my hair out replacing wiring all weekend thinking it was my mistake lol
Melih's fw is always coming back to haunt me lol. I'll sort it out tomorrow anyway. sorry again.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 27, 2012, 01:40:34 AM
Quote from: thundead on March 27, 2012, 01:03:41 AM
yep, sorry mate my bad. everything got fked up when i changed the pin fron 8 (timer2) to 7 (timer1).
All's well that ends well, appreciated you have sorted it so quick. I was pulling my hair out replacing wiring all weekend thinking it was my mistake lol
Its seems I'm doing something else wrong now!!
I'm flashed both TX and Rx (theundead one 3.4)......Tx green light after flash....however when I flash the Rx it goes solid red....then after that it flickers between blue and red and my servo randomly jumps for awhile then settles
when I put an input on that stick on the Tx the servo just jumps about a bit.....no smooth movement (Rx continues to flicker between blue and red, Tx stays green)
Tx powered by 2s 2200mah battery and then connected to trainer port DX6i
Rx powered from a 5v BEC to pin 1
when I disconnect Tx the Rx stops flickering
config files are the same
//####### BOOSTER #######
// 0 = No booster
// 1 = Booster
#define BOOSTER 0
//######### Band Select ##########
// 0 = 433Mhz
// 1 = 459Mhz
#define BAND 1
//######### TRANSMISSION VARIABLES ##########
#define CARRIER_FREQUENCY 459000 // startup frequency
//####### Freq Hopping #######
// 1 = Enabled 0 = Disabled
#define FREQUENCY_HOPPING 1
//###### HOPPING CHANNELS #######
#define CHNO 6
static unsigned char hop_list[10] = {0,45,5,40,10,35,15,30,20,25};
//###### RF DEVICE ID HEADERS #######
// Change this 4 byte values for isolating your transmission, RF module accepts only data with same header
static unsigned char RF_Header[4] = {'C','a','T','T'};
//###### SERIAL PORT SPEED #######
#define SERIAL_BAUD_RATE 115200 //115.200 baud serial port speed
Any ideas??
Guess what that will be my fault again......had 3.3v selected in arduino and not the 5v one
THANK YOU PAPA!!!!!
Quote from: Cat695 on March 27, 2012, 04:41:19 PM
Guess what that will be my fault again......had 3.3v selected in arduino and not the 5v one
THANK YOU PAPA!!!!!
I made the same mistake,just ask Mihai..... :laugh:
Quote from: thundead on March 27, 2012, 12:55:16 AM
Yup, found the culprit... Will move RSSI on pin 1 and re-arrange all the ports like this:
R 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. bed time now though lol.
Cheers webe for pointing out this nasty bug.
Mihai Out :D
Quote from: thundead on March 27, 2012, 12:36:26 AM
anyway Think I found out what;s wrong with the RSSI.... the PWM is messed up because the fw uses timer1 to drove the servos... so need to find a way round this.
Just wanted to check that you are aware that if you use PPM you have to connect pins 1 and 3 (like using a bind plug). If you are planning on putting RSSI on pin 1 then would this mess up the PPM output mode?
RSSI is now fixed. All I need is to move the Serial PPM thingy and we're good :D ETA 30 mins.
u guys want the same jumper thingy idea for the Serial PPM ? or should I make it activate via 2 pins that are close together (2 & 3) vs (2 & 4) ???
I`m easy, 2&4 sound good to me
2 and 4 will be then :D
Quote from: Coyote on March 27, 2012, 11:52:34 PM
I`m easy, 2&4 sound good to me
right I'll make that one clear in the readme lol
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 27, 2012, 05:01:26 PM
Quote from: Cat695 on March 27, 2012, 04:41:19 PM
Guess what that will be my fault again......had 3.3v selected in arduino and not the 5v one
THANK YOU PAPA!!!!!
I made the same mistake,just ask Mihai..... :laugh:
Teaser as usual :D
Thundeadmod 3.5 rssi test. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7i4tFq2plm8#)
Laughing at the random guest appearance at the end :) lol looks like RSSI is good again :) I'll have some range confidence this weekend now
Quote from: thundead on March 27, 2012, 11:57:59 PM
right I'll make that one clear in the readme lol
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 27, 2012, 05:01:26 PM
Quote from: Cat695 on March 27, 2012, 04:41:19 PM
Guess what that will be my fault again......had 3.3v selected in arduino and not the 5v one
THANK YOU PAPA!!!!!
I made the same mistake,just ask Mihai..... :laugh:
Even after being told use 5v earlier I just kept seeing 3.3v on the board and just selected that.....so my bad but good for newbies to know
Another question
Am I right in saying that if I set up a mix (like aileron/rudder) they don't work???
Yes they work, the mixing is done in the radio and the radio sends out each channels mixed output
Quote from: Coyote on March 28, 2012, 01:16:11 AM
Yes they work, the mixing is done in the radio and the radio sends out each channels mixed output
Yep they do, I had pulled a cable out when messing about with positioning.
thUndeadMod 3.5 now live
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list)
IMPORTANT UPDATE FOR ANYONE USING MY FW.
Changelog
V2 Rx remapped
Fixed RSSI bug in v2 hardware
Added Hardware Help in configurator
I'm going flying tomorrow with working rssi :)
Me too :) Just tried it out, working great :)
Its that good I did it......without help
Cheers
Competition tomorrow:D
(http://s13.postimage.org/zf4mwcyo3/523966_10150599516511981_578711980_9042369_1054378763_n.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/zf4mwcyo3/)
Now you know why I haven't been adding anything to the fw lately lol :D
Diving UAV??
A submersible!
Best of luck with R/C signal levels, unles it has an umbilical?
Nigel.
yup, its an ROV. 3 cameras, grabber, pressure sensor, 4 arduinos running the whole show lol (2 megas for controls and 2 minis for camera OSDs because I can :D)
nothing off the shelf :D electronics and some programming done by yours truly :D
Uses a 20m tether :)
Quote from: Cat695 on March 28, 2012, 10:36:16 PM
Diving UAV??
Looks cool :)
A mate of mine is building one for his university project.
Miles.
Very cool project matey, best of luck with it :)
Cheers :)
Quote from: Devonian on March 28, 2012, 10:36:40 PM
A submersible!
Best of luck with R/C signal levels, unles it has an umbilical?
Nigel.
Thats it!! I couldn't think of the bloody name
Mihai, Ian
John ask me to post this for you guys to have a look at
(http://s17.postimage.org/rgffsn2jv/20120328_225425.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/rgffsn2jv/)
(http://s15.postimage.org/ccaw5kmmv/20120328_225431.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/ccaw5kmmv/)
I was going to do a video but would be here all night uploading so hopefully my explanation will be enough.....trying to keep it brief though.
Today I went to do a LOS flight on the new FW (V3.5). Took off and flew 200m and lost control...(plane safe) was powering the openLRS Rx from the ESC (2 amp 4 servos only) antennas are extra from Simon (mono pole ones on both Tx and Rx)
So fitted a BEC (8.5amp 5v) did a range test by wondering up the road and seemed to get 3 times as much than the flight!
John (AKA Papa) asked me to hook up a multimeter to pin 1 GRN and Signal pins and check the output........with Tx off should be nothing or very low, correct?
With Tx on it should jump and stay up at 3+ volts....but as you can see from the pics it doesn't, it constantly jumps from 0 to 3+ volts
Tried 2 different BECS and still the same....John thought it best to pass this on to you guys as he thinks theres a problem.
Cat
There is a problem there. With my tests last night, the RSSI did not bounce to those extremes. 0.3 v typically. I would reflash your board (rx) and try it again
I still have to flash to the new version as I slept most of today away instead of flying (joys of night work) I may do a quick instructional video just so everyone has something to follow and we can eliminate silly mistakes from the mix straight away
I'm going to repeat my ground test tomorrow at the same place as previous one, and the weather is the same. So it will be the 459mhz this time and 3.5 software. If I get similar results we will know. But I've flown out 1.4km on Sunday on 3.3 software so I'm not expecting and real differences in results other that RSSI values
I did not do any range testing but did load up 3.5. It does seem to be much better.
I noticed before that from time to time my RSSI was dipping (seem as a return to home on my RVOSD). I was not sure what caused this but if you are saying that a timer was on the pin for RSSI then that could be the cause.
WIth the RSSI on pin 1 I did not experience any of these fluctuations and the RSSI was very solid. I am using a CC BEC (10A).
A 2A BEC with 4 servos on it does sound a bit close to the edge.
Quote from: Splashy on March 29, 2012, 12:57:29 AM
I did not do any range testing but did load up 3.5. It does seem to be much better.
I noticed before that from time to time my RSSI was dipping (seem as a return to home on my RVOSD). I was not sure what caused this but if you are saying that a timer was on the pin for RSSI then that could be the cause.
WIth the RSSI on pin 1 I did not experience any of these fluctuations and the RSSI was very solid. I am using a CC BEC (10A).
A 2A BEC with 4 servos on it does sound a bit close to the edge.
yep I thought that but its even doing it on a 8.5amp bec Trevor
just reflash both tx and Rx with 3.3 and RSSI on pin 7 is solid as a rock
Quote from: Cat695 on March 29, 2012, 01:18:28 AM
just reflash both tx and Rx with 3.3 and RSSI on pin 7 is solid as a rock
I would advise against this. The RSSI is not working properly on pin 7.
On 3.5 I found the RSSI was very solid (and working) on pin 1. If there had been any glitches then the RVOSD would have jumped into Return to home mode and that causes an audible glitch as the servos twitch. This happened on 3.3 but not on 3.5
I have another Rx arriving tomorrow Trevor so will try that one...I might just have a dodgy Rx
Quote from: Cat695 on March 29, 2012, 02:14:06 AM
I have another Rx arriving tomorrow Trevor so will try that one...I might just have a dodgy Rx
Extremely unlikely to be a hardware issue mate, I assume you protected the Rx with the heatshrink I sent you? Running it naked is asking for trouble. I'd be inclined follow splashy's advice and run the latest firmware. Perhaps try with stock antennas instead of the ones bought from Simon and then range test. The antennas are an unknown in this equation, I'm not questioning their quality but trying even the stock ones may yield a different result possibly isolating an issue. Also you remember when you had incorrectly selected 3.3v and not 5v when flashing. You are set at 5v 16mhz pro mini when flashing BOTH the Tx & Rx? Just double checking to make sure we are not missing something obvious
Yes mate it was one of the first things I did was put on that heat shrink
Mihai gave me the same advice on the antennas so stock went back on and will carry out a range test today....but the voltage still drops.
And yep I have reflashed both Tx and Rx with 3.5 and yes John I ensured I was using the 5v 16Mhz (mega328 one)....after a comment Ian made I even ensured the FTDI board remained perfectly still when flashing.
I have a video that I will add once its uploaded guys so you can see me flashing (the Rx that is not getting my todger out :P).....I didn't show it but I defo had 5v 16mhz mega328 selected (the USB is one I use for an SD card reader)
I want to thanks you guys for all your help by the way!!!
Its my last day at work today for 2 weeks so will be back soon to continue the saga (we're off go karting and the boss is paying!!)
OpenLRS Rx flashing FW version 3.5 (http://vimeo.com/39392532)
Hey all,
here's my research results from yesterday. After crashing my short range FPV plane and waiting till glue hardens I hooked up OLRS with CL-OSD, flashed them both with latest firmwares. My multimeter have shown very stable RSSI output on PIN1 - good job Mihai!
But... CL-OSD was very jumpy... Well, that's very logical - you can't reliably read voltage encoded as PWM wave using ADC. So I did a lil research on low pass filters and made simplest one - RC low pass filter (resistor in series and capacitor in paralel to the ground). After doing some math I've come to values of R=20kOhm, C=2.2uF. If PWM is really ~490Hz then i got cut-off frequency of about 7Hz and 0.1s settle time. After connecting OLRS to CL-OSD using that filter I got smooth changing RSSI values on my OSD.
PS. Mihai, I've just put a small amount of funds into your beer fund. Thanks for your hard job! Go and have a beer NOW ;)
PS2. Never ever fly FPV with uncharged ground station battery - that was the reason I lost my video few hundred meters away and crashed my new plane. I'm using 7Ah lead battery (gel type) to power my ground station. Before launch it showed ~11.5V, after less then 10min of flying my GS shutdown and voltmeter were showing ~7V >:(
Mine was a bit jumpy at first, I tried a 10k resistor and 2.2uf cap which gave me the best result for smoothing, but I think Ill add the Opamp Papa suggested to me
@webe, cheers for the Beer :D I'll add you to the infamous pringles hall of fame list :D
@Coyote, papa, splashy: glad its working ok for you.
@Cat, if the new rx doesn't work we'll debug the thing over skype tonight after 9 if ur up for it.
@everyone lol : Thinking of adding this things onto the configurator:
1. RSSI debug via serial monitor
2. Save and Load function for your configs (this way I can debug things better)
3. any ideas welcomed
what else do u think is missing from the configurator ?
Quote from: Coyote on March 29, 2012, 04:47:33 PM
Mine was a bit jumpy at first, I tried a 10k resistor and 2.2uf cap which gave me the best result for smoothing, but I think Ill add the Opamp Papa suggested to me
I'll expand on the op-amp, I made buffer using a LM358 configured as a voltage follower. The great thing about using a buffer like this, is that it solves any issues with the OSD putting too much load on the Rx which can cause an unstable RSSI. Even if you continue with a filter (which I don't think is needed) a buffer is a must as it has such a high input impedance the Rx has to do no work to drive the input which means you get a nice reliable RSSI all the time.
The schematic and wiring diagram I made where drawn on a piece of paper then photographed on the quick to share with Thundead originally, but I have shared with Coyotee too. So if you can suffer the low-tech diagrams carry on reading....
(http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/5475/img0619um.jpg)
Ok the top sketch shows you whats going on in the circuit as a schematic. And the bottom sketch shows you how to connect your wires to the op-amp (note pin1 is the top left, I tried denoting it with a big black dot but it might not be obvious)
NOTE: Do not substitute for an op-amp other than the LM358 just because the guy at maplins says it will be ok ;) This opamp has a quite special property, which is it will accept an input that can be the same as the negative power rail. other op-amps that are powered by 0v GND that recieve a 0v input go crazy and output garbage which would be no good for us. with only +5v to GND to play with there isn't much headroom to use any other op-amp.
Below is a picture of my finished buffer, I honestly think I was guilty of over-kill with the ferrite bead so its entirely optional. I bent the legs out flat on the op-amp and soldered directly to the chip, then used some hot glue to protect and hold everything in place, then I used heatshrink that I warmed slowly. The best bit is that the hot glue re-melts and as the heatshrink closes up the excess glue oozes out. and you are left with a small well protected buffer that looks professionally made and is very light.
(http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/8823/img0614t.jpg)
If you guys need more info I guess I can make another thread and do a video on how to make one, let me know if thats needed??
I take no credit for designing the buffer as it's merely an op-amp configured as a voltage follower. Anyone with more than a passing interest in electronics knows how to make one. The hot glue and heatshrink was my idea though (probably been done elsewhere though)
Right guys I'm off to go fly
Got another Rx flashed to 3.5
Did numerous range tests this afternoon and it doesn't drop out (but when connected to my multimeter still drops to 0) so only one way to test this baby is to fly!
This is my setup on EZ*2 (CG as per manual)
Battery (3S 2700mah) to EZOSD current sensor to EZOSD to VTX (5V camera in there to)
current sensor splits off to
8.5 amp BEC which powers Rx on rear of plane
ESC which obviously powers motor (with + pin removed from the servo cable and taped down)
Adjusted TX so it always points up
Rx Antenna is straight up (I'm using the 459 ones from splashy and Simon)
will fly LOS to trim out.
Quote from: thundead on March 29, 2012, 05:01:03 PM
@Cat, if the new rx doesn't work we'll debug the thing over skype tonight after 9 if ur up for it.
thundead,
can we have a chat on skype later today? I wanna discuss some ideas with you I have on mind.
If you interested, PM me your skype contacts. Ill be back in 2-3 hours.
Ok, got up too late after a night shift to range check, but I did have 30min spare to make the RSSI buffer.
(http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n39/cayote64/IMAG0113.jpg)
(http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n39/cayote64/IMAG0114.jpg)
After I initially turned it on, things were not good, the RSSI bounced from 3.12v to 0.04v, just the same as Cats, but then I unplugged plane, plugged it back in, and every thing is fine :)
RSSI holds to within 0.03v with 2.2uf cap on the RSSI input and Ground
Tx power Off / On RSSI returns to max value and holds
Rx power Off / On RSSI returns to max value and holds
Ok guys just back from a practice and a range test
Lost control of the plane at about 300m (flew beautifully inside 300 might I add), and inside of 300m the motor kept cutting out about every 30-40 secs and then starting up again after about 1 sec.......
after recovering plane (didn't crash thankfully just landed softly again) I gave my spotter the Tx and drove off about 600-700m...and nothing.....everything still powered up and can still get Vtx picture but no signal (red light on Rx).
This is on the NEW Rx I got today!
came back cause I was starving :(
Hmm something is seriously wrong somewhere in your setup. what antennas did you use ?
I'll do a range test tomorrow with the the latest fw and see how it goes.
Quote from: Cat695 on March 29, 2012, 08:44:46 PM
Ok guys just back from a practice and a range test
Lost control of the plane at about 300m (flew beautifully inside 300 might I add), and inside of 300m the motor kept cutting out about every 30-40 secs and then starting up again after about 1 sec.......
after recovering plane (didn't crash thankfully just landed softly again) I gave my spotter the Tx and drove off about 600-700m...and nothing.....everything still powered up and can still get Vtx picture but no signal (red light on Rx).
This is on the NEW Rx I got today!
came back cause I was starving :(
Quote from: Cat695 on March 29, 2012, 08:44:46 PM
Ok guys just back from a practice and a range test
Lost control of the plane at about 300m (flew beautifully inside 300 might I add), and inside of 300m the motor kept cutting out about every 30-40 secs and then starting up again after about 1 sec.......
after recovering plane (didn't crash thankfully just landed softly again) I gave my spotter the Tx and drove off about 600-700m...and nothing.....everything still powered up and can still get Vtx picture but no signal (red light on Rx).
This is on the NEW Rx I got today!
came back cause I was starving :(
Regarding the EZ* cutting out and coming back on again. I do not know the answer to this but had exactly the same problem with mine. There did not seem to be much to indicate what was wrong .. it did not always cut off in a steep climb for instance, and it seemed to do it in random orientations (so not RX antenna being blocked).
I did two things .. first was to add an extra air inlet to the motor. I am using a brushless in runner and I thought that it might be getting too hot. The second thing (and I think this was what did it) was to replace the ESC with a big one .. 60A (from the original 40A Flyfun). My EZ* does not cut out like this anymore.
If you need a new ESC then please let me know .. I have a few spares (80A, 60A, 30A, 18A) Plush
Splashy u got any problems with the latest version ?
Quote from: thundead on March 29, 2012, 08:49:07 PM
Hmm something is seriously wrong somewhere in your setup. what antennas did you use ?
I'll do a range test tomorrow with the the latest fw and see how it goes.
Quote from: Cat695 on March 29, 2012, 08:44:46 PM
Ok guys just back from a practice and a range test
Lost control of the plane at about 300m (flew beautifully inside 300 might I add), and inside of 300m the motor kept cutting out about every 30-40 secs and then starting up again after about 1 sec.......
after recovering plane (didn't crash thankfully just landed softly again) I gave my spotter the Tx and drove off about 600-700m...and nothing.....everything still powered up and can still get Vtx picture but no signal (red light on Rx).
This is on the NEW Rx I got today!
came back cause I was starving :(
The antennas are exquisitely handmade antennas (like yours) and are 459 Mhz ones.
Quote from: thundead on March 29, 2012, 09:27:28 PM
Splashy u got any problems with the latest version ?
No .. but have not done a real range test yet. I am just taking the RSSI and putting it straight into the RVOSD. As you know, if there any glitches then it pops into RTH mode. On the previous version it was glitching, on this version the RSSI looks very solid. If you switch off the TX then RSSI drops to 0.
The PPM is working perfectly on pin 1 and connecting 2 and 4 does correctly turn it into PPM mode.
I will get my daughter to run over the field next door holding my Zephyr II. That should be good for a 1.5 km range test. I'll even put the goggles on so I can direct her from the comfort of the patio (and keep an eye on the RSSI).
Trev
I lost total control of the plane for that second...every 30 seconds or so...then nothing but the power was still on at the plane....I have the standard kit for the ez*2 ESC and its a 20A
The Rx is being powered from a 8.5amp BEC and powering 4 micro servos
I still keep picture and all displays from the EZOSD mate
it just seems the further away the plane gets the less control I have.....but full picture and display from OSD
I'll stick it in my quadcopter tomorrow and see if I get any problems with that (I can see the rotors better at a distance)
And I'll stick the other Rx in my twinstar
Least that we can either blame the easystar or not......
Cat695 is it possible there is some interference based on where you are in the country? Salisbury plane and all the military activities are there any large antennas nearby?
I thought that but our radio's don't constantly broadcast (DF hazzard) and it would only be random cut outs as someone pressed the pressel and stayed on the net talking/sending data so I reckon because I only get a 1 second cut out and its pretty much at 30 sec intervals its not that mate.
But you did say that the motor cut out .. Do you think that this was due to a loss of comms causing the failsafe throttle to be set? When you say loss of control does this mean that you did not have any control over the plane during this cut out.
Don't suppose you could see what the RSSI did during this cut out .. obviously this would let you know whether it was down to the RX.
I don't have RSSI connected mate.....I only know what I'm getting when I connect a multimeter, hence why I just fly rather than bench test, that way I know I'm getting and giving real world facts to you experts rather than lab conditions. (i'm no electronics expert by any stretch).
I think its a loss of comms.....like its resetting itself....it lasts for a second maybe 2 max...and I lose everything...literally every 30 secs or so then past 300m nothing.
I will fit it to my quad tomorrow and just hover....walk away and see what happens...if thats fine then I will look more towards the ezstar being a sh*t build.....also have a twinstar I can test on to...
BUT Ian had the same thing happen to him today,,,but he restarted and it worked again.
I think I'd hold back on putting it on a quad mate, if you get fail safe with the quad it might not end as well as it did with your plane.
also could it be my PPM output from my DX6i?? if I remember rightly when I tested it from the trainer port (how its connected to the UHF) many moons ago it was about 2.9
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 30, 2012, 12:01:02 AM
I think I'd hold back on putting it on a quad mate, if you get fail safe with the quad it might not end as well as it did with your plane.
WHat I'll do is set the quad down....walk away and then arm it (a naza has to be armed before it will fly) so the props will spin.......if after 300m they don't spin (i'll take binos) then I know its the Tx and RX and not the easystar
Ok I'm back as been searching the net......have you guys seen this antenna for UHF (has been used on openLRS) You antenna'perts might try out out!!
Build IBCrazy's 433MHz Turnstile antenna for FPV (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCypz0ZeDdo#)
I built one and even on my 60" wing it was far too large. If you think about it the uhf range records are done with mono or dipole antennas, all to silly ranges. So I don't see its practicality at all imo
I built one and even on my 60" wing it was far too large. If you think about it the uhf range records are done with mono or dipole antennas, all to silly ranges. So I don't see its practicality at all imo
I have a dipole in my tail and a turnstyle on the end of the wing on my skywalker, it over hangs a little but fits ok. I'm waiting for diversity ;)
Quote from: Cat695 on March 29, 2012, 09:36:43 PM
Trev
I lost total control of the plane for that second...every 30 seconds or so...then nothing but the power was still on at the plane....I have the standard kit for the ez*2 ESC and its a 20A
The Rx is being powered from a 8.5amp BEC and powering 4 micro servos
I still keep picture and all displays from the EZOSD mate
it just seems the further away the plane gets the less control I have.....but full picture and display from OSD
Does 20A ESC sound too small to anyone else?
I started with 40A Flyfun, changed to Plush 30A which was better and then solved the problem with 60A Plush.
If you would like to try out a 60A Plush then just let me know. I really like the Plush. Have never had a problem with them. You can have it free ..
Quote from: Splashy on March 30, 2012, 02:38:09 AM
Quote from: Cat695 on March 29, 2012, 09:36:43 PM
Trev
I lost total control of the plane for that second...every 30 seconds or so...then nothing but the power was still on at the plane....I have the standard kit for the ez*2 ESC and its a 20A
The Rx is being powered from a 8.5amp BEC and powering 4 micro servos
I still keep picture and all displays from the EZOSD mate
it just seems the further away the plane gets the less control I have.....but full picture and display from OSD
Does 20A ESC sound too small to anyone else?
I started with 40A Flyfun, changed to Plush 30A which was better and then solved the problem with 60A Plush.
If you would like to try out a 60A Plush then just let me know. I really like the Plush. Have never had a problem with them. You can have it free ..
Check your PM Trevor.....and I'm happy to try anything at this stage
Cat,
you should try uploading spectrum analyzer firmware to you RX and check the noise floors in the field you are flying. Maybe theres some strong interferences in the band your are flying - as someone here already said. But you will have to carry a notebook with you to get actual readings from RX.
I've played at my home with OLRS RX as spectrum analyzer and got some peaks from: my 433 wireless thermometer, car key-chain, roadgate key-chain.
EDIT: Here's the link to the nice GUI: http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1617297 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1617297)
Does anyone know why I'm not allowed to write PM's?
Cat, thundead,
sorry I didn't contacted you on skype yesterday - got very late back from neighbours home where we were playing poker. I'll get to you this evening.
Because you need 20 posts, it was a measure we had to introduce to stop a spammer
aah, ok.
So now i have to write just 6 spam messages to get PM activated ;D
Lol, spam posts get deleted
Quote from: webe on March 30, 2012, 07:45:01 AM
Does anyone know why I'm not allowed to write PM's?
Cat, thundead,
sorry I didn't contacted you on skype yesterday - got very late back from neighbours home where we were playing poker. I'll get to you this evening.
Thats ok mate....be warned I'm traveling north tonight (I have 2 weeks off) so might not be around till tomorrow.....but did read your link cheers.....its pointing now (in my mind) that the chips on the board is obviously more for 433 freq and really doesn't like being pushed upto 459.
Mihai, splashy, dev, Papa and Coyote are the guys who have all the gear and more importantly all the idea.....I'm just a foot soldier mate BUT I'm more than happy to learn...wouldn't bother me taking my laptop in the field and testing stuff)
I find it all very interesting
Right, so I went out and performed the range test :)
The results, were to say the least, bad, worse than bad, terrible :(
1) This was a ground to ground test
2) TX was at 459MHz UK legal 100mw output power ( Or supposed to be but I seriously doubt it )
3) Tx antenna was a Diamond SRH771 SMA 433MHz
4) Hopping was 5 channels
5) A GoPro was on and recording, but then turned off to see if range came back
6) Gopro was 12" from the OpenLRS Rx
7) My OpenLRS antenna was not fitted as recommended directly to the Rx but on a 24" RG318 tail
8) 5.8ghz vtx was running the whole test with a linear antenna so to cause as much effect on results as possible. It shouldn't, but anything that was gong to be switched on while flying was.
I repeated last times test, the tx was sat at exactly the same place within 12" of last time, the weather was exactly the same as last time and I covered the same route for the test.
Expecting the same results as last time I drove straight to the 2.4km first check point and got out the car, not a thing, RSSI 0.04v no control :( I then just for the purpose of the test continued to the 4.3km point that 433mhz code has passed fine with no glitches no problem. Got out the car, RSSI 0.04 no control :(
Very disappointing
So I started from scratch, I went back to the tx to make sure everything was fine, it was, so I did a much shorter range test.
To my horror my max distance with no glitches was only 300m !
At 470m if I banked the plane to induce dbi loss I lost control at 90 degree bank.
At 870m if I banked the plane anywhere past 10 degrees, total loss of control :(
My conclusion :
1) Cat your not doing something wrong :)
2) I have no doubt Thundeads code is in no way at fault, the pins were moved up one, the RSSI code has nothing to do with the connection
3) I believe, very much, that the 433 chip just can not take the 459mhz, I believe it drops the power that much it renders the system useless. I also don`t believe the output is anywhere near 100mw, not even close. 459 and 433 are that close in frequencies that if they were using the same power, the ranges would match within a few meters of each other. Which suggests the chip is running way short of anything close to 100mw
4) The only way this is going to be improved is by using a different chip
Christ that's a massive difference! I'm flashed with latest FW but didn't get a range test done today, Ian can you repeat the test at 433 just to prove its 459 causing troubles and not anything else?
Not today, but i will be, it was a long trek to go home re-flash and try again
shit.. that's not good news for 459 then... Don't think its my code since everybody was getting 3km on 439 mhz...
Is anyone actually using antennas cut for 459MHz during these tests?
A quarter wave should be 163mm - anything else is a compromise IMHO and will be off tune and affecting readings.
I will try to test mine soon, but my Tx is modified with better coupling circuit for the PA (Power Amplifier - yes, all 100mW of it !!) according to HopeRF's pdf document on components for different frequencies.
Nigel.
No these were with 433 antennas Nigel, but even so, a range reduction of 10x is not down to de-tuned antennas. Your results will be very interesting to see
Sorry to hear that Ian, but deep down I am feeling a little better that I hadn't been doing things wrong (you know how you get when you doubt yourself.
I didn't get a test in today guys because I travelled north to nottingham as I'm on leave now for two weeks.....However I have brought all my gear and seeing as the derbyshire dales are close by I should be able to get a flight in tomorrow.
Awesome that we know the problem!
Quote from: thundead on March 30, 2012, 08:00:16 PM
shit.. that's not good news for 459 then... Don't think its my code since everybody was getting 3km on 439 mhz...
Going back to previous posts in other threads about openLRS and the 459 freq (and getting some sleep) I think it actually shows itself that its the chip and not your coding mate
Who'd have thought that I could get more range with my dx7 and a cheap hobbyking Rx over a UHF system lol
What are the options for OpenLRS in the UK.
I guess they are as follows
1. Modify TX and RX via a hardware mod to give better performance on 459
2. Revert back to 439 and hope
3. Put a booster on the TX with a couple of settings, one of which is 100 mW
4. Abandon OpenLRS in the UK (thankfully got mine from firstpersonview who I am sure have a good RMA procedure)
Obviously 1 is the best option .. the datasheet for the RFM22B states that 459 Mhz is within the spec although is on a different band to 433 (470 as against 433).
It does not say in the spec that the 470 band will have a very poor power output so is there any way to increase the power output on 459?
Is EZUHF totally without problems .. it seems to be the only other option if we cannot get OpenLRS working on 459.
I am wondering if this is an option...
http://www.hoperf.com/rf_fsk/fsk/22.htm (http://www.hoperf.com/rf_fsk/fsk/22.htm)
Its 500mW at 433Mhz so at 459Mhz we will take a hit and lose some power right off the bat. And I am sure it could be toned down a little more. I say this without having a good look at the datasheet.
I am thinking the Rx stays the same as its nice and sensitive, but have one of these in the Tx.... You can't really modify the Tx so I am wondering if it would be possible to do a custom job with an Arduino Pro mini and this module on a breakout board...
All pie in the sky thinking out loud for now
If the power is low, add an amplification circuit to the output to raise it to 100mw. I think its as simple as that really. That way no heavy modifications to openlrs, just a simple plug n play add-on should have it fixed
Whoa, hang on a bit chaps.
Let's do more than one test with more than one set of software.
Before I set out on this, HopeRF were contacted and they had tested these modules to 460MHz and said we should be no more than 10mW down on power. It was Simon @ FirstPersonView who contacted them as he is 'in the trade' and were willing to talk to him.
Let's do some more tests first before writing the kit off, eh?
Nigel.
Im going back up in the next few days to try the 433 code vs the 459 code, then versions 3.3 vs 3.5 as well side by side. The one thing I cant do is measure the mw output of each system, which would be of great interest
Quote from: Coyote on March 30, 2012, 06:48:33 PM
Right, so I went out and performed the range test :)
The results, were to say the least, bad, worse than bad, terrible :(
1) This was a ground to ground test
2) TX was at 459MHz UK legal 100mw output power ( Or supposed to be but I seriously doubt it )
3) Tx antenna was a Diamond SRH771 SMA 433MHz
4) Hopping was 5 channels
5) A GoPro was on and recording, but then turned off to see if range came back
6) Gopro was 12" from the OpenLRS Rx
7) My OpenLRS antenna was not fitted as recommended directly to the Rx but on a 24" RG318 tail
8) 5.8ghz vtx was running the whole test with a linear antenna so to cause as much effect on results as possible. It shouldn't, but anything that was gong to be switched on while flying was.
I repeated last times test, the tx was sat at exactly the same place within 12" of last time, the weather was exactly the same as last time and I covered the same route for the test.
Expecting the same results as last time I drove straight to the 2.4km first check point and got out the car, not a thing, RSSI 0.04v no control :( I then just for the purpose of the test continued to the 4.3km point that 433mhz code has passed fine with no glitches no problem. Got out the car, RSSI 0.04 no control :(
Very disappointing
So I started from scratch, I went back to the tx to make sure everything was fine, it was, so I did a much shorter range test.
To my horror my max distance with no glitches was only 300m !
At 470m if I banked the plane to induce dbi loss I lost control at 90 degree bank.
At 870m if I banked the plane anywhere past 10 degrees, total loss of control :(
My conclusion :
1) Cat your not doing something wrong :)
2) I have no doubt Thundeads code is in no way at fault, the pins were moved up one, the RSSI code has nothing to do with the connection
3) I believe, very much, that the 433 chip just can not take the 459mhz, I believe it drops the power that much it renders the system useless. I also don`t believe the output is anywhere near 100mw, not even close. 459 and 433 are that close in frequencies that if they were using the same power, the ranges would match within a few meters of each other. Which suggests the chip is running way short of anything close to 100mw
4) The only way this is going to be improved is by using a different chip
So no one as yet has got a decent distance on 459mhz? This could explain why my Dad and I's DIY system has been getting crap range. We've done all the tests at 459mhz selected thinking that's what other people had done as well.
I'll go repeat my range test in a minute at 433, to help verify this.
Brett
Yes, that would do it. Of course you won't have telemetry .. but at least it should work.
It should be relatively easy to find a booster that can be neatly integrated. The 7W Flytron amp is a little bit of an overkill but something along those lines with a switch for 100mW and maybe 500mW (or 200) as an emergency switch would be great.
Perhaps we can ask Flytron to come up with such a booster. He does seem to be able to turn around good designs pretty quickly and I am impressed with their delivery costs and speed of delivery.
I rather like this option as I think that OpenLRS works very well and bodging something out of a transceiver chip and a Pro Mini would result in a little too much for me to put my faith into.
It may not be low on power, but that`s what my money is on.
Flytron I think are looking into releasing a much lower power amplifier, when im not sure
Nigel`s right though, no need to write this off yet, its only one test so far, lots of variables
Quote from: Devonian on March 30, 2012, 11:54:46 PM
Whoa, hang on a bit chaps.
Let's do more than one test with more than one set of software.
Before I set out on this, HopeRF were contacted and they had tested these modules to 460MHz and said we should be no more than 10mW down on power. It was Simon @ FirstPersonView who contacted them as he is 'in the trade' and were willing to talk to him.
Let's do some more tests first before writing the kit off, eh?
Nigel.
I agree. It is great kit and I would love to see it working.
I just wanted to start the debate on the options available. I agree that the HopeRF datasheet indicates that it should work just fine and whilst 10mW is quite a lot it does not explain the results that may be occurring.
guys be sure to set your fw to 435000 Hz
its more "legal": 435=... Satellite, to 438=
435.070 UO-14 sat. FM repeater mode - uplink: 145.975 (University of Surrey, 1990)
436.625 StenSat FM transponder - uplink: 145.840 (12 cubic inches, 8.2 ounces) launched 26Jan00
Yes the results are far from expected, all they do though really, is show there is something wrong, it doesn`t show what though conclusively
The basis of my thinking is this :
If the code for the signals and channels were wrong, the range would not matter, it would not work next to the plane.
If the code works next to the plane, the only factors for lack of range would be the transmission of the signals, the reception and antenna tuning ( for max range )
Quote from: thundead on March 31, 2012, 12:08:39 AM
guys be sure to set your fw to 435000 Hz
its more "legal": 435=... Satellite, to 438=
435.070 UO-14 sat. FM repeater mode - uplink: 145.975 (University of Surrey, 1990)
436.625 StenSat FM transponder - uplink: 145.840 (12 cubic inches, 8.2 ounces) launched 26Jan00
I am not quite sure what you mean by this ..
What Mihai is suggesting is to set the frequency to 435Mhz in the configurator. It's a relatively quiet area of the band and not as naughty as being on 433Mhz. Lets also remember that the great range checks we all did recently where at 439mhz and nobody seemed to mind
Yes, I agree that this is not as naughty and at 439 there were no incidents but I would not like to see this detract from the quest to get 459 working properly.
I have been taking a look at the datasheet and will try a few things out. Can anyone see a problem with using the spektrum analyzer RX as a way of comparing output power? From what I gather this should give a true report of the comparative power output.
I also see that HopeRF have a higher powered transceiver chip http://www.hoperf.com/rf_fsk/fsk/RFM23BP.htm (http://www.hoperf.com/rf_fsk/fsk/RFM23BP.htm) this could be an option for a new board design.
Ive done that with 433, 435 and 459, the spectrum shows exactly the same values with each band flashed. All peak around 227
Quote from: Splashy on March 31, 2012, 01:14:39 AM
Yes, I agree that this is not as naughty and at 439 there were no incidents but I would not like to see this detract from the quest to get 459 working properly.
I have been taking a look at the datasheet and will try a few things out. Can anyone see a problem with using the spektrum analyzer RX as a way of comparing output power? From what I gather this should give a true report of the comparative power output.
I also see that HopeRF have a higher powered transceiver chip http://www.hoperf.com/rf_fsk/fsk/RFM23BP.htm (http://www.hoperf.com/rf_fsk/fsk/RFM23BP.htm) this could be an option for a new board design.
Hang on a minute I mentioned the other chip that HopeRF do (there are only 2 chips that are more powerful in this band) and said about a pro-mini and you called it a bodge in your post. Now you are suggesting the other chip and a new board design.....Its like an echo. You've suggested in essence the same thing that you called a bodge ten minutes ago.
I just went outside in the dark and suspiciously walked around the neighbourhood with my RSSI measurement box and did some experiments.
(http://static.rcgroups.net/forums/attachments/1/5/0/4/4/6/a4725771-119-IMG_8375.jpg)
Setup:
Antenna: 15.2mm cut for 459MHz
Board: my own DIY RFM22B running custom code, should perform the same as OLRS
Settings: single frequency (no hopping), 38400 Baud, 19.6kHz frequency deviation, 40-50Hz PPM from er9x radio
Procedure:
1. Set frequency to 459.5MHz, output 1dBm
2. Walk with gps to ~50m
3. Write down RSSI
4. Repeat for 20dBm
5. Repeat for 435.5MHz
6. RSSI is calculated: RSSI = raw value/2 - 130
Results:
I have attached the results. I would say my measurement uncertainty is +/-5dBm, and +/-5m for distance.
Conclusions:
From Dennis Frie's previous results, I would expect a ~3dB difference. I did not see a measurable difference between 459.5 and 435.5 using my crude method. It is likely that if I used proper 435MHz antennas I will be able to see a bigger difference. I have used 433 antenna on 459 before, and saw 3-4dB difference, so this is in line with Dennis Frie's predictions.
I have to say that the RF22 module works just fine at 459MHz, maybe with a small penalty. No where near as dramatic as you guys seem to be seeing. Clearly something else must be the problem. Have you guys tried disabling frequency hopping? 459MHz is very clean where I live I simply don't see the need for FH.
Well this could be the best news we have heard tonight (I say could with baited breath) How different is your setup from OpenLRS? You stated you are running custom hardware and firmware right? It would be interesting to learn from your setup if you are willing to share. The plot is really thickening here
Hey Coyote,
according to your post « Reply #76 on: March 12, 2012, 04:52:13 PM » you did range test with all the same setup but 459 UHF band?
I suggest you to repeat range test with 459 AND 433 bands each after another. If both bands will show same results as previous tests, then I see only difference - antennas. I dont think that would be a tranceivers problem...
Quote from: Coyote on March 30, 2012, 06:48:33 PM
Right, so I went out and performed the range test :)
The results, were to say the least, bad, worse than bad, terrible :(
1) This was a ground to ground test
2) TX was at 459MHz UK legal 100mw output power ( Or supposed to be but I seriously doubt it )
3) Tx antenna was a Diamond SRH771 SMA 433MHz
4) Hopping was 5 channels
5) A GoPro was on and recording, but then turned off to see if range came back
6) Gopro was 12" from the OpenLRS Rx
7) My OpenLRS antenna was not fitted as recommended directly to the Rx but on a 24" RG318 tail
8) 5.8ghz vtx was running the whole test with a linear antenna so to cause as much effect on results as possible. It shouldn't, but anything that was gong to be switched on while flying was.
I repeated last times test, the tx was sat at exactly the same place within 12" of last time, the weather was exactly the same as last time and I covered the same route for the test.
Expecting the same results as last time I drove straight to the 2.4km first check point and got out the car, not a thing, RSSI 0.04v no control :( I then just for the purpose of the test continued to the 4.3km point that 433mhz code has passed fine with no glitches no problem. Got out the car, RSSI 0.04 no control :(
Very disappointing
So I started from scratch, I went back to the tx to make sure everything was fine, it was, so I did a much shorter range test.
To my horror my max distance with no glitches was only 300m !
At 470m if I banked the plane to induce dbi loss I lost control at 90 degree bank.
At 870m if I banked the plane anywhere past 10 degrees, total loss of control :(
My conclusion :
1) Cat your not doing something wrong :)
2) I have no doubt Thundeads code is in no way at fault, the pins were moved up one, the RSSI code has nothing to do with the connection
3) I believe, very much, that the 433 chip just can not take the 459mhz, I believe it drops the power that much it renders the system useless. I also don`t believe the output is anywhere near 100mw, not even close. 459 and 433 are that close in frequencies that if they were using the same power, the ranges would match within a few meters of each other. Which suggests the chip is running way short of anything close to 100mw
4) The only way this is going to be improved is by using a different chip
BTW if weather doesn't get worse I'm going to do range tests today using 435band with stock and Nagoya NA771 on TX, stock and DragonLink dipole on RX. I'll get back here and report my results.
Hi Webe, yes im going out today armed with the laptop too, to flash to test it with 3.3 on 433, 3.5 on 433, 3.5 on 435 and 3.5 on 459. It will be a chew on, but will yield some conclusive results
@ zitron
Great work, thanks for sharing, I'm sure that between us we can figure out what's going wrong here.
You say you used an antenna 152mm long - for 459MHz - I calculate 163mm.
Formula is:
300 (speed of light in Mega metres per second) / Frequency / 4 (for quarter wave)
300 / 459 / 4 = 163mm
I also have no need for frequency hopping as out in the sticks in rural Devon, it's a pretty quiet band !
Would you care to share your code and maybe some idea of hardware?
I'm toying with building a simple RSSI meter with a pro-mini board + RFM22B module and simple meter
http://www.dpcav.com/xcart/product.php?productid=16562&cat=252&page=3 (http://www.dpcav.com/xcart/product.php?productid=16562&cat=252&page=3)
I have a spare meter already from another project and it works very well.
Nigel
morning all :)
Coyote, be sure to test out 3.2 again because that gave us the best range. Maybe rssi on pin 1 still messes something up donno.
Ok, thats gonna be a long test, 6x 5km tests lol
no point testing out 3.3 as its the one with broken rssi. try the one on pin 8 instead (3.1 or 3.2)
Quote from: Coyote on March 31, 2012, 12:02:53 PM
Ok, thats gonna be a long test, 6x 5km tests lol
Quote from: papa_lazerous on March 31, 2012, 01:53:46 AM
Well this could be the best news we have heard tonight (I say could with baited breath) How different is your setup from OpenLRS? You stated you are running custom hardware and firmware right? It would be interesting to learn from your setup if you are willing to share. The plot is really thickening here
There really shouldn't be any performance difference between my setup and OLRS, you can find details about my setup here: http://arduino.cc/forum/index.php/topic,93777 (http://arduino.cc/forum/index.php/topic,93777)
Quote from: Devonian on March 31, 2012, 10:56:51 AM
@ zitron
Great work, thanks for sharing, I'm sure that between us we can figure out what's going wrong here.
You say you used an antenna 152mm long - for 459MHz - I calculate 163mm.
Formula is:
300 (speed of light in Mega metres per second) / Frequency / 4 (for quarter wave)
300 / 459 / 4 = 163mm
Hmm.. I'm using the wikipedia formula 143/F, which gives me 156mm: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipole_antenna)
I did some experiments and found that 152-156 seems to be best for 22awg wire covered with heat shrink. But I'm not 100% sure if this is right.
Live update, I'm at the range test location.
Test 1
Thundead v3.2 433mhz 5 channel hop 100mw >8.04km ground test.
Control loss only if 26 db loss incurred
Next test
Thundead v3.5 433 MHz same as above so it willprove RSSI and pin changes are fine
Test 2 complete.
Thundead v3.5 433mhz 100mw output
You can relax Maihi is not your v3.5 code :)
>8.057km with an RSSI of 1.50
So looks like it is the 459 that's the problem, test 3 in s min v3.5 on 459 MHz
Test 3
Thundead v3.5 459mhz 100mw output 433 antennas
I drove to the first check point at 2.4km. Got the plane out and had a connection for 1min max. RSSI 1.5 to 0. Glitches as soon as plane was banked, then after a failsafe, no rx connection could be made. I drove higher up, still no connection. Connection was re-established 400m from home
This was interesting though. If it had a link at 2.4km, all be it temporarily and with 1.50 that suggests its down on 433 but we know the chip running at 459 is a little down on power, coupled with the antennas being tuned for 433 this is to be expected. So the loss and inability to reconnect suggests to me the channel's used or the hopping ?
Cracking test results Ian
Its like live updates lol all sat here with bated breath
:popcorn:
and puts kettle on...
PK
I'm still out ( wacky warehouse with the kids ) but ill do a proper post when I get in with check points, RSSI values, A noise floor spectrum sweep from antenna location and video
You mean YOU are playing at wacky warehouse!!
Ok full report >>
Test was done at the same location as last time.
1) This was a ground to ground test
2) Tx antenna was a Diamond SRH771 SMA 433MHz
3) Tx antenna was fitted with a 700mhz low pass filter
4) Hopping was 5 channels
5) A GoPro was on and recording through the whole test
6) Gopro was 12" from the OpenLRS Rx
7) My OpenLRS antenna was not fitted as recommended directly to the Rx but on a 24" RG318 tail
8) 5.8ghz vtx was running the whole test with a linear antenna so to cause as much effect on results as possible. It shouldn't, but anything that was gong to be switched on while flying was.
First a noise floor reading was taken from the transmitters location :
(http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n39/cayote64/noisefloor-1.png)
Tx power was at 12.6v for the first test, running down to only 12.2v for the last test.
Weather was 11 degrees, overcast then showers followed
Test procedure :
Flash firmware
Set tx down at home location
Set home on plane after >6 sats were locked
Drive to checkpoints noting distance, RSSI and orientation behaviour
Test 1
Firmware used : Thundead V3.2
Frequency : 433 Mhz, 5 channel hopping, default header
Output power : 100mw
Booster : 0
Distance : 2.44km, 3.427km, 4.441km, 6.971km and 8.04km
RSSI : N/A
Test 2
Firmware used : Thundead V3.5
Frequency : 433 Mhz,5 channel hopping, default header, set 1
Output power : 100mw
Booster 0
Distance : 2.441km, 3.44km, 4.549km, 6.990km and 8.057km
RSSI : 1.29 1.79 1.70 1.57 1.50
Test 3
Firmware used : Thundead V3.5
Frequency : 459Mhz, 5 channel hopping, default header, set 1
Output power : 100mw
Booster : 0
Distance : 2.459km
RSSI : 1.50 ( briefly )
OpenLRS range test (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMRs6DHMwyg#)
So basically 459 on these boards is....pants
No, your not reading the results, at 2.4k it did connect, with an RSSI of 1.5v, so it is transmitting a fair distance, but somethings up, if that somethings figured out, then it may still be game on.
perhaps we need a no hop test as suggested before, perhaps it will yield better results. I guess the only good thing is that we will have more range in the air than on the ground.
I'm hoping Thundead has some idead when he comes and visits the thread next....
Quote from: Coyote on March 31, 2012, 06:41:30 PM
Ok full report >>
First a noise floor reading was taken from the transmitters location :
Wow if I'm reading that right, you have a massive 10dB noise floor difference between 435 and 459! If that's actually true you can expect easily less than half the range at 459. I wonder if that is caused by the go pro. On top of that you are using 433 antenna... You should really try it without the go pro and use proper antennas to narrow down the possibilities.
I've also done some tests today, I will post them after dinner.
Nope, gopro, plane, video system and tx off during the noise floor scan
Hooooly shiiit 8 km on 433. the fw is defo working right haha. that's a new record for the openlrs then. immagine how much distance that translates into the air. grat work Coyote! awesome range test!
Thanks very much, yes firmware on 433 deffo works :) Pin change and RSSI work great too :)
awesome! damn you who ever made 459 the rc control freq lol
Quote from: Coyote on March 31, 2012, 09:04:32 PM
Thanks very much, yes firmware on 433 deffo works :) Pin change and RSSI work great too :)
Just wondering what the theoretical range would be on 433Mhz with 7Watt booster.........
If you go off 8km being max range, which it isnt, but for arguments sake, its 4x the power to double the distance, 4x100mw = 400mw 4x400mw = 1.6watts 4x1.6watts = 6.4 watts,
So that 3x each steps range, 8km x 2 = 16km, 16km x 2 = 32km, 32km x 2 = 64km+ ground range
Quote from: Coyote on March 31, 2012, 08:36:10 PM
Nope, gopro, plane, video system and tx off during the noise floor scan
Ok, I just did another noise floor scan at where I live using the same settings you did, and attached results.
I have also overlaid your results on top of mine, after scaling. Unless I did something wrong you clearly have a much higher noise floor at 459MHz, 15dB will make a dramatic difference. Just to be sure, the red line on your graph is the maximum right?
Also really interesting how the spectrum matches so nicely...
Here is an issue, the first system power up on 459mhz firmware shows the RSSI showing full losses at less than 10ft range. Just like Cat`s problem, but I thought I`d video it in case it sheds light for someone
459mhz bootup issue (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VMzOnJN_fM#)
Yes it seems so Zitron, I wish Denis could rescale his spectrum graphs with RSSI power Dbm
Yep Ian thats exactly what mine does when on 459.......
Hmm.. anyone know what frequency deviation (fd) value undead is using? If it's a intermittent packet drop/crc fail increasing fd will help boost signal to noise, it worked for me. Then again I did not have any of the rssi fluctuations your guys seem to be having.
When he changed the frequency maybe he inadvertently changed something else? There are so many settings in the RFM22 module...
thUndead's frequency deviation in v3.5 is:
_spi_write(0x72, 0x30); // frequency deviation setting to 19.6khz (for 38.4kbps)
Some interesting reading...
http://www.open.com.au/mikem/arduino/RF22/ (http://www.open.com.au/mikem/arduino/RF22/)
From that link...
Automatic Frequency Control (AFC)
The RF22M modules use an inexpensive crystal to control the frequency synthesizer, and therfore you can expect the transmitter and receiver frequencies to be subject to the usual inaccuracies of such crystals. The RF22 contains an AFC circuit to compensate for differences in transmitter and receiver frequencies. It does this by altering the receiver frequency during reception by up to the pull-in frequency range. This RF22 library enables the AFC and by default sets the pull-in frequency range to 0.05MHz, which should be sufficient to handle most situations. However, if you observe unexplained packet losses or failure to operate correctly all the time it may be because your modules have a wider frequency difference, and you may need to set the afcPullInRange to a differentvalue, using setFrequency();
Useful files
http://www.open.com.au/mikem/arduino/RF22/files.html (http://www.open.com.au/mikem/arduino/RF22/files.html)
Nigel.
I am no expert on the RF22M or the Si4432 but I have spent quite a while looking at the data sheets and playing around with the Excel Spreadsheet calculator.
I think that we should be looking at a couple of sections and registers.
//band 435.000
#if (BAND== 0)
_spi_write(0x75, 0x53);
#else
_spi_write(0x75, 0x55); //450 band
#endif
_spi_write(0x76, 0x7D);
_spi_write(0x77, 0x00);
}
How has the value in register 0x76 been calculated?
If I use the spreadsheet calculator for 459 then it gives a value of E1 instead of 7D. But I guess that this is overwritten in the next section. It would be good to do a test with frequency hopping disabled and maybe some hard coded values taken from the frequency calculator.
and
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.
frequency = frequency / 10;
frequency = frequency - 24000;
#if (BAND== 0)
frequency = frequency - 19000; // 19 for 430�439.9 MHz band from datasheet
#else
frequency = frequency - 21000; // 21 for 450�459.9 MHz band from datasheet
#endif
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);
}
In the above section we have 459 sitting right at the top of the 450 - 460 band. Should we not be using a value of 21900 when getting frequency = frequency - 21000
Apologies if I am totally off the ball here.
If the hardware design is correct and we are getting good results on 433 Mhz, and the unit will work to almost the same power output on 459 Mhz then it would indicate that it is the registry settings that are incorrect for 459Mhz. 433 is almost in the middle of the 430–439.9 MHz band, whereas 459 is right at the top of the 450–459.9 MHz band.
The testing done so far has been very time consuming. Could we not produce a testing version of the TX and RX and get it to cycle through some potential registry settings and hopping options. It could go through a cycle of options over say a 1 minute period...
10 seconds on low power output (so we know when the period starts)
and then 10 seconds trying out each option
I realise that we could not really do the same for the RX since we could not coincide these actions without switching on at the same time .. or could we use the button on the TX to change the options that we use and then use the LED to indicate which option has been selected.
We could even use the button and LED combination to try out different frequencies .. say starting at 433, moving to 435 and then 459. It would mean that we could take lots of readings for later analysis while at a set distance. Of course this testing would be made easier if we had a couple of RX to use.
I agree that it would be useful to have a 'simple' Tx firmware.
No frequency hopping, no telemetry, just hard coded for single channel, i.e. 459MHz at full power.
The spectrum analyzer firmware for the Rx is not a problem for the moment and will allow us to figure out exactly what is going on here.
I've attached the HopeRF Excel spreadsheet if it helps...
Nigel.
Quote from: Coyote on March 31, 2012, 10:23:00 PM
Yes it seems so Zitron, I wish Denis could rescale his spectrum graphs with RSSI power Dbm
I will have another look at it next week (dbm instead of RSSI). It should be 0.5 dB/RSSI, but I wasn't able to confirm it, when I did a quick test with attenauters etc.
Thanks Dennis, much appreciated :)
Ill do one more range test, v3.4 with no hopping on 459, that should be the last piece of the puzzle confirmed then, takes the hopping out the equation. If it fails we know its power related I suppose, if the results are good we know its the hopping that needs attention
Quote from: Devonian on March 31, 2012, 11:37:04 PM
thUndead's frequency deviation in v3.5 is:
_spi_write(0x72, 0x30); // frequency deviation setting to 19.6khz (for 38.4kbps)
That is used as an example in the data sheet, and I think that is a bit too low. When fd = 19.6 I get dropped packets sitting on my table. I guess it's ok if you want narrow band transmission and don't care about a couple % error, but since no one else is using 459, I quadrupled mine to 76.8kHz and no more dropped packets. However I did not see a significant effect on range.
Interesting note on the AFC, but if you are using something like a 20ppm accurate crystal, you will be off by 0.01MHz in the worst case, well within the 0.05MHz range.
Quote from: Dennis Frie on April 01, 2012, 11:02:08 AM
I will have another look at it next week (dbm instead of RSSI). It should be 0.5 dB/RSSI, but I wasn't able to confirm it, when I did a quick test with attenauters etc.
Yes 0.5dB/RSSI is what the data sheet says. I subtracted 130 from the result by looking at the graph, but that maybe open to interpretation.
Indeed I think I need to change the fd for 459mhz but I need to make it smaller not larger as on 459Mhz we got 10khz spacing between channels. If you make it bigger (it is to big already cheers for pointing that out) it will overlap with the other channels. Correct me if I'm wrong. 433 has 60khz channel spacing so the current fd is ok for that band.
Also from teh datasheet, for 9.8 baud @ GFSK the recommended is either 45khz or 4.8khz spacing. ( si4432.pdf page 49)
Quote from: zitron on April 01, 2012, 03:01:51 PM
Quote from: Devonian on March 31, 2012, 11:37:04 PM
thUndead's frequency deviation in v3.5 is:
_spi_write(0x72, 0x30); // frequency deviation setting to 19.6khz (for 38.4kbps)
That is used as an example in the data sheet, and I think that is a bit too low. When fd = 19.6 I get dropped packets sitting on my table. I guess it's ok if you want narrow band transmission and don't care about a couple % error, but since no one else is using 459, I quadrupled mine to 76.8kHz and no more dropped packets. However I did not see a significant effect on range.
Interesting note on the AFC, but if you are using something like a 20ppm accurate crystal, you will be off by 0.01MHz in the worst case, well within the 0.05MHz range.
Quote from: Dennis Frie on April 01, 2012, 11:02:08 AM
I will have another look at it next week (dbm instead of RSSI). It should be 0.5 dB/RSSI, but I wasn't able to confirm it, when I did a quick test with attenauters etc.
Yes 0.5dB/RSSI is what the data sheet says. I subtracted 130 from the result by looking at the graph, but that maybe open to interpretation.
Ok, back in from test number 4
Thundead v3.5 code, 459 MHz, no hopping, 100mw
On first boot up the RSSI showed 0.04 to 0.10, after two more systems resets the RSSI stayed at a constant 3.2v RSSI so I began the test.
First check point at 2.4km no twitches coming up to the check point put doubts in my mind. I got the plane out, no rx link, tried a few different orientations and then it linked. Only for about 10 seconds. Then it lost link and I never got the link bavk, tried switching it off / on, nothing :(
so its not my hopping algorithm as its working great on 433 :). read post ^^^
Quote from: Coyote on April 01, 2012, 07:32:23 PM
Ok, back in from test number 4
Thundead v3.5 code, 459 MHz, no hopping, 100mw
On first boot up the RSSI showed 0.04 to 0.10, after two more systems resets the RSSI stayed at a constant 3.2v RSSI so I began the test.
First check point at 2.4km no twitches coming up to the check point put doubts in my mind. I got the plane out, no rx link, tried a few different orientations and then it linked. Only for about 10 seconds. Then it lost link and I never got the link bavk, tried switching it off / on, nothing :(
Channel spacing on 459MHz is 25kHz.
We cannot get 25kHz multiples, so we must use multipes of 10kHz.
So from a startup frequency of 459.000 we can get, for example, 459.000, 459.050, 459.100, 459.150, 459.200 etc
and for a startup frequency of 459.025, we can get, for example, 459.025, 459.075, 459.125, 459.175, 459.225 etc
http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html (http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html)
Another code change Mihai? :D
Nigel.
Nope its not the hopping, even when sat on one channel full power, it still can't get a solid link :(
Quote from: Devonian on April 01, 2012, 08:03:40 PM
Channel spacing on 459MHz is 25kHz.
We cannot get 25kHz multiples, so we must use multipes of 10kHz.
So from a startup frequency of 459.000 we can get, for example, 459.000, 459.050, 459.100, 459.150, 459.200 etc
and for a startup frequency of 459.025, we can get, for example, 459.025, 459.075, 459.125, 459.175, 459.225 etc
http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html (http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html)
Another code change Mihai? :D
Nigel.
An interesting link especially the "For aircraft use, 434.025 to 434.775 is recommended."
That solves our problem !
Quote from: Splashy on April 01, 2012, 08:31:27 PM
An interesting link especially the "For aircraft use, 434.025 to 434.775 is recommended."
That solves our problem !
Where does it say 434.025 to 434.775 on that page?
On this page http://www.ukrcc.org/35mhz.html (http://www.ukrcc.org/35mhz.html)
Quote from: Splashy on April 01, 2012, 08:35:26 PM
On this page http://www.ukrcc.org/35mhz.html (http://www.ukrcc.org/35mhz.html)
Correct me if I am wrong, but in that context in which it is written it is talking about telemetry
You are probably right. A bit confusing .. shame I have already reflashed to those frequencies
So what other variables can we eliminate?
Things I can think of;
1. Use proper 459 antennas
2. Try somewhere with a lower noise floor
3. Find out what is causing the start up problem
Also I don't see the need to worry about channel spacing, unless you are flying with other people. It's not like anyone else is using the band. Every time you half frequency deviation you reduce signal-noise 4 times.
It is most definately for telemetry mate ;)
You need to be a little careful because if you pick the wrong frequency you can seriously pi$$ off some HAM geeks this site shows allot of the frequency allocations http://www.wibble.co.uk/links/ukspectrum/spectrum.html#b400 (http://www.wibble.co.uk/links/ukspectrum/spectrum.html#b400) you want to stay well away from UK repeaters :)
Quote from: papa_lazerous on April 01, 2012, 08:42:45 PM
It is most definately for telemetry mate ;)
You need to be a little careful because if you pick the wrong frequency you can seriously pi$$ off some HAM geeks this site shows allot of the frequency allocations http://www.wibble.co.uk/links/ukspectrum/spectrum.html#b400 (http://www.wibble.co.uk/links/ukspectrum/spectrum.html#b400) you want to stay well away from UK repeaters :)
I agree, this is how it is meant to be read.
I also agree about not picking the wrong frequency and was not really suggesting using them .. although .. IF one were to use a frequency other than 459 and yesterday Thundead suggested 435, what would be a good frequency to use. Surely one allocated for RC use, albeit for telemetry. If those frequencies are allowed for communicating between an aircraft and the ground, and vice versa, then would this not raise as many eyebrows or tempers since it is only a difference in the data that is being transferred .. and why would you want to send telemetry from the ground to the aircraft anyway.
Of course I want to use 459 but I have a friend who is asking about this specific issue so I thought I would ask for him.
Quote from: zitron on March 31, 2012, 01:47:57 AM
I just went outside in the dark and suspiciously walked around the neighbourhood with my RSSI measurement box and did some experiments.
(http://static.rcgroups.net/forums/attachments/1/5/0/4/4/6/a4725771-119-IMG_8375.jpg)
Setup:
Antenna: 15.2mm cut for 459MHz
Board: my own DIY RFM22B running custom code, should perform the same as OLRS
Settings: single frequency (no hopping), 38400 Baud, 19.6kHz frequency deviation, 40-50Hz PPM from er9x radio
Procedure:
1. Set frequency to 459.5MHz, output 1dBm
2. Walk with gps to ~50m
3. Write down RSSI
4. Repeat for 20dBm
5. Repeat for 435.5MHz
6. RSSI is calculated: RSSI = raw value/2 - 130
Results:
I have attached the results. I would say my measurement uncertainty is +/-5dBm, and +/-5m for distance.
Conclusions:
From Dennis Frie's previous results, I would expect a ~3dB difference. I did not see a measurable difference between 459.5 and 435.5 using my crude method. It is likely that if I used proper 435MHz antennas I will be able to see a bigger difference. I have used 433 antenna on 459 before, and saw 3-4dB difference, so this is in line with Dennis Frie's predictions.
I have to say that the RF22 module works just fine at 459MHz, maybe with a small penalty. No where near as dramatic as you guys seem to be seeing. Clearly something else must be the problem. Have you guys tried disabling frequency hopping? 459MHz is very clean where I live I simply don't see the need for FH.
Would it be possible for you to post which registry values you set please. Also, are there any glaring differences between the schematic for the OpenLRS and your design. Obviously if you are getting good results on 459 then we ought to be comparing code and hardware.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on April 01, 2012, 08:42:45 PM
if you pick the wrong frequency you can seriously pi$$ off some HAM geeks
Oi, watch who you're calling a Ham geek ;D
I've been a licenced 'geek' for 30+ years.
Nigel
Quote from: Splashy on April 01, 2012, 10:15:05 PM
Would it be possible for you to post which registry values you set please. Also, are there any glaring differences between the schematic for the OpenLRS and your design. Obviously if you are getting good results on 459 then we ought to be comparing code and hardware.
Attached my current settings. If you need any other registry values let me know.
Also I wouldn't say that I'm having good results. I have not yet done a full range test, kind of difficult without a car! All I can say is that I did not see any dramatic differences in short range tests.
I don't think there are any functional differences between my setup and OLRS, the hard work is done by the RF22 module, which should perform identically. You can find details in my arduino forum thread posted earlier. Although the fact that you guys are having issues with the connection and RSSI when you turn on the receiver is really strange. I have never had anything like that...
It is already done in 3.5 mate :) use set 2 and that's it :D
Quote from: Devonian on April 01, 2012, 08:03:40 PM
Channel spacing on 459MHz is 25kHz.
We cannot get 25kHz multiples, so we must use multipes of 10kHz.
So from a startup frequency of 459.000 we can get, for example, 459.000, 459.050, 459.100, 459.150, 459.200 etc
and for a startup frequency of 459.025, we can get, for example, 459.025, 459.075, 459.125, 459.175, 459.225 etc
http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html (http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html)
Another code change Mihai? :D
Nigel.
Quote from: Devonian on April 01, 2012, 10:32:02 PM
Quote from: papa_lazerous on April 01, 2012, 08:42:45 PM
if you pick the wrong frequency you can seriously pi$$ off some HAM geeks
Oi, watch who you're calling a Ham geek ;D
I've been a licenced 'geek' for 30+ years.
Nigel
See what I mean.... such a touchy bunch, just imagine I was broadcasting all over Nigels broadcasts :o
No offence meant :)
And Splashy, I think 433 for telemetry is limited to a much lower power. I remember reading it somewhere but cant recall where
Fair enough, thanks for that.
I think im missing something with the hopping discussion, I tested without hopping, could not get a lock at 2.4km. The noise floor was high on 433 as it was on 459, but the 433 had no problems at all.
So why are we looking at the channel spacing on 459 when it failed on one single channel ?
I would have thought that channel spacing and hopping really does`nt matter if it cant perform on one static channel
Like I say, maybe I`ve missed something
I think Mihai was setting channels spacing for 459 at 10kHz but it is 25kHz.
Nothing to do with your tests Ian, just a bit of info mixed inbetween your tests.
Channel spacing may have an influence on things if set too small (10kHz).
One more thing I've noticed. In the register settings pdf, for power levels,
default for 0x6d at 18 (hex, for full power)
Melih/Mihai set 06xd to 07 (too low a power?)
or am I missing something (quite possible)!!
A quick setting change in the Tx pde, load it to your Tx and run up the spectrum analyzer will prove it - I'm at work but will try it as soon as I get chance.
Attached is Si-AN440 pdf for register settings.
0x6d is on pg3
Nigel.
I have been doing some playing around using 2 x TX. One running 3.something on 439 Mhz and the other running the standard 459 Mhz (probably 3.5)
Results are below and are as expected.
(I can't post the pic for some reason - so here it is)
(http://www.auctonic.com/openlrs/439-and-459-v1.jpg)
Now, this is where it MIGHT get exciting. I created a new TX version last night. It contains the suggestions of a few people including Zitron, is on one channel with no hopping, and uses data from the excel spreadsheet.
(http://www.auctonic.com/openlrs/439-and-459-v2.jpg)
Just in from my first OpenLRS V3.5 flight.
Mixed results, I could only get 3.1km with a 400mw boost, but it was controlling the plane flawlessly
Quote from: Coyote on April 02, 2012, 05:23:03 PM
Just in from my first OpenLRS V3.5 flight.
Mixed results, I could only get 3.1km with a 400mw boost, but it was controlling the plane flawlessly
400mW boost? the booster I am thinking of starts doing its magic at around 800mW-1000mW
Quote from: Splashy on April 02, 2012, 05:01:53 PM
I have been doing some playing around using 2 x TX. One running 3.something on 439 Mhz and the other running the standard 459 Mhz (probably 3.5)
Results are below and are as expected.
(I can't post the pic for some reason - so here it is)
Now, this is where it MIGHT get exciting. I created a new TX version last night. It contains the suggestions of a few people including Zitron, is on one channel with no hopping, and uses data from the excel spreadsheet.
Very interesting. Anyway possible I can ask you to make a scan with something like 250-400 average to make sure it's the actually peaks we see from the frequency-jumping? Just to be sure
Something like:
Start freq: 440
End freq: 442
Nr avg: 300
Step size: Match the channel-spacing
Quote from: papa_lazerous on April 02, 2012, 05:24:28 PM
Quote from: Coyote on April 02, 2012, 05:23:03 PM
Just in from my first OpenLRS V3.5 flight.
Mixed results, I could only get 3.1km with a 400mw boost, but it was controlling the plane flawlessly
400mW boost? the booster I am thinking of starts doing its magic at around 800mW-1000mW
Yes Im running it at 3.7v ( 0.8watts) but on half power, so 400mw.
Because the tx had booster : 1 it only outputs 50mw but goes through the booster ( switched off ) so no idea what it really was.
I had 2.02v RSSI at 3.2km, but then it went into failsafe without warning
Just by looking at the datasheet really quick, I would say engaging half power mode( lowers gate from 3.3v to 2.75v at that low of an input voltage on the drain, would mean little or no amplification of the signal. Infact you are boardline attenuating it.
If you are running the Tx with the booster OFF but passing signal through it I dont know what you end up with or if there would be any damage to the RF amplifier.
EDIT: this is a copy from the datasheet..
Without the gate voltage (VGG=0V), only a small leakage current flows into the drain and the RF input signal attenuates up to 60 dB.
Where all your tests conducted like this? This means you had upto 60dB attenuation on 50mW of power!
Quote from: Coyote on April 02, 2012, 06:10:53 PM
Quote from: papa_lazerous on April 02, 2012, 05:24:28 PM
Quote from: Coyote on April 02, 2012, 05:23:03 PM
Just in from my first OpenLRS V3.5 flight.
Mixed results, I could only get 3.1km with a 400mw boost, but it was controlling the plane flawlessly
400mW boost? the booster I am thinking of starts doing its magic at around 800mW-1000mW
Yes Im running it at 3.7v ( 0.8watts) but on half power, so 400mw.
Because the tx had booster : 1 it only outputs 50mw but goes through the booster ( switched off ) so no idea what it really was.
I had 2.02v RSSI at 3.2km, but then it went into failsafe without warning
I just did some tests and with the 439 setup with 433 antenna and 459 with 459 antenna. I then changed the antenna on the RX spectrum analyzer to a 459 and the results were much better. I am wondering whether the choice of antenna is set to make a large difference to the range seen .. so far we have been running at 439 with 433 antenna and the results were good, when we changed the 459 the results were bad.
I could send you a set of 459 antenna if you would like. Perhaps then we can remove this from the equation. Just pm me your address if you would like them and I'll post them out tomorrow.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on April 02, 2012, 06:24:59 PM
Just by looking at the datasheet really quick, I would say engaging half power mode( lowers gate from 3.3v to 2.75v at that low of an input voltage on the drain, would mean little or no amplification of the signal. Infact you are boardline attenuating it.
If you are running the Tx with the booster OFF but passing signal through it I dont know what you end up with or if there would be any damage to the RF amplifier.
EDIT: this is a copy from the datasheet..
Without the gate voltage (VGG=0V), only a small leakage current flows into the drain and the RF input signal attenuates up to 60 dB.
Where all your tests conducted like this? This means you had upto 60dB attenuation on 50mW of power!
No previous tests were all done with no booster connected. When half power was selected with 3.7v input my RSSI shot back up to full, so I would say it definitely is boosting fine.
Thanks Splashy, if you want to send me them and I will gladly repeat the tests.from the same location so we have more data
Quote from: Coyote on April 02, 2012, 08:31:11 PM
Quote from: papa_lazerous on April 02, 2012, 06:24:59 PM
Just by looking at the datasheet really quick, I would say engaging half power mode( lowers gate from 3.3v to 2.75v at that low of an input voltage on the drain, would mean little or no amplification of the signal. Infact you are boardline attenuating it.
If you are running the Tx with the booster OFF but passing signal through it I dont know what you end up with or if there would be any damage to the RF amplifier.
EDIT: this is a copy from the datasheet..
Without the gate voltage (VGG=0V), only a small leakage current flows into the drain and the RF input signal attenuates up to 60 dB.
Where all your tests conducted like this? This means you had upto 60dB attenuation on 50mW of power!
No previous tests were all done with no booster connected. When half power was selected with 3.7v input my RSSI shot back up to full, so I would say it definitely is boosting fine.
Check the data sheet mate, it may have boosted at half power with 3.7 in but nowhere near as high as 400mw and you where definately attenuating with booster off and running through it.
I've just made some simple bench tests.
All test are on full power and Tx & Rx are 2 metres apart.
Rx is standard v1 hardware module, running Flytron's v1.11-spectrum_analyzer firmware + Spectrum Analyser software (ver04 from Dennis) and antenna cut for 459MHz (163mm).
Tx is my modified v1 hardware module, running thundead's ver 3.5 firmware, fixed single channel @ 459MHz and antenna cut for 459MHz (163mm).
As always, click the pics to go supersize !!
First up is a benchmark run with 459 (Sander style 'whip') antennas - peak @ 213
(http://s16.postimage.org/5zmp2cba9/459_No_radial.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/5zmp2cba9/)
I now added a ground leg to the Tx whip (simply clipped on to make a kind of half wave dipole) - peak @ 221
(http://s14.postimage.org/h3q40khe5/459_radial_Tx.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/h3q40khe5/)
Next up, I added a section to the Rx and removed the Tx section - peak @ 224
(http://s14.postimage.org/l6qbr4qa5/459_radial_Rx.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/l6qbr4qa5/)
Finally, a ground return section on both the Tx and Rx - peak @ 237
(http://s7.postimage.org/ojjcz3tjb/459_radial_Tx_Rx.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/ojjcz3tjb/)
By adding a ground leg/counterpoise, it seems I'm getting a bit more RF/efficiency out of my device.
So, how far apart are you guys keeping your Tx & Rx when you post your spec-an plots?
Seems like mine is pretty well up there with peaks always above 200...
Nigel.
That's pretty impressive Nigel, I'm running a 433mhz it's the diamond SRH-771 which is obviously not tuned for 459 at all. One thing though is its a monopole antenna, would it be more efficient with a ground plane?
Mine are monopoles as well.
It should help to have a decent ground plane or ground return for the antenna.
After all, the only other thing providing the ground return is the ground system of the VTx or VRx and that equals the square root of b****r all !!
I'd be interested to see if it makes any improvement to other users findings.
This is all I did to add the ground return/counterpoise, simply croc clipped on a bit of wire (bared end to make good electrical contact)...
(http://s17.postimage.org/evurlmai3/DSCN0783.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/evurlmai3/)
See, us 'geeks' may have some use :D
Nigel.
I was thinking the easiest way to make an end fed dipole would be to take the plastic off the outer of some coax down to 163mm (that's the calc length I think) then slide the shield back over itself, tricky but can be done then your active element is to the correct length and you have a ground element and it's centre fed. You get me?
Quote from: Devonian on April 02, 2012, 10:46:51 PM
Mine are monopoles as well.
It should help to have a decent ground plane or ground return for the antenna.
After all, the only other thing providing the ground return is the ground system of the VTx or VRx and that equals the square root of b****r all !!
I'd be interested to see if it makes any improvement to other users findings.
This is all I did to add the ground return/counterpoise, simply croc clipped on a bit of wire (bared end to make good electrical contact)...
(http://s17.postimage.org/evurlmai3/DSCN0783.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/evurlmai3/)
See, us 'geeks' may have some use :D
Nigel.
could we just wrap the bare wire round the threads and then screw on the antenna??
@ papa,
Yes that's do-able.
I've done it a few times.
Strip the outer plastic sheath down to 170mm or so.
Push the braid down until you get a small 'bunch' near where you want the centre conductor to emerge.
Pry a small gap in the braid at 170mm and pull the centre conductor out through, start with a small 'kink' of centre conductor and by pushing on it and pulling the kink, you will get it to emerge completely.
Straighten everything out and cut both elements to 163mm.
@ Cat
You could put it under the captive nut/washer of the SMA panel connector/receptacle (not the nut of the antenna connector part).
It needs more testing before we can draw any real conclusion, but my initial test is encouraging.
Nigel.
I also saw a large difference between when I just soldered a wire and using a properly sized dipole. I did some experiments for dipoles with 22 awg wire length at 459, here are the results:
Length(mm) RSSI(dB)
16.5 -47.5
16.1 -45.0
15.6 -43.5
15.2 -41.0 *prolly a fluke
15.0 -45.0
14.7 -46.5
14.3 -44.0
13.5 -47.5
Please note that it is very difficult to do these experiments because how sensitive RSSI is to everything, you should probably do your own experiments.
I bought some of these: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/5x-30cm-SMA-Male-male-RF-WLAN-Antenna-Pigtail-RG316-Coaxial-Cable-w-Connector-/290674988270 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/5x-30cm-SMA-Male-male-RF-WLAN-Antenna-Pigtail-RG316-Coaxial-Cable-w-Connector-/290674988270)
You can cut them in half and make 10 antennas!
Quote from: Devonian on April 02, 2012, 11:20:54 PM
@ papa,
Yes that's do-able.
I've done it a few times.
Strip the outer plastic sheath down to 170mm or so.
Push the braid down until you get a small 'bunch' near where you want the centre conductor to emerge.
Pry a small gap in the braid at 170mm and pull the centre conductor out through, start with a small 'kink' of centre conductor and by pushing on it and pulling the kink, you will get it to emerge completely.
Straighten everything out and cut both elements to 163mm.
@ Cat
You could put it under the captive nut/washer of the SMA panel connector/receptacle (not the nut of the antenna connector part).
It needs more testing before we can draw any real conclusion, but my initial test is encouraging.
Nigel.
something like this??
(http://s13.postimage.org/5g2hp9ddv/P1230277.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/5g2hp9ddv/)
Just had a little crack at making an end fed dipole antenna for my Tx, The first pic shows how I pulled the braid back over the coax (it took allot of patience) and the next pic shows the entire length to show it in full.
I need to cut off the spare coax and fit an sma connector. and then trim the braid and centre to the correct length as they are oversize right now. The issue I have right now is that its floppy, I need some kind of sleeve to keep it rigid. any ideas on what I can use and where its available? I'm off to get some sleep
(http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/7969/photo2ozb.jpg)
(http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/2595/photo1aw.jpg)
I use snake outers and inners when making antenna. I use 0.8mm Mig Welding wire so that fits nicely inside the inner and then I use the outer to give it some rigidity. In your case I would just use some outer snake. You can buy replacement EZ* snake sets and they are great but around £4. I also bought a few other snake sets but they are less rigid.
Figured I would add to the show and tell with some graphs I did today using the spektrum analyser software.
First is my noise floor, I have a dipole on the Rx tuned to 459Mhz
(http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/4025/noisefloor.jpg)
Ok next is with the Tx on, I am using a diamond SRH-771 on the Tx it's not tuned to 459Mhz but I am getting a pretty good result anyway I think.
(http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/9059/459mhz.jpg)
It would be nice to get the graphs in RSSI or dB, any news if thats going to happen or not?
To convert to dB just divide by 2 and subtract 130.
So my noise floor analysis is -73dB and with the Tx on its -7.5dB
Ok so now I have these figures what can I extrapolate from them?
All this antenna talk is going over my head.
This is a little embarrassing since I studied Electronic and Electrical Engineering at University. All I can think of is that antennas have changed since I studied, or I might have been hung over and missed that lecture .. slightly more likely.
What I do have is a load of bits to make antenna and the tools to make them.
I do not quite understand your end fed dipole antenna, what is is trying to achieve? Is it some sort of dipole antenna?
If you can tell me what you want and give me dimensions you require then I will make antenna to that spec for anyone that wants them, and will send them out at cost (which is basically the cost of the SMA connectors plus some snake sections).
I really believe that if we can get the TX antennas sorted out then 459 will again become a viable solution. The range of power outputs we are getting seems so antenna dependent that this could easily explain the range difference seen between 433 and 459.
I have been reading up about 1/2 wave TX antenna (a tuned equivalent of your Diamond antenna) and will make a couple of these if you guys think that would be worth it .. and your results would seem to indicate that this is the case. I have read that the more gain on the antenna the more directional it becomes and that is why I would like to get some real, in the field experience behind the antennas I make.
Right here we go.... The high'ish gain of my diamond doesn't mean it's directional, it's still omni but the pattern is more like a squished doughnut if that makes sense. I went on the diamond website this morning after work and it's not designed to transmit on 459 (which we know) but 459 is within the band that it's designed to receive.
My thinking with the end fed dipole is this. I wonder if a dipole would be better than running a monopole and no ground plane which we are doing at present. The problem with dipoles is they are usually centre fed like the sanders style dipole Rx antenna. Now if we used a centre fed antenna in the same orientation as the current monopole antenna the coax would run from the middle and parallel with one of the elements to the Tx sma connection. Running the coax parallel with an element will reduce efficency and defeat the object. So the idea of pulling the coax inside out like I did on my earlier post is that you still have a dipole but the coax feeds through it and not parallel with it meaning it effectively doesn't cause a problem. I'll test it when I get up Wednesday after work, not sure if that's today or tomorrow now lol
Quote from: papa_lazerous on April 03, 2012, 11:47:44 PM
So my noise floor analysis is -73dB and with the Tx on its -7.5dB
Ok so now I have these figures what can I extrapolate from them?
Huh? How did you get -73? At 459MHz with nothing on, you graph shows peaks of ~80. 80/2-130 = 90dB, which is exactly the same as mine. The RF22 board needs a signal that is something like 3dB above the noise floor to work, so the lower the noise floor the longer range your will have.
There's not much you can extrapolate from this, apart from the fact that your noise floor looks normal, I think. You can try different antennas and see what RSSI peaks you get. But you should really do that at lower power or longer range, because if the signal is too strong the (raw value >200) the response will not be linear. You can find a graph of RSSI value vs dB in the RF22 data sheet.
I don't understand how 80 divided by 2 minus 130 =90 ???! Wouldn't it be -90?
I did 114/2-130=-73
Yeah i get -73db also from your graph, which is still high to me, when PK and I tested noise floor with an rcexplorer ( spectrum analyser ), even in close proximity with a gopro switched on our peak values ( which was the Gopro ) was -120db. Which does not match any of my scans or Papa`s
Quote from: papa_lazerous on April 04, 2012, 03:33:18 AM
I don't understand how 80 divided by 2 minus 130 =90 ???! Wouldn't it be -90?
I did 114/2-130=-73
Yes sorry -90.
You are reading 114 at 432MHz, what you are interested in is the graph at 459MHz which is 80!
Ok Zitron I understand now :)
Quote from: Coyote on April 04, 2012, 09:45:53 AM
Yeah i get -73db also from your graph, which is still high to me, when PK and I tested noise floor with an rcexplorer ( spectrum analyser ), even in close proximity with a gopro switched on our peak values ( which was the Gopro ) was -120db. Which does not match any of my scans or Papa`s
Yeah I don't think -120db is realistic. If the noise floor was really that low, you would theoretically be able to get >50km range at 100mW!!
Try it with this range calculator: http://abicom.co.uk/documents/rf-calculator-3.0.xls (http://abicom.co.uk/documents/rf-calculator-3.0.xls)
thUndead,
Using your code on 459, we are just about to do some serious (airborne) range testing in the next couple of days.
One enhancement request :-
Can you possibly add back in the line (from the original flytron code) in the TX code for future releases :-
if ((transmitted==0) && (channel_count>3) && (channel_count<13))
just before :-
Green_LED_ON;
in the main loop since this ensures it stops transmitting if there's no valid PPM frames coming in.
Also found one very very minor bug :-
#if (TX_BOARD_TYPE == 3)
-- deleted lines
#define Green_LED_ON PORTB |= _BV(5);
#define Green_LED_OFF PORTB &= ~_BV(5); // Was originally #define Green_LED_OFF PORTB |= _BV(5); E.g turns it ON not OFF
-- deleted lines
#endif
It looks like this came from the original Flytron code
Thanks Steve (aka Ghost2212's Dad)
just installed the v2 hardware today, using a turnigy 9x for my tx. got 1km range before failsafe kicked in. This was by me leaving the TX switched on and left on a bench in my garden. I'd configured failsafe to move a servo. took the rx and servo for a drive and managed to get to 1km with houses, trees, walls and a big hill between the TX and the RX, while it was in my car.
Cant wait to flight test the range of this baby.. I also have the booster which I'll obivously only ever use in emergencies to regain control when out of range ;)
You got 1km without a booster? Exactly what frequency where you on and what version firmware? I'd be more than impressed of you got 1km on 459mhz but I doubt this is the case
hey bud, cheers for the bug report :) All noted and will be in the next fw update.
Mihai.
Quote from: raptor_flyer on April 10, 2012, 11:05:14 PM
thUndead,
Using your code on 459, we are just about to do some serious (airborne) range testing in the next couple of days.
One enhancement request :-
Can you possibly add back in the line (from the original flytron code) in the TX code for future releases :-
if ((transmitted==0) && (channel_count>3) && (channel_count<13))
just before :-
Green_LED_ON;
in the main loop since this ensures it stops transmitting if there's no valid PPM frames coming in.
Also found one very very minor bug :-
#if (TX_BOARD_TYPE == 3)
-- deleted lines
#define Green_LED_ON PORTB |= _BV(5);
#define Green_LED_OFF PORTB &= ~_BV(5); // Was originally #define Green_LED_OFF PORTB |= _BV(5); E.g turns it ON not OFF
-- deleted lines
#endif
It looks like this came from the original Flytron code
Thanks Steve (aka Ghost2212's Dad)
Well I went out for more flying today, I flew the wing LOS to trim it up, flew quite nice, on OpenLRS
Next up was the Skywalker, I flew a few circuits, put the goggles on, and then it began...........
Only 200 m out, RSSI dropping from 2.8 to 0.04, up down up down, as quick as you could say it, could not get control back, one smashed Skywalker, at only 200m !
shit... that was on 459 not on 435 right ?
No that was on 435, my japan-DVR recorded it, but file was corrupt, Ive just found a way to save the file, and when I did, something very interesting is there, just converting file to show you.
When I did my first launch, that went badly, I thought nothing of it and launched again, but seeing the footage as soon as I let go of it it looses link instantly, hens the crashed launch
hmm really strange. would be grat if u can make like a log.
fault1.MP4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQkCDt9HmXc#ws)
As you can see, which I couldnt at the time, right next to me the RSSI in the top right shows full to 0 full to 0
Quote from: Coyote on April 11, 2012, 05:52:14 PM
As you can see, which I couldnt at the time, right next to me the RSSI in the top right shows full to 0 full to 0
Isn't that excatly the the problem you were having earlier but for 459?
When that is happening are you getting any packet loss or CRC fails associated with the RSSI weirdness? It didn't seem to stop you from throttling up... The RF22 has a interrupt for packets that fails CRC, I wonder if that is implimented in ORLS. If you are losing packet while standing right next to the plane that should give you a warning something is wrong.
Quote from: chrisbrit81 on April 11, 2012, 12:00:21 AM
just installed the v2 hardware today, using a turnigy 9x for my tx. got 1km range before failsafe kicked in. This was by me leaving the TX switched on and left on a bench in my garden. I'd configured failsafe to move a servo. took the rx and servo for a drive and managed to get to 1km with houses, trees, walls and a big hill between the TX and the RX, while it was in my car.
You got 1km range in your car through a hill?? I was only able to barely get to 800m at 459 standing in field after going through a few houses. I did find that that the altitude of the RX makes a huge difference.
Only if your launching via FPV, I couldnt see the screen on the launch so had no idea the RSSI was doing that, while it was sat on the floor before launch I didnt notice it doing that at all.
On my first fight the RSSI held on take off, but then randomly dropped out at 400m to nothing
Hmmm, I've just hooked up my little LCD RSSI meter to my V1 Rx and I'm getting the same fluctuating 100% - 0% - 100% - 0%.... reading on Mihai's latest code (459MHz).
I also note the green LED is very 'dim' or maybe pulsing on/off very fast?
Something is amiss somewhere - I never got any of that on Flytron's firmware(s).
Nigel.
If we are running on 435 Mhz is there much to be gained from using the Thundead code?
Does the standard Flytron firmware not give good range out of the box?
Gentlemen,
I have been following this Thread with great interest. It's like a cross between a good detective story and a soap opera.
I honestly admire all of your sheer dogged determination to see this project through.
A question from the ignorant:-
Does the firmware resetting the EZUHF system from 433 to 459 mhz work OK??
If so, would it be possible to compare the code for the EZUHF to the openLRS to possibly identify an area in the openLRS that needs modification ?
Not really no, they are completely different systems and programming, the OpenLRS is Arduino based. But I really would like to know what chips used in the EZUHF that Sander believes works fine on 459Mhz as well as 433
Quote from: Devonian on April 11, 2012, 09:46:45 PM
Hmmm, I've just hooked up my little LCD RSSI meter to my V1 Rx and I'm getting the same fluctuating 100% - 0% - 100% - 0%.... reading on Mihai's latest code (459MHz).
I also note the green LED is very 'dim' or maybe pulsing on/off very fast?
Something is amiss somewhere - I never got any of that on Flytron's firmware(s).
Nigel.
Ok there are two ways to read RSSI from the RF22, one that reports RSSI whenever your want, which is used in spectrum scanning, and another way which reports the RSSI while the last packet was being received. The second method is the preferred way for measuring reading RSSI for a LRS. So if the signal is so low that you don't receive anything for a while the RSSI function should still report the RSSI of the last packet.
Either way, the RSSI value from the RF22 will never be exactly 0, unless it is forced to be 0 in the arduino code.
I use this meter
http://www.dpcav.com/xcart/RSSI-Meter-Kit-Assembled.html (http://www.dpcav.com/xcart/RSSI-Meter-Kit-Assembled.html)
To calibrate it, you
set the Low point with the Tx off (no RSSI signal)
set the High point with the Tx on full power nearby (max RSSI).
I connected it to the RSSI out on my v1 Rx, as above, using Mihai's firmware.
I guess I should check with a multimeter as well to confirm it really is fluctuating or not.
Nigel.
I swapped my rx over because I was thinking thats the problem, new rx shows 3.2v RSSI. My old one had for a while now only ever shown 2.8v RSSI.
This has me thinking, the wing is fine with its rx, the rx from my quad seems absolutely fine, only walker rx is showing 2.8v rssi and suspected as fault
Now, guess which is the only rx that has ever been flashed with 459 ?
Could be linked, I dunno
Quote from: Coyote on April 12, 2012, 12:03:29 AM
I swapped my rx over because I was thinking thats the problem, new rx shows 3.2v RSSI. My old one had for a while now only ever shown 2.8v RSSI.
This has me thinking, the wing is fine with its rx, the rx from my quad seems absolutely fine, only walker rx is showing 2.8v rssi and suspected as fault
Now, guess which is the only rx that has ever been flashed with 459 ?
I really don't think changing the firmware could cause damage to the board... Unless somehow the rx was transmitting at full power without an antenna!
Maybe its took a hit at some point, I dont know yet, but it has been showing a lower RSSI for no reason.
first off, anyone still using my code on 459mhz should switch to 435 until I figure out if the power dropout is software or hardware related.
Second off, everyone having RSSI problems please complete this and post it on the forum:
FW version:
RSSI Pin used:
Hardware version used:
Band used:
OSD Used:
RSSI Buffer: Yes / No / Kind (lpf , opamp, resistor)
RX covered ?: Yes - heatshrinked and rf module protected/ No, bare PCB mounted in craft
Cheers,
Mihai.
FW version:3.5
RSSI Pin used:PIN 1
Hardware version used:v2
Band used:433 / 435
RSSI 2.8 TO 2.9 only
I think it might be helpful to also state it a buffer was used between the Rx and
OSD on the RSSI and what was powering the Rx ie separate UBEC or
ESC etc
I've updated the list of things I need to debug. Cheers.
FW version: V3.5
RSSI Pin used: Pin 1
Hardware version used: V2
Band used:433 / 435
OSD Used: Telefly OSD
RSSI Buffer: Yes / No / Kind (lpf , opamp, resistor) Yes LM385
RX covered ?: No, bare PCB mounted in craft
RSSI showed 3.2v for first power up, now only shows 2.8v, tested with no buffer to multimeter, same 2.8 RSSI
Update on tests, with hopping on 2.8v RSSI, no hopping 3.04 RSSI ( still short ) On 433 and 435
Think you might have a bad rx. could you check it against another one ?
Quote from: Coyote on April 12, 2012, 04:15:06 PM
Update on tests, with hopping on 2.8v RSSI, no hopping 3.04 RSSI ( still short ) On 433 and 435
Update bud :
Interestingly, I`ve just fitted some tuned 459 antennas from Splashy ( Trevor ) and on 459 no hop, same rx is showing 3.2 RSSI
Hmmmm soo that means your 433 antennas might be dodgy ?
Quote from: Coyote on April 12, 2012, 04:23:28 PM
Update bud :
Interestingly, I`ve just fitted some tuned 459 antennas from Splashy ( Trevor ) and on 459 no hop, same rx is showing 3.2 RSSI
Ive replaced my rx antenna with a new 433 tuned one and full 3.2v is back :) However, if i leave it switched on my RSSI keeps dropping to 0.04 then back up. No failsafe initiates though ??
This is with 433 selected, static one channel
Ian I'd strongly advise you protect your Rx with some heatshrink at a minimum. Leaving it naked you are just on a countdown to when it goes wrong. The processor on the top of the board is obviously static sensitive but the really important part is the RF module on the bottom of the Rx, use some heatshrink or cover/protect it with something else. It may be entirely unrelated but I figured it would be a good idea to put it out there
here is a neat trick: while the rx is transmitting and all is ok, touch the back of the rx where the RF chip is located and It will lock and you will end up in failsafe lol. Really important to isolate the RX from anything else specially since it doesn't come with a case.
Ok, sealed ( sort of ) rx in heat shrink, RSSI seems to ( 1 hour in ) hold its RSSI now, all be it 3.0v but its not dropping down to zero anymore
That's good to know. What are you using to measure the RSSI at present? The regulator onboard your Rx kicks out 3.2v and if you are measuring 3v odds are everything is fine and your meter might not be accurate. Whether you have caused any damage to the RF module by not protecting it is another matter. Perhaps before flying do a low power range check? Simply power up with the button pressed on the Tx to enter low power mode and expect around 200metres or so before glitches or fail safe and you know at normal power you will be ok....
Using RSSI on OSD display and re-checked with multimeter which matches OSD readout is accurate
It previously had velcro stuck to the back of it, either way, with the velcro on the back, before it still held its RSSI and I did the ground tests and 3km flight with it like that. I think the first crash the previous flying day might have damaged my rx.
I think Velcro will have damaged it and this is why...... We all know how static electricity gets built up. You rub a balloon on your sweater and then it has enough charge to stick to your hair or even a wall. Well Velcro has a smooth fluffy side and obviously the hooked side when they are together all is well but when you pull it apart you will create a very large amount of energy we are talking 10's of thousands of volts. And it's stuck ontop of the RF unit. A recipe for failure big time :(
Good point, something I never considered
I'm going to do a range check before I fly this weekend just to absolutely confirm your issue is isolated. I really hope it is
Papa its not isolated
Its exactly what was happening to me...on 459/435 and 433
get 200m or so out and then you can hear the motor start stopping (ie RSSI dropping in and out) at about 300 m it just shuts down....
This has happened on 2 x Rx which were (as suggested by Papa) covered in heat shrink to protect the chip
I haven't flown with openLRS since.....
Strange as I've not had an issue with signal yet, last time I flew I was on the previous FW and my RSSI didn't work properly but I still had solid signal and full control to the limit of my eyesight was flying line of sight testing RTH
Just updated the spectrum analyzer as promised.
It's now possible to change between raw RSSI, dBm and mW.
(http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showatt.php?attachmentid=4783368&stc=1)
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=21329412&postcount=33 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=21329412&postcount=33)
Great work Dennis, much appreciated :)
Ive scanned my tx on 50mw power, the scan is showing 0,00151mw ? My dbm on it is -25.6308dmb
Quote from: Coyote on April 14, 2012, 08:56:27 PM
Ive scanned my tx on 50mw power, the scan is showing 0,00151mw ? My dbm on it is -25.6308dmb
I'm not quite sure I understand, have you connected your transmitter directly to the spectrum analyzer / OpenLRS receiver? That's a bad idea, as it can't handle that powerfull an input. I have used 1 mw and 3 dB attenautor as max input when testing.
100 mw with 30-60 dB attenauter should also work
No no, I have the tx in close proximity of the scanner. I`m wondering if there is a formula i can use to transfer the readings from the scanner to work out tx actual output mw
Quote from: Coyote on April 14, 2012, 09:55:24 PM
No no, I have the tx in close proximity of the scanner. Im wondering if there is a forula i can use to transfer the readings from the scanner to work out tx actual output mw
You should be able to make an estimate if you know your antennas well etc. but I doubt you will get a reliable result. Use a cable and an attenauter, a lot better.
If I can find it I'll bring a 3db attenuator over tomorrow if we end up having a fly.
PK
Here is a quick test with 30 dB attenauter and 0 dBm output-power.
I get a max-reading at -28.74 dBm, pretty close to the expected -30 dBm.
(http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showatt.php?attachmentid=4783799&stc=1)
By the way, 3 dB attenauter should be safe with 1 mw output power, but the RSSI is not reliable/lineary above ~ -10 dBm.
3db is all I have Ian, prob best if you look out for a 30db somewhere cos I reckon it wil be useful to you for testing direct coax link up.
PK
Yeah db`s going to be a bit too small, cheers anyway, I`ll have a look
Quote from: thundead on April 11, 2012, 02:23:03 AM
hey bud, cheers for the bug report :) All noted and will be in the next fw update.
Mihai.
Quote from: raptor_flyer on April 10, 2012, 11:05:14 PM
thUndead,
Using your code on 459, we are just about to do some serious (airborne) range testing in the next couple of days.
One enhancement request :-
Can you possibly add back in the line (from the original flytron code) in the TX code for future releases :-
if ((transmitted==0) && (channel_count>3) && (channel_count<13))
just before :-
Green_LED_ON;
in the main loop since this ensures it stops transmitting if there's no valid PPM frames coming in.
Also found one very very minor bug :-
#if (TX_BOARD_TYPE == 3)
-- deleted lines
#define Green_LED_ON PORTB |= _BV(5);
#define Green_LED_OFF PORTB &= ~_BV(5); // Was originally #define Green_LED_OFF PORTB |= _BV(5); E.g turns it ON not OFF
-- deleted lines
#endif
It looks like this came from the original Flytron code
Thanks Steve (aka Ghost2212's Dad)
Thanks Mihai,
Just discovered adding the
if ((transmitted==0) && (channel_count>3) && (channel_count<13))only works if your not using Frequency hopping as it changes the timing of the main
program loop so the TX and RX stop hopping in sync.
Can't figure out the hoping frequency from your code but I'm sure there's a way to
make sure it detects if the PPM stream has stopped updating and then stop
sending packets so the RX goes into failsafe. I'm sure you can figure out how to do this :)
Thanks Steve (aka Ghost2212's Dad)
EDIT
Forget the stuff below, I just found this
http://ukhas.org.uk/guides:rfm22b (http://ukhas.org.uk/guides:rfm22b)
and on checking in Mihai's code, I see he uses it.
//This sets up the GPIOs to automatically switch the antenna depending on Tx or Rx state, only needs to be done at start up
radio1.write(0x0b,0x12);
radio1.write(0x0c,0x15);
/EDIT
A snippet I found regarding power and controlling the TX_ANT & RX_ANT pins...
Read the posts regarding this
http://arduino.cc/forum/index.php/topic,50533.15.html (http://arduino.cc/forum/index.php/topic,50533.15.html)
Question for the programmers (especially Mihai as this is his thread).
How do you control the state of those pins, as it seems it is necessary? (last post in the thread indicates a 5db gain when controlling the pin states).
Thoughts people? (I'm no programmer, remember!!).
Nigel.
I have uploaded a new GUI and a complete sketch for the Spectrum analyzer:
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list)
Both the GUI and the code for OpenLRS hardware is changed a bit. It should be a lot faster than previously versions, as the delay and rx-reset have been removed :P
Cool Dennis, tried and tested, much better, one of the scales ( cant remember which ) didnt autoscale though as the values increased, not sure if you knew or not
Been looking at openlrs but until the 459mhz is sorted and UK legal I'll wait
shame transmitting on 459mhz has issues
Quote from: Coyote on April 17, 2012, 11:27:03 PM
Cool Dennis, tried and tested, much better, one of the scales ( cant remember which ) didnt autoscale though as the values increased, not sure if you knew or not
Glad you like the improvements ;D
I'm probably not gonna update much unless someone have ideas for improvements.
Can you check the scale that didn't auto-scale? I haven't noticed it?
Pretty sure someone awhile back said they would be interested to see whats inside a EZUHF, I borrowed a friends one and took a few pictures. The RF modulator(?) is an Si4432 which is the same as the RFM22B I believe.
Heres the link to the pictures http://www.flickr.com/photos/44091057@N04/sets/72157629509703908/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/44091057@N04/sets/72157629509703908/)
lmao I'm in denial lol. that explains why it can do 459 easy. but it probably has a completely different back-end (rf filters, power amp etc ) I think. otherwise it would have been as crappy as openlrs on 459
I have 2 comments to make, 1st is Dammm your camera has a good macro mode! and 2nd comment is that I am pleasantly surprised about the chip being used. Looks like OpenLRS is the ugly cousin of EzUHF lol Ok so filtering is going to be a little different no doubt, but even then I am not so sure as the EzUHF covers the 433 band aswell. perhaps there is an issue with the design of the OpenLRS or and its a big or something could still be done with code. It's a glimmer of hope thats definate
On a side note, some others are using 459MHz... (checkout some of the distances involved ;) )
http://www.daveakerman.com/ (http://www.daveakerman.com/)
Interesting reading.
Nigel.
Quote from: Devonian on April 22, 2012, 10:38:15 PM
On a side note, some others are using 459MHz... (checkout some of the distances involved ;) )
http://www.daveakerman.com/ (http://www.daveakerman.com/)
Interesting reading.
Nigel.
Sorry to be a kill joy but there is no reference at all on the whole of that page to using 459MHz at all. 2/3of the way down the page there is a shot of a UHF tranmitter that is using 434MHz! I know at the end he is using a RFM22B module but there is no code supplied and no reference to what band he is using
ummmm guys, 300 baud vs the 9600 my fw is using. That's why they can achieve those distances. takes them ages to receive telemetry but they are obviously in no hurry lol. Also telemetry is legal to send on the 433 band in the uk (someone correct me if im wrong).
Also sorry havent been very active with new releases. Uni is killing me lol. a few more weeks and I can restart dev after 15 may (final exam). I'll start making my own ezuhf if I really get pissed off lol.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on April 22, 2012, 08:40:13 PM
I have 2 comments to make, 1st is Dammm your camera has a good macro mode! and 2nd comment is that I am pleasantly surprised about the chip being used. Looks like OpenLRS is the ugly cousin of EzUHF lol Ok so filtering is going to be a little different no doubt, but even then I am not so sure as the EzUHF covers the 433 band aswell. perhaps there is an issue with the design of the OpenLRS or and its a big or something could still be done with code. It's a glimmer of hope thats definate
The pictures were taken through a magnifying glass with no macro mode on my phone.
This definitely shows that the basic fundamentals of the system are sound based on the range that EZUHF has got to. ;D
Quote from: Devonian on April 22, 2012, 10:38:15 PM
On a side note, some others are using 459MHz... (checkout some of the distances involved ;) )
http://www.daveakerman.com/ (http://www.daveakerman.com/)
Interesting reading.
Nigel.
Is it just me or does it seem pretty amazing how this isn't banned yet we aren't allowed to fly beyond visual sight with our plane even though we actually have control over it.
Quote from: ghost2212 on April 23, 2012, 07:41:57 PM
Is it just me or does it seem pretty amazing how this isn't banned yet we aren't allowed to fly beyond visual sight with our plane even though we actually have control over it.
Quirk of the law I'm afraid. But there are apparently controls in place for a safe launch, etc.
I once read a guys balloon flight where they had to hire a RIB to go 30 miles into the North Sea from Holland to recover their payload.
Back on topic now :D
Ok a little update :
After the problems I had I started fresh, I fitted a brand new Rx as a TX in my Turnigy 9x, turns out its IMO much easier and better than the flytron TX, everything fitted inside the module case with room to spare. I tested that and RSSI held fine unless I moved the stick fast then I could get it to glitch to 0. This aside it seemed better than the TX installed so I went for a flight. Then I fitted brand new Rx to Skywalker to rule out that as well
1 flight with the Skywalker was fine, very windy so was not fun but landed to have another flight, swapped lipos, then I took off and within 200m OpenLRS lost RC link and Skywalker came down that hard in the wind it was in 7 pieces :(
(http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n39/cayote64/IMAG0131-2.jpg)
On review of the video RSSI had started bouncing to 0 again just before I launched ( lunched LOS so had no idea )
Obviously I was not impressed, I can not conclude that its OpenLRS fault entirely because it might be my Turnigy 9x, but I have ordered my Chainlink Rx`s and I`m going to test the RSSI of the Chainlink and see if I can replicate the OpenLRS RSSI bouncing, if not, there`s something wrong
shit thats bad. right...
!!! IMPORTANT !!!
everyone using my fw please revert back to 3.1 ( fw that had rssi on pin 7 ) for the time being. I'm deeply in exams so can't work on the olrs atm until after the 19th of May.
Thanks.
Sorry to see that :(
thundead - I'll deliver my bachelor project the 24. may, but should have quite a bit of time after that. I have considered to write a new frequency-hopping algorithm and re-write a bit of the original code by Melih.
Perhaps we can figure something out. I have a bit of equipment that can be used for testing and logging.
Dennis,
Yup I'm definitely up for that. I'd actually start a new fw from scratch as I don't like the SPI implementation etc. Gd luck on your degree :)
Mihai.
Sorry to see the destruction Ian.
Happy to see Dennis and Mihai colaborating on this.
There has to be something fundamentally wrong here and perhaps it needs a complete re-vamp and start from scratch.
I wish I could help in some way, but I'm not a code writer.
Nigel.
nope but u can be a beta tester :D
Quote from: Devonian on April 30, 2012, 09:40:18 PM
Sorry to see the destruction Ian.
Happy to see Dennis and Mihai colaborating on this.
There has to be something fundamentally wrong here and perhaps it needs a complete re-vamp and start from scratch.
I wish I could help in some way, but I'm not a code writer.
Nigel.
More than happy to do that Miha - BUT, I think I may just put it on a little R/C car first :D :P
Nigel.
I'll alpha test ;)
Can someone explain what Mihai means? Is there a bug in version 3.5? I flew yesterday over 3km away without problems.
Should i downgrade to 3.1?
Quote from: thundead on April 30, 2012, 03:04:12 PM
shit thats bad. right...
!!! IMPORTANT !!!
everyone using my fw please revert back to 3.1 ( fw that had rssi on pin 7 ) for the time being. I'm deeply in exams so can't work on the olrs atm until after the 19th of May.
Thanks.
Quote from: seeers on May 02, 2012, 01:44:35 PM
Can someone explain what Mihai means?
Thundead = Mihai. That's his name :D
Sorry, wrong translation (?) I know that Mihai is thundeads name :)
I want to know why should I use fw 3.1 again ?
Quote from: tdmodels on May 02, 2012, 01:56:36 PM
Quote from: seeers on May 02, 2012, 01:44:35 PM
Can someone explain what Mihai means?
Thundead = Mihai. That's his name :D
HAHAHAHAHA laughed so hard lol.
I mean if you have problems with the latest fw then revert back to 3.1. In order to get rssi working again ( it was broken in 3.4) I had to re-map all the pins on the rx and that apparently broke something and the rssi drops without any reason.
Seers, u having any problems so far ? what hw version are you using ?
as a side note Mihai = Michael in english :D
Mihai.
Quote from: tdmodels on May 02, 2012, 01:56:36 PM
Quote from: seeers on May 02, 2012, 01:44:35 PM
Can someone explain what Mihai means?
Thundead = Mihai. That's his name :D
I use a V1 TX
V1 RX on a HK Bixler with Dennis DIY OSD (RSSI is working well)
V2 RX on my Tricopter with PPM (Without OSD)
V2 RX on a "Knurrus Maximus FPV" Delta wing currently without RSSI on the OSD (also the DIY OSD from Dennis).
Version 3.5 works until now perfectly. :D
so no range problems whatsoever. lol figures as I haven't messed with the v1 hw pins haha. I guess I'll revert the pinout on v2 hardware then. Glad its working good for you
Quote from: seeers on May 02, 2012, 03:15:30 PM
I use a V1 TX
V1 RX on a HK Bixler with Dennis DIY OSD (RSSI is working well)
V2 RX on my Tricopter with PPM (Without OSD)
V2 RX on a "Knurrus Maximus FPV" Delta wing currently without RSSI on the OSD (also the DIY OSD from Dennis).
Version 3.5 works until now perfectly. :D
Quote from: seeers on May 02, 2012, 01:44:35 PM
Can someone explain what Mihai means? Is there a bug in version 3.5? I flew yesterday over 3km away without problems.
Should i downgrade to 3.1?
Quote from: thundead on April 30, 2012, 03:04:12 PM
shit thats bad. right...
!!! IMPORTANT !!!
everyone using my fw please revert back to 3.1 ( fw that had rssi on pin 7 ) for the time being. I'm deeply in exams so can't work on the olrs atm until after the 19th of May.
Thanks.
Can you provide some details of your setup? IE Antennas, frequency and settings
Thanks
Brett
I use a Nagoya NA 771 antenna on the TX which I put on a tripod on my car roof.
on the RX i use a selfmade Dipole antenna
I have attached a picture of my "groundstation" with 2 Video RX and the OpenLRS TX
Cool setup Seers :D are you using a booster ? also what distances have u flown ?
I dont use a booster. My new record was some days ago 3100m with a RSSI of 2,2V, i think there is room for more, but the video signal was bad. :)
ooh man u can't imagine how good that sounds considering ppl have been having problems with their setups. Guess I'm doing someth right afterall lol :D
Quote from: seeers on May 03, 2012, 03:05:38 PM
I dont use a booster. My new record was some days ago 3100m with a RSSI of 2,2V, i think there is room for more, but the video signal was bad. :)
(http://s14.postimage.org/opy49hyp9/pringles.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/opy49hyp9/)
It has begun :D
new fw almost done :) quick preview:
- fixed RSSI bugs (for good I hope) - RSSI back on pin 8, Serial PPM moved to pin 9
- Hopping and recovery optimised.
- Configurator bugs fixed (the annoying freq change bug etc)
- working awesome on 433 band (459 still has range issues...)
I'm doing a stress test now on rssi and rx to check for rssi dropouts and module lockouts.
ETA 1-2h.
Cheers,
Mihai.
Quote from: thundead on May 03, 2012, 07:12:25 PM
(http://s14.postimage.org/opy49hyp9/pringles.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/opy49hyp9/)
It has begun :D
Quote from: thundead on May 03, 2012, 11:04:08 PM
new fw almost done :) quick preview:
- fixed RSSI bugs (for good I hope) - RSSI back on pin 8, Serial PPM moved to pin 9
- Hopping and recovery optimised.
- Configurator bugs fixed (the annoying freq change bug etc)
- working awesome on 433 band (459 still has range issues...)
I'm doing a stress test now on rssi and rx to check for rssi dropouts and module lockouts.
ETA 1-2h.
Cheers,
Mihai.
Quote from: thundead on May 03, 2012, 07:12:25 PM
(http://s14.postimage.org/opy49hyp9/pringles.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/opy49hyp9/)
It has begun :D
And all that on one pack of Pringles .. now come on, you can't expect us to believe that !
How do you know that 459 still has range issues, is it emitting less power?
at the moment I'm only guessing lol. I did change some things so I hope 459 will be better but have tested only 433 atm. Fingers crossed lol :)
ooh finished pringles ages ago. waiting for pizza now lol.
Quote from: thundead on May 03, 2012, 11:47:34 PM
at the moment I'm only guessing lol. I did change some things so I hope 459 will be better but have tested only 433 atm. Fingers crossed lol :)
Nice one bud, did you find anything concerning ?
nope not really. only the channel spacing was way off. changed it and managed to keep the fw on the ISM band as well lol.
Quote from: Coyote on May 04, 2012, 12:04:12 AM
Nice one bud, did you find anything concerning ?
thUndeadMod v 3.6 Beta
- Config GUI bugs fixed
- added channels in GUI
- 459 band spacing fix
- overall hopping and recovery algorithm improvement
- RSSI fixed (PIN 8)
- Stress Tested for 4h - no dropouts / random rssi encountered.
NEEDS TESTED!
- 459 range (should be better)
- Serial PPM
------
WHo wants to beta test PM me and I'll give u the password.
Cheers,
Mihai.
Quote from: Coyote on April 30, 2012, 02:04:32 PM
Ok a little update :
After the problems I had I started fresh, I fitted a brand new Rx as a TX in my Turnigy 9x, turns out its IMO much easier and better than the flytron TX, everything fitted inside the module case with room to spare. I tested that and RSSI held fine unless I moved the stick fast then I could get it to glitch to 0. This aside it seemed better than the TX installed so I went for a flight. Then I fitted brand new Rx to Skywalker to rule out that as well
1 flight with the Skywalker was fine, very windy so was not fun but landed to have another flight, swapped lipos, then I took off and within 200m OpenLRS lost RC link and Skywalker came down that hard in the wind it was in 7 pieces :(
(http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n39/cayote64/IMAG0131-2.jpg)
On review of the video RSSI had started bouncing to 0 again just before I launched ( lunched LOS so had no idea )
Obviously I was not impressed, I can not conclude that its OpenLRS fault entirely because it might be my Turnigy 9x, but I have ordered my Chainlink Rx`s and I`m going to test the RSSI of the Chainlink and see if I can replicate the OpenLRS RSSI bouncing, if not, there`s something wrong
Are you powering the OpenLRS RX board configured as a TX directly from the Turnigy 9x battery ?
If so this might be the source of your problems since the MIC5205 Regulator used on the
OpenLRS RX board can only cope with a maximum input voltage of 6.2V at the maximum
current output of 150mA. If the input voltage is higher then the Current Limit Thermal Shutdown
will be triggered and the RX board working as a TX will lose all power.
See the "Thermal Considerations" section on page 8 of the datasheet http://www.micrel.com/_PDF/mic5205.pdf (http://www.micrel.com/_PDF/mic5205.pdf)
I'd recommend anyone using the RX board as a TX use a 5V or 6V supply from a BEC.
In both configurations I had the tx and rx powered from the 5v output of the Turnigy 9x
Quote from: Coyote on May 05, 2012, 04:39:11 PM
In both configurations I had the tx and rx powered from the 5v output of the Turnigy 9x
Where are you getting the 5v from?
Quote from: ghost2212 on May 05, 2012, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: Coyote on May 05, 2012, 04:39:11 PM
In both configurations I had the tx and rx powered from the 5v output of the Turnigy 9x
Where are you getting the 5v from?
The clue was in Coyote's response I will quote it in bold for you
QuoteI had the tx and rx powered from the 5v output of the Turnigy 9x
Quote from: ghost2212 on May 05, 2012, 05:17:30 PM
Quote from: Coyote on May 05, 2012, 04:39:11 PM
In both configurations I had the tx and rx powered from the 5v output of the Turnigy 9x
Where are you getting the 5v from?
The clue was in Coyote's response I will quote it in bold for you
QuoteI had the tx and rx powered from the 5v output of the Turnigy 9x
Ok, more specifically where on the 9x?
I thought the module output pins were higher than 5v?
Maybe the Turnigy 9x has a 5V supply to the RF module as well as the higher voltage directly from the battery ?
On JR and Futaba transmitters the power supply to the removable RF module is usually
the 9.6V (nominal) from the battery.
I can't remember off hand but I will post it up tomorrow when I get in, I will check the voltage level too to be sure
Quote from: thundead on May 04, 2012, 01:19:08 AM
thUndeadMod v 3.6 Beta
- Config GUI bugs fixed
- added channels in GUI
- 459 band spacing fix
- overall hopping and recovery algorithm improvement
- RSSI fixed (PIN 8)
- Stress Tested for 4h - no dropouts / random rssi encountered.
NEEDS TESTED!
- 459 range (should be better)
- Serial PPM
------
WHo wants to beta test PM me and I'll give u the password.
Cheers,
Mihai.
Mihai,
From the testing I've done there still seems to be something strange going on with Frequency Hopping on 459.
See the following scan from Dennis OpenLRS Spectrum Analyzer
(http://s13.postimage.org/rcl93nx8z/Hopping_Problem.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/rcl93nx8z/)
This is with the default hopping setup :-
//###### HOPPING CHANNELS #######
#define CHNO 6
static unsigned char hop_list[10] = {7,4,5,6,0,1,9,3,2,8};
There are 3 nice peaks between 459000 and 459500 but the other 3 peaks are up
at 461000 to 461400 and at reduced power.
[Test was done with TX on reduced power and RX about 2 m away on a dining room table]
[Also before anyone asks, Yes I did check for these 461 to 461.4 peaks with the OpenLRS TX switched off]
I can't see anything wrong with your code since you're setting the Hopping step to 5 (x 10KHz)
and the maximum hop step (6 channels) is 7 (7 x 50Khz = 350Khz) so the max hopping frequency should be 459350Khz.
I wonder is there's some "undocumented feature" of the RFM22B or Si4431 occurring here.
Has anyhone else tried using the OpenLRS Spectrum Analyzer on thUndeadMod v 3.6 Beta ?
It use to do that on the previous version as well
Ive been trying the beta but not with the spektrum analyser software yet. I need to get out and do a range test but its been raining all day :(
Quote from: Coyote on May 06, 2012, 04:01:26 PM
It use to do that on the previous version as well
Yes I recall seeing it hopped outside the 458500 to 459500 band in previous versions but
I thought Mihai said this was a known problem he's tried to fix. Based on the info in the
Si4431 datasheet I can't see anything wrong with his code.
What is concerning now is the 3 hops above 460500Khz are at a much lower power
level for some bizarre reason. I really need someone else to try the same test to make sure
there's not something weird with my measurements or setup.
Did 925m today using DIY OpenLRS hardware and thundeads v3.6 code on 435. RSSI was around 20-30% according to the Dragon OSD but this hasnt been calibrated recently and I wasn't holding the transmitter aerial straight. Transmitter aerial was a Diamond SRH-771 with a half wave bazooka dipole on the reciever.
Well I have some EPIC news :o
I did a range test this afternoon with very surprising results. I tested at 459MHz on the new 3.6 software running @100mW using a V2 Tx and a V2 Rx. On the Tx I had a Diamond SRH-771 antenna (not ideal for 459MHz but ok) and on the Rx I have a home made dipole tuned to 459MHz.
What I did was make a little test rig up, well it was a box with the antenna taped vertically to keep the antenna's pointing the same to stop any issues with polarisation. a BEC a servo and my trusty Fluke meter for RSSI.
(http://img860.imageshack.us/img860/558/photo1et.jpg)
So I took the otherhalfs boy with me on this test, I got him to sit at one end of the beach with instructions to keep the antenna pointing straight up and I would be back in 10 minutes (I should point out that he's 14 so its ok to abandon him at the beach lol)
So I set off in the car and lost signal pretty quick, the reason is 2 fold. Firstly the car is pretty much a crude farraday cage so not much is going to be recieved, and secondly there is a heavy duty concrete sea wall between the road and where the boy was sitting. So I made a few stops along the way to get out of the car and check the signal. Heres the pics and the range on each.
(http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/213/165kma.jpg)
Ok so 1.65Km I drove up the slip way over the sea wall hung my arm out the window and got instant signal with 1.65v RSSI no glitches so back on the road....
I drive a bit further to the next break in the sea wall where I can stop the car.....
(http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/1746/223km.jpg)
Ok 2.23Km this time and I am impressed, but I still have 0.9v RSSI and no glitching so I carry on :)
(http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/8430/300km.jpg)
This is the bit you have been waiting for 3Km on 459!!! :) When I got out the car I was getting some glitching and losing some packets, but I held the test rig up in the air and I had signal again that was perfectly fine to fly on. the RSSI was around 0.6v I didnt go any further than that as I felt I was at the limit of the range.
Now here's the small print lol I was 100% definately on 459MHz hopping on 6 channels I confirmed this by using the spektrum analyser before I went out. So no question of me being on the correct frequency, I was running standard OpenLRS hardware with no mods or boosters, so I was outputting 100mW nothing more. By testing over the sea like I did and with the tide being in I will have been experiencing a reduction in range due to multipathing, its also quite a poluted RF environment as I am on the edge of town plus the starting point of the range test is the coastguard office with a massive antenna, I know they use UHF/VHF and radar from there. So I have to assume its afecting me. Out in the countryside with a wide open area to test in I expect that you will get more range, perhaps 25% more. Another thing is that the range in the air is ALWAYS allot more than on the ground, so you can safely expect 3 to 4 times the range when flying. we are talking 10km easy!!
A BIG THANKS TO MIHAI!! :party:
Yaaaay Awesome range test and result! Hopefully someone else will do a range test on 459 and I can get the fw out of beta.
Big thumbs up for papa_lazerous! I'm officially calling you my main α β γ Δ tester muhaha :D
Coyote, Have you had a chance to check the 9x voltage yet?
Quote from: ghost2212 on May 09, 2012, 07:27:22 PM
Coyote, Have you had a chance to check the 9x voltage yet?
I am failing to understand the correlation between the voltage on the 9x and if we have a good firmware?
To put your mind at rest and get you back on topic I had a look at my 9x, the voltage outputted from the 9x radio for the module to connect to is equal to pack voltage!
This is NOT a concern, the OpenLRS Tx module has built in voltage regs that are designed to take upto 16VDC input, and we are getting nowhere near that. here is a link to the schematic http://www.flytron.com/pdf/openlrs-m2-module.pdf (http://www.flytron.com/pdf/openlrs-m2-module.pdf)
Now if you use a Rx as a Tx then you would naturally use a BEC, or take 5v directly from inside the radio (this can be done but for the cost of a bec its hardly worth it)
Quote from: papa_lazerous on May 10, 2012, 06:11:03 PM
Quote from: ghost2212 on May 09, 2012, 07:27:22 PM
Coyote, Have you had a chance to check the 9x voltage yet?
I am failing to understand the correlation between the voltage on the 9x and if we have a good firmware?
To put your mind at rest and get you back on topic I had a look at my 9x, the voltage outputted from the 9x radio for the module to connect to is equal to pack voltage!
This is NOT a concern, the OpenLRS Tx module has built in voltage regs that are designed to take upto 16VDC input, and we are getting nowhere near that. here is a link to the schematic http://www.flytron.com/pdf/openlrs-m2-module.pdf (http://www.flytron.com/pdf/openlrs-m2-module.pdf)
Now if you use a Rx as a Tx then you would naturally use a BEC, or take 5v directly from inside the radio (this can be done but for the cost of a bec its hardly worth it)
This is Directly related to whether we have a working firmware or not! Coyote was using an RX as a TX(if you read his post you'll see that) He says he was powering it off 5v but if he is wrong then this would cause the voltage regulator to overheat and the RSSI to drop to 0 and oscillate as the voltage regulator came back on and then off again.
I know how the voltage regulator reacts to overvoltage because I had the same problem powering it with too higher voltage.
He also states that the RX was powered off of the 5v just as the TX module was. But where the TX module plugs in there is no 5v so not sure how this is possible.
Mihai advised people not to use the firmware that Coyote was using as he suspected there may be a serious bug that caused the crash. If it was not the firmware that was the problem then there may have never been a problem with the firmware on the 435 band at least.
Hope this clears your misunderstandings up
Brett
Hey Brett,
Something might have been wrong with the fw because when I changed the pin layout I might have messed up one of the three timers running on the arduino. All should be fixed in the 3.6 fw as I reverted back to the old pinout (rssi on pin 8 and now Serial PPM on in 9) and further optimized timing, hopping and recovery algorithms. I also changed some stuff for the 459 band and apparently works good now :)
using the rx as tx without a BEC or with a BEC on 6v is a big no no as you said beacuse of the overheating problems.
Quote from: ghost2212 on May 10, 2012, 08:42:09 PM
Quote from: papa_lazerous on May 10, 2012, 06:11:03 PM
Quote from: ghost2212 on May 09, 2012, 07:27:22 PM
Coyote, Have you had a chance to check the 9x voltage yet?
I am failing to understand the correlation between the voltage on the 9x and if we have a good firmware?
To put your mind at rest and get you back on topic I had a look at my 9x, the voltage outputted from the 9x radio for the module to connect to is equal to pack voltage!
This is NOT a concern, the OpenLRS Tx module has built in voltage regs that are designed to take upto 16VDC input, and we are getting nowhere near that. here is a link to the schematic http://www.flytron.com/pdf/openlrs-m2-module.pdf (http://www.flytron.com/pdf/openlrs-m2-module.pdf)
Now if you use a Rx as a Tx then you would naturally use a BEC, or take 5v directly from inside the radio (this can be done but for the cost of a bec its hardly worth it)
This is Directly related to whether we have a working firmware or not! Coyote was using an RX as a TX(if you read his post you'll see that) He says he was powering it off 5v but if he is wrong then this would cause the voltage regulator to overheat and the RSSI to drop to 0 and oscillate as the voltage regulator came back on and then off again.
I know how the voltage regulator reacts to overvoltage because I had the same problem powering it with too higher voltage.
He also states that the RX was powered off of the 5v just as the TX module was. But where the TX module plugs in there is no 5v so not sure how this is possible.
Mihai advised people not to use the firmware that Coyote was using as he suspected there may be a serious bug that caused the crash. If it was not the firmware that was the problem then there may have never been a problem with the firmware on the 435 band at least.
Hope this clears your misunderstandings up
Brett
Quote from: ghost2212 on May 10, 2012, 08:42:09 PM
Quote from: papa_lazerous on May 10, 2012, 06:11:03 PM
Quote from: ghost2212 on May 09, 2012, 07:27:22 PM
Coyote, Have you had a chance to check the 9x voltage yet?
I am failing to understand the correlation between the voltage on the 9x and if we have a good firmware?
To put your mind at rest and get you back on topic I had a look at my 9x, the voltage outputted from the 9x radio for the module to connect to is equal to pack voltage!
This is NOT a concern, the OpenLRS Tx module has built in voltage regs that are designed to take upto 16VDC input, and we are getting nowhere near that. here is a link to the schematic http://www.flytron.com/pdf/openlrs-m2-module.pdf (http://www.flytron.com/pdf/openlrs-m2-module.pdf)
Now if you use a Rx as a Tx then you would naturally use a BEC, or take 5v directly from inside the radio (this can be done but for the cost of a bec its hardly worth it)
This is Directly related to whether we have a working firmware or not! Coyote was using an RX as a TX(if you read his post you'll see that) He says he was powering it off 5v but if he is wrong then this would cause the voltage regulator to overheat and the RSSI to drop to 0 and oscillate as the voltage regulator came back on and then off again.
I know how the voltage regulator reacts to overvoltage because I had the same problem powering it with too higher voltage.
He also states that the RX was powered off of the 5v just as the TX module was. But where the TX module plugs in there is no 5v so not sure how this is possible.
Mihai advised people not to use the firmware that Coyote was using as he suspected there may be a serious bug that caused the crash. If it was not the firmware that was the problem then there may have never been a problem with the firmware on the 435 band at least.
Hope this clears your misunderstandings up
Brett
I see what you are getting at Brett, the FW had an issue as Mihai just stated. Coyote had initially been running a Tx as a Tx so no issue there with voltages but still the same problem, a problem I managed to duplicate also. Running a Rx as a Tx I assume there was a BEC being used. Either way there was a FW bug regardless of coyote's wiring
Yeah my Tx as a tx was fine for lots and lots of range tests and was left on for hours at a time as I went back and forward 8km a time before 3.5 FW
Quote from: thundead on May 10, 2012, 08:49:15 PM
Hey Brett,
Something might have been wrong with the fw because when I changed the pin layout I might have messed up one of the three timers running on the arduino. All should be fixed in the 3.6 fw as I reverted back to the old pinout (rssi on pin 8 and now Serial PPM on in 9) and further optimized timing, hopping and recovery algorithms. I also changed some stuff for the 459 band and apparently works good now :)
Ah ha, I didn't realise the significance of moving the RSSI out back to pin 8. I've been modifying the setup in your 3.6B code to put it back on pin 1 so I didn't have to rewire the plane. :-[ I will rewire the plane so I have RSSI out on pin 8 and use your code unmodified before we try any further flight tests.
Thanks,
Steve.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on May 07, 2012, 08:28:10 PM
Well I have some EPIC news :o
I did a range test this afternoon with very surprising results. I tested at 459MHz on the new 3.6 software running @100mW using a V2 Tx and a V2 Rx. On the Tx I had a Diamond SRH-771 antenna (not ideal for 459MHz but ok) and on the Rx I have a home made dipole tuned to 459MHz.
What was the total length of your "home made dipole tuned to 459MHz" ? I assume 163 mm * 2 = 326 mm ?
How are you planning to mount it on the plane ? Ideally I wanted to use a similiar dipole configuration but can't figure out how to mount it on our twinstar
Quote from: raptor_flyer on May 11, 2012, 11:01:40 PM
Quote from: papa_lazerous on May 07, 2012, 08:28:10 PM
Well I have some EPIC news :o
I did a range test this afternoon with very surprising results. I tested at 459MHz on the new 3.6 software running @100mW using a V2 Tx and a V2 Rx. On the Tx I had a Diamond SRH-771 antenna (not ideal for 459MHz but ok) and on the Rx I have a home made dipole tuned to 459MHz.
What was the total length of your "home made dipole tuned to 459MHz" ? I assume 163 mm * 2 = 326 mm ?
How are you planning to mount it on the plane ? Ideally I wanted to use a similiar dipole configuration but can't figure out how to mount it on our twinstar
The antenna I have in my plane is built into the tail of my skywalker, half of it protrudes vertically through the top of the tail and the rest is inside. I have a RF sensor from flytron that I have hooked so the higher the recieved signal it shows on an LCD. What I did was make the antenna longer and then trim it down and monitor the signal strength, its very sensitive and works well. But I am a little OCD about things and 163mm should be fine, the antenna I used for testing with my ghetto test rig was a quicky but accurate dipole that I made purely for range tests, I tuned using the RF sensor by trimming the elements till I got a peak (Yes I did over trim it and start again when doing my first one) I am going to put that antenna on my quad now
Thanks for the Info.
Unfortunately we have the Video TX aerial mounted on the tail so can't put the OpenLRS antenna there.
I've been experimenting with so called "Bazooka Dipoles" see http://www.hamuniverse.com/vertbazooka.html (http://www.hamuniverse.com/vertbazooka.html)
I think they've been mentioned before on this forum. They are fairly easy to make and much easier to mount since you can put them inside a plastic tube. But I have no idea how they perform compared to
classic dipoles like yours ?
I experimented with making a dipole like that a few weeks ago, but I havent got any tube to put it in so it sat un finished till I get a nice rigid sleeve. Its easier to make a classic dipole though. What plane are you trying to fit the antenna on?
Quote from: papa_lazerous on May 12, 2012, 01:19:51 AM
I experimented with making a dipole like that a few weeks ago, but I haven't got any tube to put it in so it sat un finished till I get a nice rigid sleeve. Its easier to make a classic dipole though. What plane are you trying to fit the antenna on?
At the moment our FPV Testbed is a Multiplex TwinStar. We have the dipole for the video link mounted in the
tail fin so can't really put the dipole for the radio link there.
Would be interesting to hear if anyone has tested Bazooka verses conventional dipoles ?
If you read the stuff about Bazooka dipoles on the HAM radio sites they should perform better than
a conventional dipole when fed via a coax since they provide similar features to a balun to prevent the
coax from acting as an antenna as well.
I haven't found any reference to them yet in the FPV context though ?
maybe you can move your Vtx? Also why are you using a dipole for your video? Circular polarisation seems to have taken over as it cures all the multipathing issues. But forget the buzzword bazooka, what you linked to is just a dipole antenna! The difference is that its end fed instead of centre fed. I do believe there are some advatnages to be had, but its not going to rock your world thats for sure. As soon as I can find a cheap source of some tubing to slide mine inside of to stop it bending around I will test it and let you know how it compares to a standard dipole, I dont think we are going to be talking allotof difference.
This will probably be the last firmware release as ppl seem to have been losing interest in this lately (only 2 people actually bothered testing the beta).
------------------------------------------------------------
Final thUndead Firmware for the openLRS
Changelog:
- v2 RX Pinout reverted back to 3.1 (RSSI on pin 8)
-RSSI is not rock solid as it was before
- Serial PPM on pin 9
- Hopping algorithm and recovery improved.
- 459 should be nice and reliable (tested 3km on ground)
- 433 should be even better
- Fixed nasty frequency change bug in GUI
- added channel selection dialog in GUI
DISCLAIMER
- Use this fw at your own risk. I cannot be held responsible for plane crashed, exploding rx/tx modules, aliens making contact etc lol.
- big thanks for papa_lazerous and ghost 2212 for bothering to test out the beta.
Background data
- Ground test was carried out on the 459Mhz band
Was tested up to 3km with some spare rssi left (ground test)
huge thanks to papa_lazerous for bothering to test this thing.
- rx/tx were stress tested for about 4h without any module lockouts / resets / etc (tx on micro mode in my Faraday microwave oven lol)
- RSSI was rock solid over this 4h period with slight variations (+/- 0.06v max)
so I can say that if this fw is doing weird stuff then you might be doing something wrong. (unless I can reproduce the bug and eat my words :) ) I challenge anyone to prove me wrong hehe.
-----------------------------------
Download
http://openlrs.googlecode.com/files/thUndeadMod3_6FINAL.zip (http://openlrs.googlecode.com/files/thUndeadMod3_6FINAL.zip)
-----------------------------------
Regards,
Mihai :)
I`m still interested Mihai, but due to lack of planes I haven`t tested it yet. No one else seemed to be flying / crashing other than me so I want to see someone else take to the air first before I risk another load of money
I appreciate that coyote and I understand no worries :) the thing is i personally dont use the olrs. the 2.4 Frsky is enough for my applications so I've been deving for you guys and want to see if I'm doing it right basically. no point in releasing new firmwares if they get worse.
Quote from: Coyote on May 17, 2012, 12:05:05 AM
I`m still interested Mihai, but due to lack of planes I haven`t tested it yet. No one else seemed to be flying / crashing other than me so I want to see someone else take to the air first before I risk another load of money
Ground tests don't cost money ;) just time and a little petrol (ok that stuff is expensive). My new Vtx arrived today, I broke mine a few weeks ago so wasn't able to fly fpv. Weather permitting I'll be testing in the air Sunday. I have absolute confidence in it after testing on the ground
Ill do a ground test soon enough though, I`m going to make a board up though, apart from it looks better in the tests I can mix n match dead quickly too
On about that, does anyone know how to put a turnigy 9 into a servo test mode, so it continuously moves the servos ?
Are you running ER-9x? If so create a new model and servo test is under the templates. Then goto the mix page and chose the channel the servo is plugged into and add channel 16 to that mix. It might be ch15 but I'm almost positive it's 16. If you don't have that template installed I will post after work how to configure from scratch.
Oh I nearly forgot.... Your making a board up for testing? What's wrong with the ghetto rig? All you need is Sellotape and a cardboard box, low tech for the win lol
Year ER-9X, cool, having a look right now :)
Its just a ply board and velcro, as getto as I can get :)
Sounds like wanna be ghetto to me, do you have a stroppy adolescent teen that can help you whilst under duress?
getto enough ? :D
(http://s14.postimage.org/t8qlq5dfx/IMG_20120503_213557.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/t8qlq5dfx/)
This is called the poor student's rig where the cable tie is king :D
Quote from: Coyote on May 17, 2012, 12:17:15 AM
Year ER-9X, cool, having a look right now :)
Its just a ply board and velcro, as getto as I can get :)
Your attachment sucks. Can't view on tapatalk as its a clickable thumbnail, instead of the image direct on the page. So you get points or ghetto posting
Lol, its got the servo test function, but I have no idea what im doing with the mixes * runs to find video *
Easy enough
Template Servo Test (Servo Teste)- ER9X (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU8ZzgqSbsE#)
Mixes are something you should know about in detail. Some very clever stuff possible
All sorted working fine, ground tests here we come
Quote from: Coyote on May 17, 2012, 12:44:35 AM
All sorted working fine, ground tests here we come
Cool :) I'd expect you get more rage than me, as I must have been getting a loss due to the sea. Can you test on 459 and 6ch hopping so you mirror my test. That way our data can be compared, ofcourse antennas will be different though
Ok I`ll do that, using a Diamond on tx and Splashy 459 Sander style
Same Tx antenna :) the Rx antenna is down to how good splashy is ;)
hello all...
i have had olrs v2 hardware for a while now and have been testing some of the earlyer fw...
after not very good range at all and crashing my quad i waited for an update,
tried that and got 20ft maybe before really bad glitching etc..
so i have been waiting for some new fw to be written.
unfortunately im no programmer,
and i admire those who understand even a bit of it! lol
if we now think this 3.6 fw will work on 459mhz i will reflash it this week end and have a go :)
i will have to go get a new multi meter from b&q or something to test the rssi and i will report back.
originally i tried making some antennas but purchased some from badland.co.uk in the end
they made some especially for me, 2x lightened 1/4's for airframes and a 1/2 wave for tx,
all for £30 ;)
so 459 hopping 6 channels?
simon.
Hey Simon good to see you are up for some testing, maplin might be a good bet for a meter it would be a £15 investment but well worth it, once you have a meter you wont know how you managed without it. When you want to measure the RSSI take an old servo that's broken and cut the cable off, or cut one end off an extension, you need to connect the meter to the outer 2 wires. That's ground and signal, do not use the centre wire as that's 5v! Best keep that wire out the way!! You will need the Tx upright and the Rx upright so both antennas are orientated the same. It's best to have a helper with the Tx so it's off the ground at normal height too. I guarantee you will have better results with 3.6. I've got complete confidence in it, and I can honestly say its the first time I've had this much confidence in it lol. Make sure your Rx isn't naked, as that will affect performance! I use heatshrink to protect mine. Really looking forward to seeing someone else's data :)
ok i got a bit exited last night at the prospect of olrs working well enough to use now
so i flashed 3.6 359 6ch last night and went for a quick test around the house
i got 250m up the road!!! :)
this is through old 2ft stone walls of my house and in a dense urban area! and in the car!!!
very pleased so far!!! any other fw was glitching at the door step!!!
going to get multimeter now... will report back when 'propper' test done...
simon.
That sounds promising! I didnt get very far in my car either, add stone walls and 250m is actually very good :)
well...
i managed to do a bit of a test in the end (busy weekend)
i roped a friend into holding the tx and we went to the biggest open area close to here.
got the v2 rx hooked up to the meter and it read 2.9v or there abouts...
i drove to the other end about 450-500m away and got out the car.
i was getting nothing behind trees and under 1v at 450m away :(
it only became a 'usable link' at around 250m in open space.
any greater distance and i was loosing lots of packets....
and the voltage on rssi seemed to have to be around 1.5-2v to get a good link..?
i didnt have it all mounted to anything though...
would this affect it?
the rx is covered in battery pack heat shrink so its ok,
but would holding it affect the range?
i was quite exited at the prospect of being able to use olrs in the air after all this time
and 3.6 does seem to be the best fw yet! thanks every one for all the dev. so far.
but if im honest i was expecting more :/
maybe its my antennas?
might try post a pic of it all tomorrow if anyones interested?
simon.
Antennas will play the biggest role in the quality of your link! You say you got your antennas from badland.co.uk all for £30. I paid that much just for my Tx antenna lol I have absolutely no way of knowing if your antennas are good or bad but I would be swayed into suspecting that something is not correct there.
You should absolutelty be getting more signal than you are getting right now, without a doubt 100% sure about this, the only possibilites are a) you are doing something wrong b) your antenna is wrong c) you have a hardware issue.
Firstly you say you have heatshrink on the Rx this is good, and holding it shouldnt cause a problem, I put everything in a box so it wouldnt be an issue though
Whats your Tx setup like? specify what type of module and radio you have and how its hooked up
Next is one of the most overlooked and kinda obvious things, When you flashed your Tx & Rx in Arduino what board did you select? it should have been the Arduino pro or pro mini (5V,16MHz w/ATmega 328)
If you selected ANYTHING else its wrong and will kill any range, I have posted a picture below of the correct option to select, sorry if this is obvious but its also a good reason why your range would be bad
(http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/5912/capture1no.jpg)
If you flashed using the correct option can you try a range test using the standard antennas?
Also I found I could get much lower than 1.0-1.5v for a useable RSSI, I will say that I had a good direct line of sight with no obstructions betweenthe Tx and Rx. Trees are an absolute no no for range tests when they are in close proximity especially now they have leaves! They absord radio waves on the UHF very easily, so if you have trees between the Tx and Rx you will get poor results. There must be a clear place near you that you can get say even at least 500m of clear ground just to overcome the issue you have now with trees like a school plaing field or something.
Also I didnt get to fly and do an in the air range check this weekend as it blew and blew all day sunday, and its half 6 Monday and still blowing :(
Your RSSI should be 3.2v when in close proximity, that`s suggesting your antennas are not tuned together to me
hello all...
thought i would try an answer some of the points....
as far as i know badland are a reputable company that make tuned antennas...
i did not just buy them but spoke to one of the engineers there and explained their intended use etc..
he said he would make some tuned to my specs and i was happy at that.
there seems to be a lot of 'homebrew' antennas out there, and im not knocking them or their creators,
just i trust the guy with the machine to test this stuff rather than my cutting and making of some my self.
the hard ware is ok as far as i know...
i did just notice that the pigtail on the tx module sma end is not looking to tight inside....
im sure it makes good contact on the centre pin but maybe something to think about for the sake of a quid or what ever they are...
i checked and im flashing for 5v 16 328 in arduino,
i didnt think it would work at all if you got that wrong?
attached are some pics of the range test
and the set up...
so back to the drawing board i guess...
simon.
I think that serial PPM is not working on pin 9.
I am assuming that connecting pins 1 and 3 enables PPM mode.
hello all...
Hi
thought i would try an answer some of the points....
as far as i know badland are a reputable company that make tuned antennas...
i did not just buy them but spoke to one of the engineers there and explained their intended use etc..
he said he would make some tuned to my specs and i was happy at that.
there seems to be a lot of 'homebrew' antennas out there, and im not knocking them or their creators,
just i trust the guy with the machine to test this stuff rather than my cutting and making of some my self.
I am not saying they are a bad company etc, but what I am questioning is if the antennas they made for you are any good. It's a variable, we have the same hardware except antennas and I get great results and you dont. Its worth looking into this. Both Coyote and myself use this antenna http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/antennas/433mhz/diamond-srh771-sma-433mhz-antenna (http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/antennas/433mhz/diamond-srh771-sma-433mhz-antenna) Its tuned for 433 but is a quality well built antenna that seems happy to perform well outside of its designated band.
My main concern about your antennas are that you have a very low RSSI in your picture if you are getting 2.9V with the Tx & Rx beside each other then something is wrong. Please try the stock antenna and see if you get a different result with the RSSI. Just to see if it gets better or worse. I would be interested to know the answer as I know which way it should go but I have a funny feeling it wont
the hard ware is ok as far as i know...
i did just notice that the pigtail on the tx module sma end is not looking to tight inside....
im sure it makes good contact on the centre pin but maybe something to think about for the sake of a quid or what ever they are...
On the Tx where the pigtail attaches to the board, it just be able to swivel freely if you try and move it then it shouldnt resist too much. Ofcourse it shouldnt just be falling off either ;)
i checked and im flashing for 5v 16 328 in arduino,
i didnt think it would work at all if you got that wrong?
Oh it will work if you flashed at say 3v3 or 8Mhz as long as you select the 328 chip. Problem is the chip would be running at less volts and at a slower clock speed causing very poor range results of around 400metres max, hence me double checking with you
Quote from: Coyote on May 21, 2012, 02:09:14 PM
Your RSSI should be 3.2v when in close proximity, that`s suggesting your antennas are not tuned together to me
Agreed, have you had chance to do any kind of range check yet? It would be helpful if someone else could get the same results as me. I am still grounded due to windy conditions so no in the air check yet, wed/thur are looking good though on the forecast
Quote from: papa_lazerous on May 21, 2012, 05:29:07 PM
Oh it will work if you flashed at say 3v3 or 8Mhz as long as you select the 328 chip. Problem is the chip would be running at less volts and at a slower clock speed causing very poor range results of around 400metres max, hence me double checking with you
I'm sure that its the voltage coming out of the onboard voltage regulator that control the voltage at which the atmega runs at, The frequency is controlled by the external oscillator.
Quote from: ghost2212 on May 21, 2012, 06:52:28 PM
Quote from: papa_lazerous on May 21, 2012, 05:29:07 PM
Oh it will work if you flashed at say 3v3 or 8Mhz as long as you select the 328 chip. Problem is the chip would be running at less volts and at a slower clock speed causing very poor range results of around 400metres max, hence me double checking with you
I'm sure that its the voltage coming out of the onboard voltage regulator that control the voltage at which the atmega runs at, The frequency is controlled by the external oscillator.
While your sure Ghost, I challenge you to flash the olrs Rx with the wrong setting and it will work although badly with short range. I know this as I've done it and so have countless others! That's why I raised it straight away as its an obvious thing to check for these symptoms, and while the voltage of the board is designated by the reg and the oscillator etc. if you select the wrong options in the Arduino program it sets the wrong fuses when flashing the code and it runs but not properly. Mihai could explain it better I'm sure
yes, if you flash it using the 3.3v 328 it will run at 8mhz instead of 16. so usually if the red light flashes a lot, and you have bad signal etc double check if you flashed with the right settings. I'll do a range test hopefully tomorrow and report back.
@phibin: that tx antenna looks like a standard 1/4 wave 433 antenna to me so I'd suggest getting a Diamond antenna or similar. The rx antenna should be about 16.34 cm (for 459mhz) also if you get a rssi lower than 3v while being in micro mode + 2-5m away from the rx then the antennas are definitely bad. Just my 2 cents :)
hello again all...
the badland thing i just meant that i trusted them making them more than me.. lol
i have herd about these 'diamond' antennas but they aint cheap... so
is 'micro mode' a low power setting?
how do you enable/disable this? in the arduino thing i take it..?
the pigtail thing...
the sma end where the antenna attaches seems a bit wide and low in the connector end,
i wasnt sure if a good connection was being made.
plus it has a good kink in the cable where it fits in the module, worth changing i thought?
i attached the original 433 antenna i got with on the tx and checked rssi
still around 2.8-9v
i did notice if you wiggle the sticks the rssi value seems to fluctuate between 0-3.2v ... ?
this seemed strange to me, any ideas?
well i hope people are not loosing interest now... :/
i would love to get it working but as i said im no programmer,
and i did feel my testing input would be limited so didnt pipe up much in the thread...
but if you want me to try anything just ask,
also if the pringle and red bull fund is running a little low i wouldnt mind making another small donation :)
hope my input has helped,
or you can help me.. lol
simon.
A diamond antenna is £20 it's well worth it!
I'm quite concerned you got virtually the same RSSI with custom tuned antennas vs cheapy ones that came with it. It certainly rings alarm bells with me.
You double check you flashed with the correct setting didn't you?
It might be a help of you can picture this connection and kink in the cable and if at all possible can you make a video showing the RSSI fluctuation and what you do to achieve it.
haha no worries mate. here to help :)
micro mode is a low power mode of the transmitter for debugging purposes.
to enter it, hold the tx module's button pressed then turn on your transmitter. you should hear a long beep.
the rssi should keep constant when u're moving sticks. the rssi might jump about when u have the tx very close to the rx (caused by signal saturation on the rx)
try changing both antennas for the stock ones and flash the fw again on the 435 band. if you are still getting a rssi under 3v then either the tx or rx module has something.
also,
1. is the rx blue light solid ?
2. are you getting red blinks at close range ? (1-5m)
3. when u're measuring rssi try puttnig the tx at least 5m away from you.
hope that helps.
another idae would be to do a quick video clip with the rx and how it reacts so I can get an idea of what's going on.
the rssi thing is a bit weird...
i only noticed it when i was taking pics for the previous post today
i will try flashing to 435 and using the original antennas but they dont look much cop..
been thinking that the antenna tail on the tx would cause the problem im seeing
if the fw is solid now and the hw is ok i would expect ranges like that with no real antenna attached.
thinking the tx antenna connection might be the place to look next..
with previous fw's i was getting flashing red on the rx (missed packets) at the door step of my house.
with the solid stone walls it seemed to glitch there
but the new fw got out side in the car and moving up the road before we saw missed packets.
when you say solid blue, you mean blue led on...
it actually strobes very quickly, you can see if you wave it about in front of your face... lol
i was getting solid blue led on range test up to about 150-200m
i will do said tests when i get a chance, sooner rather than later i hope,
and report back,
simon.
A solid blue means all blue no red, the blue flickers rapidly and this is normal. Where are you based? If you are anywhere near me I can lend a hand trouble shooting first hand otherwise it'll just have to be the slow way online
Had a fly on Wednesday and I can say that I was very happy with the inflight performance. I will not be posting a video on the site as its against forum guidlines, all I will say is that you can easily fly out of visual range and fly back without any issues.
I don't know if anyone else uses Serial PPM but Thundead has just fixed this so it is now working.
For me serial PPM is great .. only one servo cable running from my RX to my RVOSD. It also works great with MultiWii and is of great benefit since you have access to all the channels.
So Serial PPM is working in this version? I havent tried it but its on my list of things to try as the wiring is allot simpler :)
A one line change is required #define Serial_PPM_OUT_HIGH PORTB = _BV(4) //Serial PPM out on Servo 8
but i'm sure Thundead will put this in the next release.
It really does make the wiring so much easier. I was not looking forward to adding extra cables to my ZII (and removing the laminate and filler) so am very pleased that it is now working (serial PPM on pin 9 enabled by connecting pins 1 and 3 together with a bind plug).
Does the RSSI still work ok, also does it have any bad affects on the range?
RSSI still works fine and is still on pin 8. It cannot have any effect on range since it is only a different method for sending the message from the RX to your OSD of flight controller.
The gods of ASM coding have enlighten me so the fix was born hahahaha :)
Quote from: Splashy on May 24, 2012, 11:02:07 PM
A one line change is required #define Serial_PPM_OUT_HIGH PORTB = _BV(4) //Serial PPM out on Servo 8
but i'm sure Thundead will put this in the next release.
It really does make the wiring so much easier. I was not looking forward to adding extra cables to my ZII (and removing the laminate and filler) so am very pleased that it is now working (serial PPM on pin 9 enabled by connecting pins 1 and 3 together with a bind plug).
Does anyone know if it's possible to make the Tx buzzer beep every time a packet is lost?
I'm currently FPVing my tricopter with no OSD, so some audible notification that the link is degrading would be helpful (if at all possible).
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on May 25, 2012, 09:28:59 AM
Does anyone know if it's possible to make the Tx buzzer beep every time a packet is lost?
I'm currently FPVing my tricopter with no OSD, so some audible notification that the link is degrading would be helpful (if at all possible).
The 'official' software offers this, but be aware you will get poor range on 459. I would call it un usable unless Melih has implemented some of Thundead's changes in his FW
where can i get a new pigtail for the tx?
i can only fing rp-sma ones and they are all far too long...
simon.
Quote from: phibin on May 26, 2012, 12:50:08 PM
where can i get a new pigtail for the tx?
i can only fing rp-sma ones and they are all far too long...
simon.
What you need is a ufl to sma connector a quick google search listed plenty that where of usable lengths. and for as little as £3
yep tried that and got a bit over whelmed with it all..
mostly very long rp-sma ones,
just thought some one may know some where good?
back to hunting... lol
simon.
For the price get the cheapest, then pop down to maplins and buy a standard sma connector (making sure its the correct type as its screw mounted to the module) then you can cut down the over length wire and put your own end on it. Its your call, search or cut one down :) I am hoping for the wind to drop down soon so I can go out and fly again, It's looking like Monday is gona be the day for me. Gona put some more range on my Olrs setup ;)
Anyone actully flying? I went out 3.6Km on Monday @970m altitude with flawless performance from this FW. I really wish someone else would pipe up and say how they are getting on.
Making my test rig tonight to go and test over the weekend
Quote from: papa_lazerous on May 31, 2012, 07:04:09 PM
Anyone actully flying? I went out 3.6Km on Monday @970m altitude with flawless performance from this FW. I really wish someone else would pipe up and say how they are getting on.
Going flying this weekend so should hopefully get lots of testing in :)
That's good to know, I've been speaking to Mihai about RSSI as I found mine to be jumpy. The reason is my OSD displays as a percentage so full RSSI of 3.2v is 100% so 1% fluctuation is 0.032v change and 10% change in RSSI is only 0.32v I was getting mostly 10% changes which only gives me ten steps of resolution so we have spoken about ways to make it better. I'm hoping with other people speaking about their experiences we can show there is enough interest to warrant more updates. At the end of the day the RSSI doesn't matter so much as it doesn't affect range but it would be nice to have it perfect. I intend to find the limit of my range on 459 as soon as the weather is nice :)
I am flying my Tricopter with this firmware, but only out to about 300m as I don't have a way to monitor RSSI whilst under goggles. THis is why I was asking about some sort of audible notification that my signal was degrading.
I might implement something like primitive telemetry but can't find the time atm. plus not seeing a big interest in the olrs lately except a couple of you guys. Next thing in the works is RSSI based on packet lost rather than on raw rssi data from the rf module.
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on June 01, 2012, 09:51:13 AM
I am flying my Tricopter with this firmware, but only out to about 300m as I don't have a way to monitor RSSI whilst under goggles. THis is why I was asking about some sort of audible notification that my signal was degrading.
Quote from: thundead on June 01, 2012, 07:56:08 PM
I might implement something like primitive telemetry but can't find the time atm. plus not seeing a big interest in the olrs lately except a couple of you guys. Next thing in the works is RSSI based on packet lost rather than on raw rssi data from the rf module.
im still very interested....
unfortunately i ran into a problem with antenna connection i haven't resolved yet,
but im hoping for some good testing soon.
the rssi idea sounds like a good one :)
im thinking im going to have to buy like 10 pairs of ends to make a new tx pigtail... :/
dont think my soldering or my soldering iron are really up to the job..
any one fancie selling me a couple 'ready done' ?
simon.
lol simon ask and u shall receive lol. ive got some sma- sma pigtails uf u need. drop me a pm lol.
Quote from: phibin on June 01, 2012, 10:59:32 PM
Quote from: thundead on June 01, 2012, 07:56:08 PM
I might implement something like primitive telemetry but can't find the time atm. plus not seeing a big interest in the olrs lately except a couple of you guys. Next thing in the works is RSSI based on packet lost rather than on raw rssi data from the rf module.
im still very interested....
unfortunately i ran into a problem with antenna connection i haven't resolved yet,
but im hoping for some good testing soon.
the rssi idea sounds like a good one :)
im thinking im going to have to buy like 10 pairs of ends to make a new tx pigtail... :/
dont think my soldering or my soldering iron are really up to the job..
any one fancie selling me a couple 'ready done' ?
simon.
PM sent :)
Quote from: thundead on June 01, 2012, 11:51:47 PM
lol simon ask and u shall receive lol. ive got some sma- sma pigtails uf u need. drop me a pm lol.
Quote from: phibin on June 01, 2012, 10:59:32 PM
Quote from: thundead on June 01, 2012, 07:56:08 PM
I might implement something like primitive telemetry but can't find the time atm. plus not seeing a big interest in the olrs lately except a couple of you guys. Next thing in the works is RSSI based on packet lost rather than on raw rssi data from the rf module.
im still very interested....
unfortunately i ran into a problem with antenna connection i haven't resolved yet,
but im hoping for some good testing soon.
the rssi idea sounds like a good one :)
im thinking im going to have to buy like 10 pairs of ends to make a new tx pigtail... :/
dont think my soldering or my soldering iron are really up to the job..
any one fancie selling me a couple 'ready done' ?
simon.
got some ordered ;D
I got the opportunity today to show all the EZUHF, ThomasLRS and DragonLink boys that OpenLRS with thundead's custom firmware was just as stable and as capable (up to 3km ;)) as theirs is.
I turn on my Tx. Things are looking good, I've not shot down any of the other LRS aerial vehicles.
I plug in my Tricopter and as usual, wait for the blinking lights on the MultiWii baord to tell me all is initialised.
At this point I realise something isn't quite right. The red light is flashing frequently on my Rx. It's never done that before. My Tx is about 2 metres away.
I think that I'll just bring the Tricopter up into a hover to see of it's twitchy. On my short walk back to my Tx I hear the tail servo moving on my copter and I turn around to see it go full right. The Wii board when seeing this input, arms the copter and the props start spinning. Just as I near the copter and bend down to unplug it the motors start blipping. I quickly yank the power and set about diagnosing the problem.
It turns out there was another chap using ThomasLRS and right next to him was a chap using Dragon link. Both these guys were about 5 metres away from my copter. It seems that random control data from their systems were being fed and used my my OpenLRS Rx.
I packed away at that point due to the fact that 90% of the people there were using the other LRS systems and I didn't want to get shot down.
My confidence in the RC link has been knocked.
I have attached my config.h Tx file in case anyone wants to see what I have set.
a RED light means you are losing packets of data, this may be caused by lots of other people in the close proximity uing high powered UHF settings. Did you have failsafes set correctly? Also another LRS cant control your Tricopter that 100% cant happen!
I'm sorry to say that it 100% definitely did happen.
I got the guy running ThomasLRS to stop moving his Tx controls and all my twitching stopped. When he started moving his Tx controls it start twitching and acting up again.
My failsafes are set to everything neutral.
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on June 02, 2012, 10:04:33 PM
I'm sorry to say that it 100% definitely did happen.
I got the guy running ThomasLRS to stop moving his Tx controls and all my twitching stopped. When he started moving his Tx controls it start twitching and acting up again.
My failsafes are set to everything neutral.
That doesnt mean he was controlling your tricopter, it means the guy beside you was broadcasting on an Illegal frequency at an illegal power and it was causing interference with your setup! Why not go out without others using high powered UHF on non UK legal powers and frequencys and then do a test. In the situation you where in today only the most powerful system will be ok! Thats not the fault of your system its just how it is, in a room full of people talking you only hear the loudest person shouting...
hey mate,
just had a look at your config.h and in theory its absolutely impossible to receive packets from another system because tlrs dlink are hopping between 430-447 while you are on 459. Furthermore, the olrs uses a 4 byte header to make sure only valid packets are used. Invalid pckets are dumped. so very weird indeed. Only explanation, someone else was using the Olrs on 459 on stock settings (header DoMo which needs changing in order to have an unique packet like binding more or less)
Sorry to hear that anyway :(
I want to make clear here that I am in no way trying to lay blame at anyone's feet. I'm just reporting my findings so that others may learn from my experience.
It is indeed weird. There was only one other person there using openLRS and he was using 433Mhz.
I expected it to be ok because I'd seen the packet headers and was well aware of the theory behind them.
I guess I literally got shouted out. Which I guess is to be expected. Had I been using one of the other high power UHF links I could've been stood right next to the other two who were quite happily co-existing.
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on June 02, 2012, 10:22:38 PM
I want to make clear here that I am in no way trying to lay blame at anyone's feet. I'm just reporting my findings so that others may learn from my experience.
It is indeed weird. There was only one other person there using openLRS and he was using 433Mhz.
I expected it to be ok because I'd seen the packet headers and was well aware of the theory behind them.
I guess I literally got shouted out. Which I guess is to be expected. Had I been using one of the other high power UHF links I could've been stood right next to the other two who were quite happily co-existing.
2 Olrs users in one place, wow! although it sounds like allot of UHF in one place, where you at a FPV meetup lol So how did the other olrs user get on? if he was ok then it points towards a setup issue. I hope you can get setup and working as it really does work!! I will send you a PM in a moment
I have used my openLRS kit with the thundead fw very successfully on my own out to about 250-300m.
I just had this one issue when there was a lot of other UHF activity.
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on June 02, 2012, 10:29:28 PM
I have used my openLRS kit with the thundead fw very successfully on my own out to about 250-300m.
I just had this one issue when there was a lot of other UHF activity.
I wonder how well any UHF system on 100mW power would perform beside several other systems outputting 500mW
Dragonlink was the same, fly with other Chainlink users ( like we did at a meet ) and all the chainlink users were fine, the DL user ( Marcin ) was failsafing next to tx. Dragonlink has since fixed this problem.
Probably not very well as the red lost packet light indicated on my system.
I picked up an OSD today so I can hopefully monitor RC link.
I do accept that flying so close to two high power UHF systems probably wasn't my brightest idea, but the copter starting up took me by surprise.
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on June 02, 2012, 10:35:54 PM
I do accept that flying so close to two high power UHF systems probably wasn't my brightest idea, but the copter starting up took me by surprise.
I'm amazed a multicopter could arm itself by accident, as interference is generally random twitches but you need a definate throttle down and rudder over movement for several seconds to stop it happening by accident
Just a thought, the Bounce is this weekend...... Thats the only place I can think you would be with sooooo much UHF in one place. Am I right? I follow the UK thread on RCG from time to time I saw it on there during the week
Yes this happened at the Bounce meet today.
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on June 02, 2012, 10:40:50 PM
Yes this happened at the Bounce meet today.
Did the weather hold out? it seems there may need to be a system of having a flag board like in the old days to stop problems happening
The weather held out fine. Started cold, but by lunchtime the sun was shining and we had a good few hours of gorgeous sunshine. Wasn't too windy and it was probably just right.
We did have a kind of frequency control system that worked reasonably well. The trouble is, is it's not really an organised funfly with no one wanting to take the responsibility of policing a frequency peg board
I hope you geta good flight in soon as I hold the record right now on orls on Uk legal frequencys ;)
I tested my v1 system with a 500mW UHF transmitter right next to my receiver and it didn't glitch at all and my OLRS system was still responding to inputs/outputs. This was a couple of itterations ago of thundeads firmware.
I'll need to re-test on the latest version.
It might be a while before I can do this though.
Seems very odd that another system can appear to have taken control of your system.
As Mihai points out, you really must change that header to something unique to you (not the default DoMo as generated by the configurator software).
Nigel.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on June 02, 2012, 10:30:51 PM
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on June 02, 2012, 10:29:28 PM
I have used my openLRS kit with the thundead fw very successfully on my own out to about 250-300m.
I just had this one issue when there was a lot of other UHF activity.
I wonder how well any UHF system on 100mW power would perform beside several other systems outputting 500mW
We ran the openLRS on 435 with no frequency hopping and it performed faultlessly despite other UHF systems being on etc.
1.7km no problem and RSSI was still pretty high.
Was less than 50m and sometimes less from the other UHF users.
Quote from: ghost2212 on June 03, 2012, 12:36:53 AM
Quote from: papa_lazerous on June 02, 2012, 10:30:51 PM
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on June 02, 2012, 10:29:28 PM
I have used my openLRS kit with the thundead fw very successfully on my own out to about 250-300m.
I just had this one issue when there was a lot of other UHF activity.
I wonder how well any UHF system on 100mW power would perform beside several other systems outputting 500mW
We ran the openLRS on 435 with no frequency hopping and it performed faultlessly despite other UHF systems being on etc.
1.7km no problem and RSSI was still pretty high.
Was less than 50m and sometimes less from the other UHF users.
Where you at the same place at the same time Ghost? And when on 435 where you using Thundeads FW? This might help narrow down what was going on a little
Quote from: papa_lazerous on June 03, 2012, 10:13:51 AM
Quote from: ghost2212 on June 03, 2012, 12:36:53 AM
Quote from: papa_lazerous on June 02, 2012, 10:30:51 PM
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on June 02, 2012, 10:29:28 PM
I have used my openLRS kit with the thundead fw very successfully on my own out to about 250-300m.
I just had this one issue when there was a lot of other UHF activity.
I wonder how well any UHF system on 100mW power would perform beside several other systems outputting 500mW
We ran the openLRS on 435 with no frequency hopping and it performed faultlessly despite other UHF systems being on etc.
1.7km no problem and RSSI was still pretty high.
Was less than 50m and sometimes less from the other UHF users.
Where you at the same place at the same time Ghost? And when on 435 where you using Thundeads FW? This might help narrow down what was going on a little
Same place apart from about 50m difference, Not necessarily the same time though i flew through most of the day and while numerous other UHF users were flying. Using thundeads latest FW. We had trouble on 435 with the latest firmware with it occasionally glitching for a second then returning to normal. It wasn't range related and switching to non frequency hopping stopped it. It was almost as if the receiver and transmitter were getting out of step.
Need more testing really to confirm this and we will hopefully do some 459 testing as well both non hopping and hopping.
Brett
Thats interesting to hear, strange how you werent getting as many problems as southpawpaul. I wonder if there could be setup related issues creeping in. I have found this FW to be pretty good for locking back on after losing sync, but flying the skywalker is different to a fast aircraft or a multicopter where a solid link all the time is needed. I havent lost a link but if I did for a second or two it wouldnt matter. Perhaps for those using multicopters a no hop or limit to 3 channels (as to give faster recovery) would benefit. I am only speculating about possible things until Mihai shows up. Are you planning on doing some 459 Tests? Also did you have you header set as DoMo or had you changed it?
Quote from: papa_lazerous on June 03, 2012, 05:46:24 PM
Thats interesting to hear, strange how you werent getting as many problems as southpawpaul. I wonder if there could be setup related issues creeping in. I have found this FW to be pretty good for locking back on after losing sync, but flying the skywalker is different to a fast aircraft or a multicopter where a solid link all the time is needed. I havent lost a link but if I did for a second or two it wouldnt matter. Perhaps for those using multicopters a no hop or limit to 3 channels (as to give faster recovery) would benefit. I am only speculating about possible things until Mihai shows up. Are you planning on doing some 459 Tests? Also did you have you header set as DoMo or had you changed it?
Yep we changed the header, Hopefully we will test the 459mhz but not with the current weather. We were flying a Twinstar but I don't think I had any lockouts all day. I know that some of the other UHF users did I think as one guy crashed a nice composite glider due to what they think was a control lockout.
That is the thing with all of the UHF systems out there, I dont think there is the capacity for allot of users to run side by side like you can with 2.4 To be fair thats a new thing really but something we have all grown to expect now. And all of the UHF systems seem to work differently so who is to know how well they play together as the manufacturers most likely dont check. It's good you got some decent range with others around as that proves things are working as they should. I know with the hopping that it should get a sync pretty fast, if it was taking a long time it may be that there where contsantly bad channels perhaps due to the amount of UHF traffic in the area.
Looking at the Bounce meet posts on RCG it seems that this was not an isolated incident with Open LRS. There are several people all saying the same "glitches" happened on TLRS, Dragon Link etc. It would seem to me that there was just too many people on the same bands at the same time
well u get more bandwidth on a 2.4 link than a UHF one. just because lol. Anyway working on something interesting atm so any pringles help would be appreciated :D
Quote from: Coyote on June 06, 2012, 06:24:34 PM
Looking at the Bounce meet posts on RCG it seems that this was not an isolated incident with Open LRS. There are several people all saying the same "glitches" happened on TLRS, Dragon Link etc. It would seem to me that there was just too many people on the same bands at the same time
Remember SouthPawPaul was on 459mhz which as far as we know was completely clear that day, everyone else was using 433 frequencies. I don't think its lack of frequency space but more the lack of the systems being unable to cope with multiple users. They were never designed nor tested with multiple transmitters on.
A friend of mine who was running EZUHF on 433etc had no problems throughout the day.
pig tails arrived :)
more testing soon....
simon.
finally managed to do some testing....
unfortunately no improvement at all!!! :(
in fact now I'm losing LOTS of packets on 6ch hop...
i tried it on 459, 433 6ch hop and same results now....
also tried above with 433 and 459 antennas....
i had a quick try with 459 no hopping on 459 antennas....
still getting around the same rssi voltage..
on 459 6ch hop,, between lost packets if i move the sticks i get a brief rssi of 3.2v ?????
i really am at a loss now..
i was so looking forward to it finally working.
i may have a go flashing different fw's and see what happens,
but mightily disappointed now...
if the fw's good, i might just throw it in the bin now..?
simon.
i will try make a 'short' vid of the whole process and post a link...
i really want to get this to work!
really really hope its not a hw issue :(
simon.
so did a shortish vid as requested....
http://youtu.be/_hTw-kATM2Q (http://youtu.be/_hTw-kATM2Q)
should be live in about 20mins...
sorry if it drags on a bit but it was quite hard work filming and doing it all... lol
and i cocked up the tx flash with one hand :/
but paused the cam and connected it properly
all flashed AOK
so i hope you can help...
if i missed or didnt show anything enough,
let me know and i will let you know... lol
thanks again for your interest in helping get it sorted :)
simon.
Standing by for video :))
Right I've watched the video and you flash in a completely different way to me! I am at work till 10:30pm but can do a video of how I flash and we can see if you get things working using my method after work. Alternatively I am on Skype right now and if you want I can guide you through what you should be doing, just drop me pm and I will give you my Skype details
I can not see your Rx boards two leds responding to the upload data, I don`t know if that`s just the camera though.
But there is something very wrong, but they go through their frequency cycles but then seem to loose sync
I have a theory on what the problem is, waiting for phibin to get back to me, its just too much of hassle typing it all out on a phone lol
Quote from: Coyote on June 10, 2012, 07:46:31 PM
they go through their frequency cycles but then seem to loose sync
that is just what i thought.....
simon.
pm sent papa..
thanks again for all your help so far guys...!
just ordered 2x rf modules to replace said f**ked ones
and a 3.3v ftdi thingymebob.. so no more magic smoke incidents!
i cant belive i did that! what a stupid mistake!!!
well we live and we learn..
so thanks again... and we wait for the post again :/
simon.
It happens, I use a UBS to FDTI with jumper pins to select 5v for wii`s and 3.3v for OpenLRS. Its very good, but the ebay link no longer exists :(
Good of John to offer to fix it for you :) That will save you a few bob
Quote from: Coyote on June 11, 2012, 12:40:24 PM
Good of John to offer to fix it for you :) That will save you a few bob
very good!!
i did just think though.. have i waisted yet another 10er?
on the 3.3v ftdi???
dont we flash the processor at 5v 16mhz 328?
this means we flash at 5v for the chip? but rf module needs the regulator so it dosnt fry?
so we plug power rather than using the ftdi power???
or do we use 3.3v to flash too??
sorry if im being a bit stupid... lol
simon.
Your USB to FDTI takes 5v, but your FDTI input on the Open boards are only 3.3v
You can power the boards via a receiver pack or a bec and have no vcc pin from the FDTI and do it that way though
so im not totaly stupid then..? lol
the 3.3v ftdi will flash it ok....
simon.
Yeah I use a 5v input, 3.3v output FDTI programmer
Quote from: papa_lazerous on June 11, 2012, 04:38:30 PM
But a 3v3 one may well be your simplest option
that is what i thought....
for all the messing, wouldnt it be best to just have the correct tool for the job... lol
thanks again for all your help mate!
simon.
Is anyone using 1.3ghz video gear with the openLRS?
Outside the UK of course :D
Quote from: papa_lazerous on June 15, 2012, 02:06:35 PM
Quote from: ghost2212 on June 15, 2012, 12:41:22 PM
Is anyone using 1.3ghz video gear with the openLRS?
Outside the UK of course :D
I use 5.8ghz, what's your theoretical question ghost?
The 1.3ghz gear seems to kill the range of the openLRS. Using the spectrum analyzer I measured a massive peak at around 428mhz spreading to about ~431mhz. With the 1.3ghz I had a range of about 100m before glitching but switch to 5.8ghz and it was instantly a lot better.
I just wondered whether anyone else had managed to use the two together.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on June 15, 2012, 02:33:38 PM
1.3 will kill the range on all UHF radios, unless you buy a filter...... 1.3 is a harmonic of 433 ;)
its a third Sub Harmonic and people don't seem to have issues with Dragonlink and other LRS
I argue a filter wont help, the filter blocks higher or lower frequencies for sure, but a harmonic is not a higher or lower frequency its a point where cycles intersect each other. I found that with linear antennas the UHF problem was reduced greatly, but with Circular vtx antennas it is the UHF kiss of death.
A filter does nothing for harmonics John, fact.
Your talking about higher or lower frequencies being emitted from the vtx, which is not harmonics, which is exactly what I wrote. I was referring to harmonics not being effected which was what ghost was referring to
Quote from: Coyote on June 15, 2012, 04:33:59 PM
A filter does nothing for harmonics John, fact.
Your talking about higher or lower frequencies being emitted from the vtx, which is not harmonics, which is exactly what I wrote. I was referring to harmonics not being effected which was what ghost was referring to
I'm using linear antenna's, An inverted vee at 1280mhz. I have also purchased a high pass filter which seems to make no difference whatsoever. I need to find a way to check that its actually working(it should have a loss of greater than 40db at 428mhz)
Please read up on your literature John. Google harmonics
433mhz x 2 = 866mhz
433mhz x 3 = 1.299ghz
Its the cycle of the 433mhz hitting the 1.3 band by the 3rd cycle. That`s called harmonics. As the vtx no matter how many filters you fit to it is still a 1.3ghz transmitter the harmoincs still hit each other.
Please tell me what type of filter you use to stop a 1.3ghz transmitter transmitting on 1.3ghz ?
A high pass filter helps because say the 1.3 vtx was still emitting power on as low as 866mhz then it will be walking all over the UHF reception trying to be received, so a filter help, but it wont stop it at 1.3
Even a bandpass filter ( which I tried ) on the UHF rx can not stop it
You could band pass the UHF rx, high pass the vtx and use a very high channel. That may help a lot.
Quote from: papa_lazerous on June 15, 2012, 05:03:36 PM
Quote from: Coyote on June 15, 2012, 04:58:54 PM
You could band pass the UHF rx, high pass the vtx and use a very high channel. That may help a lot.
Bandpass = filter
Highpass = filter
Hang on that's a complete turn around from 5min ago, glad you googled and finally agree
Lol no its isnt` and no I don`t agree with you.
Its not a turn around, I stated moving the vtx away from the harmonics IE by moving up channels will help, that`s because it gets it away from the harmonics, then with the channel high and out the harmonics way filter out the lower emitted frequencies IE closer to the harmonics.
You didnt mention moving channels to get out the way of harmonics at all, you said just filter, which still leaves you in the harmonics and fixes sweet FA lol
Like I said though, been there and done it. Bandpassed, high passed, Range tests came back fantastic, real flights proved even by doing all that UHF failsafed like crazy within less than 1km.
That`s by far the best fix, we agreed on something !!! :)
Quote from: papa_lazerous on June 15, 2012, 05:17:20 PM
There's an even better fix, run olrs at 459 and use legal video frequencies mutter mutter
I do intend to try 459mhz and see if its less affected by the 1280mhz transmitter.
So your using 25mw 5.8ghz are you? :P
Quote from: papa_lazerous on June 15, 2012, 06:13:49 PM
I'm on 459 and those fancy new 400mw 5.8vtx's ;) no need for 1.2ghz as I can get to the limit of my planes battery range on 5.8. Although 1.2 is good for cloud busting :P
5.8ghz is fine for most stuff but the final plan for me is to be able to fly with 3 other people with 2 of them on 5.8ghz so running 3 on 5.8ghz could prove problematic. That and I have 2 1.3ghz vtx's so would like to use them if possible. It has better penetration for going through trees as well :)
No posts for a fortnight ?
Come on guys - tell us how the experiments and testing are going.
lool. you're the first to reply to this topic in ages haha :)
I don't even have an openLRS ! It's just that when I joined this Forum someone told me how I could buy one of these from Firstpersonview.co.uk and that they "worked straight out of the box" !!
I like a challenge and I enjoy watching other people following one.
I have studiously followed the ups & downs - even occasional sideways movements of this Thread, hoping one day to see a full determination of what has caused the range problems and how to eradicate those problems on 459 mhz.
(Preferably before the world runs out of 'pringles') LOL
system works if used accordingly :) I've started work on another firmware (no ETAs yet as barely have time to breathe lol) that will hopefully simplify and make clear to everybody how to properly flash my fw.
Currently there hasn't been any interest in this system though and I'm currently considering buying a rangelink and stop dev lol.
From my point of view the range issues were caused by burned out RF modules resulting from use of inappropriate FTDI flashers (5v compared to the required 3.3v). neither myself or papalazerous had any range issues during our tests.
Regards,
Mihai.
Quote from: wgt40w on July 02, 2012, 02:52:57 PM
I don't even have an openLRS ! It's just that when I joined this Forum someone told me how I could buy one of these from Firstpersonview.co.uk and that they "worked straight out of the box" !!
I like a challenge and I enjoy watching other people following one.
I have studiously followed the ups & downs - even occasional sideways movements of this Thread, hoping one day to see a full determination of what has caused the range problems and how to eradicate those problems on 459 mhz.
hello again all....
unfortunately i was one of the stupid ones that tried to flash olrs with a 5v ftdi thing...
not very wise in the end.. (i did see a flyton vid of him just flashing rx's so tried it doh!)
so i ordered a set of rf modules to try and fix the set...
ordered some 2-3 weeks ago now and no delivery or tracking for the UK provided :/
not to happy about that as flytron are pointig the finger at customs now.
we will see...
randomly i found another set of olrs for sale on the forum here.
1x v2 tx and 2x v2 rx's
not really done any testing as yet with these, i will try asap.
(but have now been informed that this HW maybe f**ked as well?)
i am really really wanting to get this flying in the end as its been months and hundreds so far!
thanks again every one who is inputting to the whole olrs thing! it is much appreciated...
i will report back soon with some testing...
simon.
I lurk and read many forums and I personally think that folks normally only post when there's either a problem or they are asked directly for feedback on something.
For me the lack of people posting on here is actually a testament to how well thundead's excellent firmware actually works with the olrs hardware.
Just stay away from other overpowered LRS systems and you'll be peachy :)
i did just have a thought.... haha easy now.....
i could flash a tx/rx and use the 2nd rx as the spectum analyser thing to see?
i must admit i down loaded the FW but havnt tried using it yet...
is it easy? will it show if its working correctly or not?
simon.
Just tried exactly what you posted. I use my second (not yet installed) Rx and installed the OLRS Spectrum Analayzer FW on it. Started the GUI and selected the range 457Mhz - 462Mhz and started scanning. I turned my Tx on and off and could see the data spikes in the 459Mhz area.
Worked brilliantly.
I guess this would confirm a number of things.
1. Your tx module is working
2. It's working on the correct frequency
3. Your rx RF module hasn't been fried.
what FW did you use... my spectrum thing will only go up to com port 15...?
my ftdi is on com port 49.....?
any ideas...
thats great though just what i was trying to achieve :)
simon.
p.s.
looked again and there is only the v0.7. one...?
how do you change the com port? anyone???
You can change the com port that the ftdi sits on.
Try this guide.
http://www.cedrus.com/support/rb_series/tn1045_usbport_win.htm (http://www.cedrus.com/support/rb_series/tn1045_usbport_win.htm)
haha.. was easy in the end..! just click and type the no. in.... hahaha
this is a quick screen shot of no hops @ 459 with 3 scans...
using a 433 antenna on rx :/ but can do better tests if this is working....
simon.
(http://s14.postimage.org/zb1301zyl/scan.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/zb1301zyl/)
can you post a screen shot of your results?
then i can compare...??
thanks,
simon.
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on July 02, 2012, 06:53:08 PM
Just tried exactly what you posted. I use my second (not yet installed) Rx and installed the OLRS Spectrum Analayzer FW on it. Started the GUI and selected the range 457Mhz - 462Mhz and started scanning. I turned my Tx on and off and could see the data spikes in the 459Mhz area.
Worked brilliantly.
I guess this would confirm a number of things.
1. Your tx module is working
2. It's working on the correct frequency
3. Your rx RF module hasn't been fried.
Sure thing :)
(http://s18.postimage.org/ghy2hpmud/OLRS_Scan.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/ghy2hpmud/)
This is the 459Mhz FW using all of the accepted defaults for header and frequency hopping.
guys, just to make it clear to everyone, the rf module could still emit if its "fried" but at a much lower power thus drastically decreasing range :)
this is the screen shot from....
V2 tx flashed 3.6FW @459mhz 6ch hop fpvuk 459antenna
v2 rx flashed with analyser FW fpvuk 459antenna
any ideas?
just checked on 3.6flashed v2 rx and lots of red light action :(
simon.
(http://s16.postimage.org/b5q9ny2zl/graph.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/b5q9ny2zl/)
graph from v2tx i just purchased..
(http://s15.postimage.org/9m48b8r4n/fucked_graph.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/9m48b8r4n/)
this is the graph from the v2tx that i flashed with 5v...
looks like they are both f**ked then...?
also attached FW flashed....
I'm no expert, but it seems like the Tx is behaving itself and also the Rx that's running the Analyzer firmware.
An uneducated guess would be that there's a problem with the Rx module that's got lots of red light action.
Phibin try this, flash the rx tx again but without hopping. and see if u get a solid light
Quote from: SouthPawPaul on July 02, 2012, 08:30:40 PM
I'm no expert, but it seems like the Tx is behaving itself and also the Rx that's running the Analyzer firmware.
An uneducated guess would be that there's a problem with the Rx module that's got lots of red light action.
my uneducated guess :laugh: was that my tx isnt giving same rssi values as yours.. ie is fryed?
its showing about 20% less rssi on the spikes?
i did the single channel thing the other day but no propper test as yet...
lots more blue light action but still the odd red...
just nipping out.. will try your suggestion and post analyser shot when i get back in 30mins or so..
simon.
Where are you? If you're close-ish We could use my kit to test yours.
You being close to me of course is a long shot :)
I should start a fw flashing service lol :D
The best way to flash any of these module is to ONLY connect the following wires:
Ground, Transmit & Receive.
Whenever possible, I power the board seperately at the voltage intended.
I tried Mihai's 3.6 code last night, didn't work for some reason and I'm just off to the mancave for another bash....
I don't like the serial output and much prefer the 'normal/old style' method as it means I have no problems with a couple of boards I own.
@Mihai,
How much bother to cook up an 'old style' option in your code?
Nigel.
hey Nigel :) nice to see you around :) What you mean by Serial and old style ?
Hi Mihai, not been around much lately and not been able to do any FPV/RC/hobby stuff this year really.
I mean on the Rx to have the outputs on their 'normal' respective pinouts and not all serially on one pin.
I see in your 3.6 Rx code, you moved the output pins about and that bu99ers up my connections to some other control boards.
I got side tracked this evening as I also have Zitron's UHF boards and played a bit with that instead of checking out your code - sorry 'bout that.
I'm out tomorrow (another hobby - Amateur Radio) so it'll be a day or 3 'til I get to the mancave again.
Also got my house on the market so we're packing stuff and chucking stuff out, all at the same time.
I'm dreading having going through my mancave...
Nigel.
you can still use the latest fw with the standard parallel servo layout :) that's the stock setting as well I think. Also the pins have been moved around only for the v2 board. the v1 pinout is the same.
Quote from: Devonian on July 02, 2012, 11:03:50 PM
Hi Mihai, not been around much lately and not been able to do any FPV/RC/hobby stuff this year really.
I mean on the Rx to have the outputs on their 'normal' respective pinouts and not all serially on one pin.
I see in your 3.6 Rx code, you moved the output pins about and that bu99ers up my connections to some other control boards.
I got side tracked this evening as I also have Zitron's UHF boards and played a bit with that instead of checking out your code - sorry 'bout that.
I'm out tomorrow (another hobby - Amateur Radio) so it'll be a day or 3 'til I get to the mancave again.
Also got my house on the market so we're packing stuff and chucking stuff out, all at the same time.
I'm dreading having going through my mancave...
Nigel.
OK, got you.
I just looked at the Rx code and thought...
Mine is a v1 board, so will check it out when I get chance.
Nigel.
sorry peeps if you were waiting.. :/
excursion took longer than planned...
going to have a go at the 1ch flash now.
simon.
p.s.
i hope people dont think im dissing the HW or all the hard work thats gone into the FW.....
just a shame i seem to be thwarted at every turn so far, but im sure we will get there in the end!
ok...
so i flashed the newest set with 459 no hop....
getting the odd red flash but its a 'flick' of red now every now and again,
not as before when there were 'blocks' of red light...
rssi on 2nd rx showing arround 3.1v-3.2v when im stood next to it....
better than the 'old' HW...
screen shot of peek.. showing rssi of 230 now... better!
(http://s13.postimage.org/jorf1d6er/1ch.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/jorf1d6er/)
going to have a quick wander down the road to see what the rssi is like....
simon
rssi should gradually drop. btw u flashing using arduino pro mini 16mhz 5v selected riight ? :)
Quote from: thundead on July 03, 2012, 01:14:11 AM
rssi should gradually drop. btw u flashing using arduino pro mini 16mhz 5v selected riight ? :)
..... yep
the rssi although a bit jumpy gradually goes down to about 2v
over not a great distance really, 100m through trees and lamp posts. etc..
tx sat in the window of a stone house.
i am getting the same red flick every couple of seconds but servo travel seems smooth still...
simon.
hmmm i get at least 400m through granite and with 6ch hopping and 433 antennas on 459mhz so someth is not right.
if u got a multimeter check the antenna out track going to the rf module. maybe u got a bad soldering point who knows.
Quote from: thundead on July 03, 2012, 01:29:16 AM
hmmm i get at least 400m through granite and with 6ch hopping and 433 antennas on 459mhz so someth is not right.
so 2v at that distance is not good then.....?
i looked at southpawpaul's graph again and it shows an rssi value of '233'..
im getting 230 on single ch now...
do you mean check the tx rf module?
simon.
check both tx and rx modules for bad solder joints.
2v is good still. The system should get bad under 1v (glitchy servos) and unusable under 0.5v. in theory anyway :) Anyway I''m off to bed now. I'd say leave it for now until I get the new fw out (eta 1 week max) and if that fails you could send the thing to me so I can compare with my system.
Regards,
Mihai.
PS: who wants to be beta tester (will do range tests, stress tests etc) drop me a PM.
Quote from: thundead on July 03, 2012, 01:37:17 AM
check both tx and rx modules for bad solder joints.
2v is good still. The system should get bad under 1v (glitchy servos) and unusable under 0.5v. in theory anyway :) Anyway I''m off to bed now. I'd say leave it for now until I get the new fw out (eta 1 week max) and if that fails you could send the thing to me so I can compare with my system.
Regards,
Mihai.
PS: who wants to be beta tester (will do range tests, stress tests etc) drop me a PM.
i will test anything... just tell me what to do... lol
also i will do a propper range test in a field and see what results i get with single ch 459.
may also try a test at 433...?
thanks again for your help,
simon.
Quote from: wgt40w on July 02, 2012, 02:40:12 PM
No posts for a fortnight ?
Come on guys - tell us how the experiments and testing are going.
Well this seemed to bring out the woodworm !!!
right POLL for all users:
1. How many AUX channels are you using (ex. CH5 and pan tilt on 6/7)
2. How often are you using them ? (ex. I can't stop panning !!! :) )
3. How many have servos connected ( just my pan servo which I love to pan )
4. What resolution you think is needed ? ( ex. think 100 clicks is enough)
5. Video tutorial for flashing ?
6. How much pain is the Arduino IDE for you ?
Advanced (answer only if you know what i'm talking about)
5. What latency is acceptable for your flying ? (ex. 20ms / less for helis)
6. Should the new fw refresh the channels ? (ALL - parallel / One by One - Serial / Pairs (1st 5 ch) + aux
7. how important is hopping on more than 4 channels
8. Do you use Serial PPM ?
9. RSSI ? (Analogue (sig strength seen by rf chip) / link quality (packet based) / both )
hopefully i didnt forget anything lol :)
Cheers
Mihai.
@ Mihai,
Start a new thread with poll attached, easier to see the results.
People can make a short explanation, as Papa did above if they feel the need to expand/clarify on their reasons for their poll/vote.
Nigel.
done
http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php/topic,6777.new.html#new (http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php/topic,6777.new.html#new)
everybody look ^^^^
Don't see a poll to select options?
Nigel.
well its not an actual poll as soem questions dnt have fixed answers :)
Quote from: Devonian on July 03, 2012, 08:09:41 PM
Don't see a poll to select options?
Nigel.
Quote from: thundead on July 03, 2012, 06:43:49 PM
right POLL for all users:
1. How many AUX channels are you using (ex. CH5 and pan tilt on 6/7)
2. How often are you using them ? (ex. I can't stop panning !!! :) )
3. How many have servos connected ( just my pan servo which I love to pan )
4. What resolution you think is needed ? ( ex. think 100 clicks is enough)
5. Video tutorial for flashing ?
6. How much pain is the Arduino IDE for you ?
Advanced (answer only if you know what i'm talking about)
5. What latency is acceptable for your flying ? (ex. 20ms / less for helis)
6. Should the new fw refresh the channels ? (ALL - parallel / One by One - Serial / Pairs (1st 5 ch) + aux
7. how important is hopping on more than 4 channels
8. Do you use Serial PPM ?
9. RSSI ? (Analogue (sig strength seen by rf chip) / link quality (packet based) / both )
hopefully i didnt forget anything lol :)
Cheers
Mihai.
i dont know how much you will value my input but here goes....
1. 1234 then 567 are a must really...
2. A lot really... mode/osd/aileron or other...
3. 567 will have at least 1 servo normally maybe 2 dependent on airframe, and osd/mode switches camera gimble..
4. resolution... more is better??
5. the video tutorial... well after my recent f**k ups i was thinking of doing one now i know how.
6. IDE? if you mean your cool little programme that writes it for you... its ace!
B
5. for me flying multi's the faster the better really, for fixed wing stuff you can get away with it a bit i recon
6. dont know cant comment
7. dont know cant comment
8. nope not tried it...
9. RSSI is an awesome feature! but a packet quality rssi could be good? can you do both? or switch in the script?
well hope it helps a little?
simon.
I'd have love to have flown in the last couple of days however, after being made redundant a fortnight ago, all my daytime is spent job searching.
Finally got my head back in to FPV. Weather has been too nice of late and the latest toy soaked up my time (Triumph Tiger 1050 bike).
So, I loaded up 3.6_Final on the boards and had a look. Everything seems to work out fine. Set the configurator to hop 3 channels (5,15,25) which should give 433.3 433.9 434.5 which is in the middle of the Canadian digital section of 70cm band. When I checked it out on the RF Explorer Spec Analyzer, it appears that it is hopping the correct 3 frequencies as well as the carrier of 433.000. Is this by design or a bug? Not really a big deal as I can adjust for it. Tried no hopping and it worked out fine as well. If all goes well I can ground test tomorrow for range. I'll use stock whip on RX and Diamond UHF on TX. I also might try the Moxon Rectangle on the TX and the crosshair dipole on the RX horizontal. I'll report back with results.
B.T.W. Excellent work on the code @thUndead !! :)
(http://s7.postimage.org/3qzz5boon/OLRS.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/3qzz5boon/)
Bryan VE3OYN
"Technoweenie"
Hi :) if you included channel 0 in the ch list then it will go through the base ch as well :) looking fw to your range test
Well I should have known better... spent half a day messing around trying to get the RSSI working. Voltage kept jumping like a bad connection or cold solder joint. Triple checked all connections, resoldered right back to the ATMega chip and still nothing. Long story short... the stubby antenna was feeding back into the board and causing intermittent readings. Put the cross hair antenna on and rock solid.
THROW OUT THE STUBBY ANTENNA!! NOW!!
Oh well, I should have know better.
As for the channel hopping, I don't have Ch 0 in the list. My list is just 5,15,25 giving me 433.300, 433.900 and 434.500 for hops. Strange??
Here is my config.h:
Quote//###############################################################
//### Config.h Generated with thUndead's openLRS Configurator ###
//###############################################################
//####### TX BOARD TYPE #######
// 0 = Original M1 Tx Board
// 1 = OpenLRS Rx Board works as TX, reads your PPM signals from first servo port.
// 2 = Original M2 Tx Board
// 3 = OpenLRS Rx v2 Board works as TX, reads your PPM signals from first servo port.
#define TX_BOARD_TYPE 2
//####### BOOSTER #######
// 0 = No booster
// 1 = Booster
#define BOOSTER 0
//######### Band Select ##########
// 0 = 433Mhz
// 1 = 459Mhz
#define BAND 0
//######### TRANSMISSION VARIABLES ##########
#define CARRIER_FREQUENCY 433000 // startup frequency
//####### Freq Hopping #######
// 1 = Enabled 0 = Disabled
#define FREQUENCY_HOPPING 1
//###### HOPPING CHANNELS #######
#define CHNO 3
static unsigned char hop_list[10] = {5,15,25};
//###### RF DEVICE ID HEADERS #######
// Change this 4 byte values for isolating your transmission, RF module accepts only data with same header
static unsigned char RF_Header[4] = {'3','o','y','n'};
//###### SERIAL PORT SPEED #######
#define SERIAL_BAUD_RATE 115200 //115.200 baud serial port speed
Using a V2 board into a Remzibi OSD. Test results soon.
Bryan VE3OYN
"Technoweenie"
Quote from: papa_lazerous on July 27, 2012, 11:14:36 PM
No action here for a while, am I right that nobody with olrs has flown in the last week with all this perfect weather?
Cmon guys I got an 8km pb on Tuesday and still had 55 rssi! Oh that was on 5.8 video too
Would be great if someone else could report success too
Was on holiday for last week unfortunately, Got a problem with motors on my plane currently but will try and get sorted to do some more range testing though. Think i might need a new video rx antenna to get enough range to fully test the openLRS though :P
Today's the day you guys get the new fw :D stay tuned
Ah :) Sounds good, did you discover the problems with V4 or is it the next upgrade to 3.5
Ah my bad .6 :)
Sorry guys will need another day to tweak out rssi :) papa is right, 3.6 core, new GUI
Quote from: thundead on July 31, 2012, 10:53:16 PM
Sorry guys will need another day to tweak out rssi :) papa is right, 3.6 core, new GUI
Will this new firmware have link quality RSSI?
If so could you explain how this will differ from what we had before? Will it display bad packets to good packets as a percentage basically or something more complicated?
Thanks
Brett
the way I'm trying to implement it is like so:
average (good/bad packet ratio + analog rssi )
so basically if you have good analog rssi but loads of blocked channels, your rssi reading will be low and vice versa.
any other ideas are more than welcomed :) Not sure what's the best approach to this.
I personally like signal strength RSSI as the "cliff effect" of packet loss tends to catch one by surprise. This is the effect where packets are good until almost near the end of range and then suddenly things go bad very quickly at the limit of range. Averaging both together might be a good way to do it. I have not tried packet loss RSSI with OLRS but have experience with digital P25 radio systems. Others may have a different preference.
Perhaps a config setting in the GUI? A tick box for Analog RSSI, Packet Loss RSSI, or Averaging. This might complicate the ease of configuration for the GUI and will require 3 separate subroutines based on the variable setting. I have seen some config GUIs that have tabs for simple or advance settings. When in simple mode, it could assume basic settings (averaging combined RSSI, derived header from name or something, preset hopping channels etc.). If switching to advanced mode, the user could input more advanced info like custom header, custom channel hopping, number of hops, type of RSSI, etc. Just throwing out some ideas.
I think the software is awesome now. Any improvements only make it that much better! Thanks for all you do.
it has landed
http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php/topic,7115.0.html (http://www.fpvuk.org/forum/index.php/topic,7115.0.html) :D
Hi guys,
I've spent a happy evening upgrading my firmware from a very old one, to the current (last) one.
The upshot is that it'll work fine if I have channel hopping turned off, but as soon as I turn that back on I get nothing between the Tx and Rx.
This is my Tx configuration file:
Quote
//###############################################################
//### Config.h Generated with thUndead's openLRS Configurator ###
//###############################################################
//####### TX BOARD TYPE #######
// 0 = Original M1 Tx Board
// 1 = OpenLRS Rx Board works as TX, reads your PPM signals from first servo port.
// 2 = Original M2 Tx Board
// 3 = OpenLRS Rx v2 Board works as TX, reads your PPM signals from first servo port.
#define TX_BOARD_TYPE 0
//####### BOOSTER #######
// 0 = No booster
// 1 = Booster
#define BOOSTER 0
//######### Band Select ##########
// 0 = 433Mhz
// 1 = 459Mhz
#define BAND 1
//######### TRANSMISSION VARIABLES ##########
#define CARRIER_FREQUENCY 459000 // startup frequency
//####### Freq Hopping #######
// 1 = Enabled 0 = Disabled
#define FREQUENCY_HOPPING 1
//###### HOPPING CHANNELS #######
#define CHNO 4
static unsigned char hop_list[10] = {2,0,1,1};
//###### RF DEVICE ID HEADERS #######
// Change this 4 byte values for isolating your transmission, RF module accepts only data with same header
static unsigned char RF_Header[4] = {'5','I','A','a'};
//###### SERIAL PORT SPEED #######
#define SERIAL_BAUD_RATE 115200 //115.200 baud serial port speed
This is my Rx configuration file:
Quote
//###############################################################
//### Config.h Generated with thUndead's openLRS Configurator ###
//###############################################################
//####### RX BOARD TYPE #######
// 1 = Rx v1 Board
// 2 = Rx v2 Board
#define RX_BOARD_TYPE 1
//###### SERIAL PPM Type #######
// Plug a jumper between Ch1 and CH3 for switching your Rx to SerialPPM mode
// =Serial PPM Types=
// 0 is classic SerialPPM, disables parallel outputs and uses CH8 for serial PPM output.
// 1 is Mixed PPM, uses CH4 for serial PPM output and last 4 channels (CH5,CH6,CH7,CH8) works normally as ParallelPPM mode.
// 2 Standard SerialPPM on Pin9 (v2RX)
#define SERIAL_PPM_TYPE 0
//######### Band Select ##########
// 0 = 433Mhz
// 1 = 459Mhz
#define BAND 1
//######### TRANSMISSION VARIABLES ##########
#define CARRIER_FREQUENCY 459000 // startup frequency
//####### Freq Hopping #######
// 1 = Enabled 0 = Disabled
#define FREQUENCY_HOPPING 1
//###### HOPPING CHANNELS #######
#define CHNO 4
static unsigned char hop_list[10] = {2,0,1,1};
//###### RF DEVICE ID HEADERS #######
// Change this 4 byte values for isolating your transmission, RF module accepts only data with same header
static unsigned char RF_Header[4] = {'5','I','A','a'};
//###### SERIAL PORT SPEED #######
#define SERIAL_BAUD_RATE 115200 //115.200 baud serial port speed
Can anyone help me please?!
Many thanks
Simon
PM sent :)
Hi Mihai,
I tried putting v4 on a further 2 or 3 times (on both the Tx and Rx) to no avail.
I put v3.6 on and it worked first time :-)
I wonder if v4 firmware and v1 hardware are not compatible in some way?
Thanks!
Simon
Its all working nicely now. I love the failsafe setting functionality! So much easier than the hour's I've spent trying to set the failsafe on a Corona receiver before!
WELL DONE MIHAI!
All the best
Simon
glad you like it :) looking fw for some range test results :D
Quote from: simondale on September 11, 2012, 09:29:29 PM
Its all working nicely now. I love the failsafe setting functionality! So much easier than the hour's I've spent trying to set the failsafe on a Corona receiver before!
WELL DONE MIHAI!
All the best
Simon
Is there any problem with me being on 3.6? Any big changes for v4?
Now I have my Naza's failsafe and GPS return to home set I'm a bit more confident going longer distances! I need to get my FPV gear installed tomorrow though - now we just had 750 GoPro cables delivered I can get on with that!
All the best
Simon
4.0 only brings a more user friendly config interface. the firmware barebone is the same :) Be sure to use a dipole on the rx paired up with a 1/2 wave ant on the tx to further improve your range :)
Regards,
Mihai.
Quote from: simondale on September 11, 2012, 09:41:49 PM
Is there any problem with me being on 3.6? Any big changes for v4?
Now I have my Naza's failsafe and GPS return to home set I'm a bit more confident going longer distances! I need to get my FPV gear installed tomorrow though - now we just had 750 GoPro cables delivered I can get on with that!
All the best
Simon
Hi All,
I am about to take the plunge and buy some UHF equipment, Santa will be a little early. I have read most of the posts on this forum back to #1, very interesting it proved to be. If however less than completely self explanatory.
My questions are :-
1. OpenLRS or if not what? Please suggest!
2. Why is their a lot of effort going in to 459 MHz rather then sticking with 433 MHz? If its a matter of legality in UK then why are people using it even as a comparison. It seems to me that antenna are available off the shelf for 433 but you need a shorter specially designed antenna for 459 MHz and a lot of questions have been asked about which is the best.
3. Why is thUndead's Mod 4 fw named final have all the bugs and more importantly the possible add on's been incorporated or is it a shortage of Red Bull and Pringles that have caused this rather abrupt stop.
4. Is the system now reasonable robust and can it be used with confidence in MOST rf environments?
5. Why is Flytron not more active on the Forum as it his hardware that hosts the fw.
6. Why a lack of activity for the last 8 or so weeks? Bad flying weather I will grant you but not a total grounding.
Hope to get some if not all the answers.
Regards
John
Hiya
1) OpenLRS or EZUHF, Chainlink,Dragonink,Rangelink or the new Hobbyking version of OpenLRS to name a few.
2) Yes its all down to 459Mhz being the legal UK frequency to use. There is only 1cm difference between a 1/4 wavelength of 433 and 459 so the 433 antennas will work just fine while using 459Mhz.
3) It is named final because thUndead has stopped developing the code after this release. Users have reported it works pretty solidly.
4) Yes the system has been used and works fine, many km flown on it now
5) Fytron tends to leave the clued up members to help others out and progress the system. Its an open source project so apart from technical electronic questions they do not have to answer much but they do answer when it needs it.
6) No idea who`s flying on OpenLRS right now, I think Papa does still
Hi You Both,
Looks as if its a try with Turkish delight, though I am always tempted by any thing from Hobby King.
Thanks for your replies.
Regards
John
Thanks for that papa, by the way which antenna are you using? and the questions that I probably should not ask What frequency? ;) Are you using channel hoping? if so how many channels and perhaps the $1000 question any simple precautions I should take.
Thanks for input so far.
Regards
John
Hi Papa,
Yep that covers it. When you say custom dipole on Rx could you give me more details, a bit of a pain me asking all these questions but you seem to be "the man" when it comes to UHF.
Keep up the good work and
Regards
John
A custom made dipole refers to an antenna that is made specifically for one frequency.
For 459MHz, two 1/4 wave elements are used, fed directly with 50 ohm coaxial cable.
Calculation is simple...
300 divided by the required frequency, divided by four, to get a 1/4 wavelength...
300/459 = 0.6535 (metres) divided by 4 = 0.163 (metres) or 163mm (163 millimetres).
Cut 2 elements at 163mm and attach them to a short length of coax, add a suitable connector for the Rx and there you have it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A6-3EN.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A6-3EN.jpg)
Nigel.
papa,
Is your custom dipole as suggested by Devonian? If so how do you mount it on your airframe. It seems that the two options to mount vertically are a little less than practical. One with about a foot of antenna above the wing/body with a coaxial feed to the centre and a requirement to secure one end the other with 6 " or so down below and 6 above with the associated problem of landing on the down bit and still rigidity and mountind difficulties. That is of course if you mount the antenna vertical, which I seem to remember form posts earlier in this forum, that mounting orientation is required.
After doing some more online research I also came across this epic http://www.eagle3.net/n4ywn/docs/PracticalAntennaHandbook-vol4.pdf (http://www.eagle3.net/n4ywn/docs/PracticalAntennaHandbook-vol4.pdf) such a loooong mine of information. In the mighty tome the formulas for calculating the half and quarter lengths of antenna seem to be at odds with Devonians numbers. Not by a lot but there seems to be a great deal of emphasis placed on accuracy when constructing antennas by some and others claim a cm or so makes little difference. What's a poor Electrical Engineer to do when faced with contradictory information particularly when dealing with a rigorous engineering discipline that should not be open to such wide interpreted differences.
I think I might buy one of Flytrons rf to voltage converters and start cutting bits of wire by trial and error and so doing optimizes at least one variable i.e. the length.
Then again perhaps life's a bit tooo short I will just throw my PayPal account at the problem ;D
Regards
John
i have had some OLRS bits for a while and have had a load of problems,
most of seem to have been me in the end! haha :-[
the biggest problem seems to have been my old 9vap tx !!!
very strange really, the ppm stream out of it maybe???
but it works AOK on my new 9C so all is good i think now.
john aka papa, has been amazing and has given me a lot of time and help with it,
for which im eternally greatfull, its a really good system!
he flashed my HW with 3.6 6ch hop 459 and it seems SOLID so far,
i have done a few tests with a multimeter plugged into the rssi on the ground.
this gave some very interesting results!!!
i purchased some bespoke antennas from a company, they made them lighter for me...
when i used http://www.csgnetwork.com/freqwavelengthcalc.html (http://www.csgnetwork.com/freqwavelengthcalc.html)
then mesured the antennas i had, none seemed the correct lengths!!!
even some that were purchased from firstpersonview (not originally by me, 2nd hand for me)
so i got some sma connectors soldered a bit of wire in the end,
then measured the correct length and cut it...
this has given the best results so far and has no 'ground plane'
next test for a fixed wing application will be a di-pole.
so had my first flight test with olrs today on a quad,
was very happy with it! not a single twitch :)
i was watching the rssi value very carfully to start with in the osd
http://youtu.be/DZNvFWZhCWc (http://youtu.be/DZNvFWZhCWc)
really very happy with it now :)
but on a system like this, a good antenna seems essential really to get the best you can out of it.
cant wait to start pushing the distance with it now ;D
simon.
Quote from: phibin on December 18, 2012, 05:29:25 PM
when i used http://www.csgnetwork.com/freqwavelengthcalc.html (http://www.csgnetwork.com/freqwavelengthcalc.html)
then mesured the antennas i had, none seemed the correct lengths!!!
even some that were purchased from firstpersonview (not originally by me, 2nd hand for me)
Response from our engineer:
The calculated length does not take into account the sleeving used in the construction and its dielectric impedance. Optimising the antenna cannot usually be done by simply snipping the wire at the calculated length if it is then going to be encased in a sleeve.
:-)
Also, we had 100 Diamond Antennas delivered last week. Here they are: http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/antennas/433mhz/diamond-srh771-sma-433mhz-antenna (http://www.firstpersonview.co.uk/antennas/433mhz/diamond-srh771-sma-433mhz-antenna)
All the best
Simon
John Don't apologies,
This is supposed to be a Hobby and as one of my Grand Kids keeps telling me "Get a life".
Like the idea of up the vertical stabilizer, sounds like the name for a Carry On Film but I am sure you know what I mean. Do you mount the Rx close to the dipole with a short coax feed or the Rx further away and use a long coax feed. Wont work quite as well on my Hex or Quad but I don't need the range on either so that's some thing to bring up on another forum some time. Glad phibin has got his "Ducks in a line" my turn next....watch this space. Meanwhile ordered one TX and Two Rx's from HK to cheap not to, back order but with the dreaded Festive season on its way and at least 3 weeks work to do that wont be a problem.
Thanks for replays
Regards
John
Hi Simondale,
Does your engineer have any comments about a 433 MHz being used a 459 MHz, only a a 6% change I agree, and as one of our contributors commented probably only 1 cm. However if its not important one wanders why antennas are cut to different lengths. If one cuts lengths of the conductor and does not effect dialectic, screen ect then I think you can still optimism an antenna in this rather hit and miss way, MHO. Your case and blatant advertisement ;) is however enough to to persuade me to revert to plan B throw some money at the problem. :-\
Regards
John
Hi phibin,
Your research seems to back up what I am finding, the lengths quoted in some posts on his forum seem to be in error, not by a large amount, but not correct. Its great to hear that some one who has cut some wire to the "correct length" and has got some good results. Also interesting is that that some professional made antenna's are not the correct length, could it be that the professional antenna are all cut to 433 MHz ? and we have this bizarre situation that a lot of effort seems to have gone in to testing systems at 433 MHz as "A comparison with the legal 459 MHz" and perhaps the 433 and 459 have some how merged in the detail.
Who knows???
Interesting
Regards
John
Quote from: papa_lazerous on December 18, 2012, 07:05:14 PM
the length of the antenna will be different depending on the Ø of the wire and the insulation around it!
as true as this is, some antennas do seem quite far off the length you would expect...
and sorry simon, i wasnt knocking your stock..
only mentioning that the 2 'tuned' antennas i have for 459 that originally came from you,
seem to be slightly off the length, in fact they are different from each other so....?
i cant see this being down to differing materials in the 2 identical antennas????
maybe just a bad pair?
i do use one of these on the tx, but in tests with the other one and my home made,
on the rx the home made is gives better results...
anyways, i think i will be investing in a diamond whip for the tx soon,
i will check your site out simon ;)
a lot of people sing its praises inc. papa so thats good enough for me!
i will be doing some more quad testing first,
as i can edge further and further away and keep an eye on the rssi
when i cant go further with the quad, i will start with the fixed wing testing and better antennas.
simon.
Sander published the specifications for these "Sander style" antennas and changed his mind on the length they should be for 459MHz at least once - due to his testing with different materials. We changed the length in line with "the designers" spec. changes.
There's a thread on fpvlab or RCGroups which chronicles the development/ history/ changes that Sander published.
I have asked ImmersionRC to get the manufacturer that makes the new 433MHz antennas that now come with the EzUHF receivers to make us some special 459MHz versions.
All the best
Simon
Yea papa(John) I get the picture without resorting to more graphics. Yep you are on the mark when it comes to my Hex/Quads. The only reason I intended to fit UHF was to avoid 35MHz and the problem with a long wire antenna, I had 2.4 Video gear as I was convinced by some expert or other on this or another forum that 2.4 was the way to go on video, lets not even get into power levels and legality ;) So to cut that long story short I subsequently bought some 5.8 gear, usually my approach to any problem throw some PayPal at it. As it happens I have no problem with 35Mz on my lumbering HobbyKing FPV plane, not very adventurous when it comes to long range and I have difficulty employing a spotter that can see this model outside about 1 Km.
Looks like the antenna discussions go on. It would be nice to see it done and dusted so newcomers as well Old Hands have reasonably reliable equipment without the doubts about how long an antenna should actually be, seems amazing that the topic as gone on for so long. Carry on the good work philbin I will join you in testing and publishing some results as soon as I get the gear.
Regards to all
John
Hi thUndead,
Glad to see you on line, pity you feel you have to give up the development of OpenLRS just as I have made the investment in some gear, not got it yet but its on its way. You have done so much more than any one else including the professional, that I will thank personally even if I don't know if it will work or not lust yet. I am sure it will, if not what the hell move on!
Just one small point, you say in the change log that you have changed the Baud rate to 4800 yet in the config.h file I see that you have "#define SERIAL_BAUD_RATE 115200 //115.200 baud serial port speed" is this a different baud rate or am I missing something. I am not a coder so its possible I have missed some thing.
Regards
John
Hi John :)
Glad people still appreciate my firmware :) i'm sure the olrs will work just fine on your new and shinny gear and as always feel free to drop me a PM if you get stuck. The baudrate you saw in the config file is for the serial output (usb connection) and not for the actual data transmission over the rf module. Although I stopped dev for now, the new orange olrs from hk is pretty tempting and might just get back in the game :)
Regards,
Mihai.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
Hi Mihai,
I have ordered two orange RX's along with TX and Turnigy 8 X from HK, should arrive some time in the new year; thought the RX's were on back order the last time I checked. I was going to use one of then as a Frequency Analyzer whilst doing some test on various antenna, but as a contribution to your unhealthy fund I will send you one as a token of appreciation for all your work, much better for you than Red Bull and what ever the other things are, just PM me with your address and I will send an "Orange" as soon as I get them.
Thanks for the reply and keep up the good work
Regards and of course Happy New Year
John
Haha cheers :) i'll drop you a pm as soon as i get back from holidays ( 28ish) in the mean time happy holidays and all the best!
Mihai.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
Finally! Success!... I have the PPM out on the receiver driving the Dragon OSD, I dont know what I had done wrong before but it now works. I think the readme might be wrong from what I can see? (happy to be corrected).
I took a look through the code, in check_modes() Serial PPM out only happens with ch1 and ch3 shorted and using my scope, it appears to be on ch 4, connected to the DOSD and Bingo!
Readme says short pins 2 and 4 there is also no 6 blinks, but working it is! :)
Only thing I am having trouble with is the RSSI, has anyone used this with DOSD yet ? I can get a voltage reading occasionaly, circa 3.5V when messing around probing with my multimeter, I suspect either a dry joint or some capacitive filter is required, how is everyone else doing it?
Looking forward to trying this out at last, its been months since I bought them of Mihai! Just need some good weather. :)
Hi All,
Happy new year !
I have now received the "Kit" Open LRS Futaba 100mW module and V2 Rx all from Flytron and so the fun has started!
Well it looks as if I fell at the first hurdle. Set up on bench with thUndead V4 final used to generate the FW 6 CH, Serial PPM Type set to 1, Frequency to 459 set 2, hop list [1,5,3,2,6,3] Header set to 'Pigs' Both config.h files checked and showing same hop list, frequency ect, Flashed with Arduino 0022, set to the correct board and the 3.3 FTDI. All lights flashed as expected and in each upload AVRDUDE reported Done. Now the rub I fitted the module in an old FM Futaba T9CP and set the modulation to PPM. Energized the Rx with a Futaba Rx Nicad and plugged a servo in to output 5,then 6, then 7 and final 8. Switched on and yes you have guessed it right the servo twitched, the Red LED on Rx flickered and the blue LED also intermittently flickered, then despite my stirring all the Tx controls and and thrashing all the switches, nothing happened.
This story is already to long but I must add:
I have carried out the above with different values of most of the variables, all with similar results. I have tried single frequency and thUdead 3.6 all with similar results.
What am I doing wrong?
Are my settings in the Tx OK ie modulation PPM ?
What should be the arrangement of LED's for normal operation be?
What am I doing wrong? asked again !
I will continue playing and try down loading a previous version of the code for both.
Meanwhile any suggestions welcome.
Regards
John
Hi "papa",
Always glad to see someone on the case :)
I think I have made a giant leap forward :-\
To cut another long story short I reloaded mod4 without FH and low and behold it seemed to work, no range checks or full tests but simple stuff as detailed in first tests. I then reverted to 4 Hops, no joy.I then loaded the last non thUndead and its configuator, played about with the 3 channels and most importantly the Step size and again low and behold the system sprung to life when I selected 10KHz. Back to thUndead 4 source and found _spi_write(0x79,0x60) and -spi_write(0x,0x50). From data sheet of si4432 RF chip it seems that you write to reg 0x97 to control the step size. Changed the value of both writes to 0x10 recompiled and uploaded and bingo.
Whilst I have a very healthy disregard for anyone who modifies code without knowing squat, I broke my own rules and it seems to have worked.
I would like comments from as many of you experienced code writers and users as I may inadvertently screwed up some thing else.
Quick ask of thUndead. Is it easy/possible without great effort to make the step size adjustable from the config orator or config.h?
Case not yet closed but I am now able to check Range, Serial PPM and mixed signals, who knows I may be flying before next winter. :laugh:
regards
John
Note and :-[ and :'(
Just noticed whilst comparing code that I have made a F***** above. The frequency hopping step size registers concerned in the si4432 RF chip are not as I said above but are of course as you all spotted 0x7A. If the mistake confuses you think how much it confused me.
Still Trying (Very trying)
John
papa,
As stated in my original post tried 3.6 and had same problem. :( I am just about to check the code generated by 3.6 and see what the step size is. Also thUndead claimed in a post last year that the only differences between 4 and 3.6 were not "Under the Hood" they were in the configurator. Ill check that at the same time using DiffMerge, till then got to believe the guy who wrote it ;) If 3.6 is superior to 4 and I have no reason to think one way or the other, then as a semi logical person I would like to know why :D as a reason or reasons must exist don't you think?
Hi jiberjaber if your "tuned in" I too am having problems with serial PPM and do not have a "scope" so I am unable to check outputs on 4 or 8 or 9 seems to be different instructions in the readme's. It could be a timing problem, I am using Eagle tree OSD Pro and it works fine with a Serial PPM stream from a FriSky Rx. If you have any details let me have them otherwise I can see a lot of trial and error. Which is fine but at the end you still dont know if you have solved a problem or just randomly got lucky.
Regards
John
papa,
Interesting however not had time to check code tonight but what you say seems to ring true. Off to watch University Challenge, to exercise the little grey cells, then dinner then darts and dominoes, hectic life.
Will compare codes and report back.
Regards
John
im not sure if this would have any relevance...
but i had lots of headache when trying to use my futaba 9vap.
it would work on single ch with poor range,
but would glitch and miss packets with and hopping.
i think that must of had something to do with the ppm out to the module on my old 9vap.
(the 9vap is "not compatible" with some 2.4stuff like spektrum modules etc)
now i use a 9c with it and its seems rock solid so far on 3.6 as per papa's recommendation.
simon.
Hi John (papa not me),
The gear I ordered from HK is being held up for lack of Orange openLRS Tx module. I am very tempted to cancel that item and get delivery of the 9x included in the order. Which brings me to my question , you mention a conversion unit/circuit that allows the Futaba module which I have, to be fitted to the 9x. Where did you acquire same? I think timing way be the reason I am not able to use Rx mode 1, mixed Serial and parallel servo output. Supplementary question which Firm ware are you running on your 9x ? I have ordered a scope, secondhand cheapo from Ebay and it will arrive all being well Wednesday so I should be able to check the Futaba and the receiver, for the quality and timing of the frames of PPM data. It would be nice to check the system with a 9x to try and get the whole picture but that may not be possible for a week or two! So much checking to do and never the right test gear, sounds like my time working for a well known Servo motor and controller manufacturer.
By the way the reason why my setup was not working is defiantly down the the hopping frequency. I have changed and changed back again 4 times twice with v4 and twice with v3.6. The results in my case are conclusive 10kHz OK 50/60KHz pants.
Regards
John
Flytron make Futaba to JR adaptors. I use one with my Flytron OpenLRS and 9x.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Hi Simon,
Cheers will head over to Flytron and order one, unless you have them in stock or will have shortly, in which case the business is yours.
Regards
John
Hi John,
You're very kind but no we don't sell them any more. You'd be best getting it direct from Melih and Bora at Flytron.com
All the best
Simon
OK Its still snowing so I will be unable to conclude / progress my trials and tribulations with a range check.
On the bench at very short range I have got the "System" working.
The system is Eagle tree e Logger, GPS, Altimeter, Pitot airspeed add on and stabiliser. Rx, I have used both Flytron and Orange from Hobby King, They still owe me one HK that is. Transmitter is Flytron M2 module Fitted to a Futaba T9CP, I await the Orange HK Transmitter module along with a Turnigy 9X transmitter and a Flytron JR to Futaba transmitter module adapter.
The FW in both RX's is configured for mixed PPM serial and parallel, output Serial on out 4. 10KHz channel spacing and 6 channel randomly selected channels (for Hopping).
I have tried both V4 and V3.6 and with some code modification both seem to perform equally well.
The RSSI is difficult to check at short range but by modifying the boost function I was able to reduce the power to 1 dBm, by using the Transmitter button, This gave some indication that it was working but not very conclusive. More of that when I finally get the weather conditions to enable me to do a range test.
When I get the opportunity I intend to do the range test above Castleton up towards Breaky Hill and Castleton Rigg an area that I know and also the site of previous trial by Coyte it may give us some form of comparison. I hope by then I have the Turnigy and will be able to draw this trialing to a close and get some flying in.
Regards
John
Thanks for that, I almost bow to your experience but in my defense I did read the Eagle tree data sheet for the OSD, unfortunately can not find it right now so I am quoting from memory but it says that SOME receivers require a high impedance on the RSSI output. Well as the output from the both my receivers comes straight from the AVR mega 328 I consulted the data sheet for the Mega 328. No such restriction was mentioned. As for effecting the range I am totally bemused as to how the output load of one of the processor pins could effect the quite separate rf module. I suppose if operating into a short circuit and not damaging the processor out put, not very likely, it may drop the Vcc of the processor, this could cause "grey out" but to be honest I remain unconvinced that the input impedance of the Eagle tree OSD could cause problems with LSS Open Rx's range. I have however sent a support email to Eagle tree seeking confirmation and the value of the input impedance. I will also post a question on the Flytron Forum to ascertain the the views of The designers. By the way excuse my ignorance but what does "bounce up" mean when applied to a processor input ?
I can see some logic in buffering and smoothing the output as It is a series of pulses that are generated in software and consist of 10 or 20 samples depending on the Version. I have checked the pulses on a scope and into a capacitor and resistor combination for smoothing. That would simple go Some way to converting the pulse out put to its RMS value. I can see no reason why this smoothing circuit should not be included but always I like not to over complicate circuits without a full understanding of what is happening as I was told as a youngster KISS. So far no smoke from the Receiver or the OSD so all will have to wait for the range check to try the final part of the tests.
Regards
John
Hi John (papa)
Done a simple test on the bench to test loading. Connected RSSI out from Rx to Tmp1 in on eLogger. Measured whilst connected to the RSSI output from Rx. Disconnected the RSSI input into the e Logger, whilst continuing to display waveform on scope. Hence I have loaded and unloaded measurements. If loading is effecting the signal I would expect the amplitude or the wave form to change, in fact with severe loading The signal should reduce considerable in amplitude. Not bounce! You can easily try the test yourself as you have a scope, in fact I hope you do so me can get actual data out on to the Forums rather than our opinions. My results are :
When connected waveform is 0.2 mSec pulses, changing slightly in length by about 10 to 15%, 3.2 V amplitude at 2.5 Msec period.
Unconnected as near the same as makes no difference.
Hence buffering for reduction in loading not required in this case
Tests repeated with both Orange and Flytron Rx's same results .
This does not surprise me as the un buffered absolute maximum sink and source current of the Atmel 328 Mega taken from the Atmel data sheets is 40 mA, given an absolute chip max of 200mA. I doubt that any one in there right mind would design an input that required that kind of drive, unless it was differential current as in RS 433/485 for very high noise environments.
I am not suggesting that the EagleTree unit is defective, you really must read my posts more carefully, I said I would request the value of the input impedance, which I have done.
What Rx do you use for your epic flights ? I assume its not Flytron as no one would risk their expensive gear on a"cheap and lazy design" or would they?
Please carry out the simple test as above and let me know how you get on you never know we may both learn something. I can send you a PM with the connection diagram scope settings, test conditions ect if you want to replicate the test.
Regards
John
Hi John (papa),
A couple of your posts seem to have disappeared, is this a system malfunction or are you modifying your opinions? It would be nice to know what has prompted you to delete them if this is not a system problem.
The above was not the main purpose of this post it is to correct a mistake I made in my last, promise not to delete it ;) post.
I said the period of the waveform was 2.5 msec well it is actualy 2.0mSec. :-[
Regards
John
I'm not here posting opinions, just facts based on experience. I'm not interested in wasting my time with you any further after your previous post. I urge you to do as you want and find out the hard way.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Hi John
The hard way is to do tests and publish the result, that I have done. The easy way is to make incorrect statements then delete them when proved wrong. My intention was not to alienate any one but to get to the truth. Your experience will be missed
Regards
John
Have you flown over 10km and back on this hardware,and I'll add I did it why 5.8ghz video on 200mw. When you have done that we'll have a pissing contest. I don't post to have to defend my posts I've got better things to do I've not been wrong with what I've said, you'll find out in the long run good luck!
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
John,
If you had left your posts on the board others could judge the rights and wrongs. Only the unsure or wrong would retrospectively hide their opinions. This is not a P****ing competition its a search for the facts. If you have any other admissions of wrong doing (10Km undocumented flights) please use PM's we do not want the Pastime brought into disrepute by some over large egos.
Goodby I still don't understand your attitude to the truth Remember what Napoleon said " Man who never made mistake never made any thing"
Goodby
John
Off topic : What rx antenna were you using on that flight John ?
Diamond on the tx home made dipole on the rx I've got GPS tracks to verify my range but don't advertise it because of the sensitivity over the range and the trouble it can cause. I've got serious trouble with my video as I get corruption with static I have video usable to 8km before the recorder didn't recover the recording. I believe you've seen it Ian? I can make or available for a limited time via drop box
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Yes I`ve seen that one John, I can confirm it.
Sorry bud, I didn`t explain, I meant video Vrx antenna used
Clover leaf on the plane (skywalker) mounted on the flat behind the prop on the tail boom. On the ground I have a skew planar wheel as my omni and I have a helical on my pan and tilt tracker 7turns I think. I get crystal clear image over 5km just on the skew though!
You need to be extremely anal over every single detail to get extreme range from 5.8 I've not reached my limit just ran out of bottle and want sure about battery but I know now I could go further easily as I glide for 15-20 minutes over head circling when I get home to lose height to land.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Cool, thanks for the info :)
i have been thinking about dipoles on the rx,
and the great ranges they have been achieving..
could you make this...
(http://s1.postimage.org/521up6kij/2013_01_20_18_24_11.jpg) (http://postimage.org/image/521up6kij/)
but have the ground element 'normal' flexable antenna wire for a multi?
as long as it was the correct electrical length?
or would it not really work as its flopping around not at its full length?
simon.
Thanks to thUndead for support and confirmation in PM will act on good advice on facts and carry on with test and publish results when I have something testable to report.
How about re joining the fold I am sure we have more bits and pieces that need some expert help.
Regards
John
Hi Guys,
I'm considering an HK Orange system on 459.
There seems to be a lot of activity on here..
So how is it going?
Is a reflashed Orange combo reliable and safe on 459 or should I stick with my old Dragonlink?
i couldnt comment on the HK copy...
but my OLRS is working great now iv ironed out the bugs it seems.
however im still to do a serious range test with it.
look at flytron for the HW...
simon.
Same comments as phibin some small tweeks to get it working on the bench nothing serious and Mihai (thUndead) is a great help by PM. He is involved at this moment in time in a University project and hence has to be careful allocating his time. I have done some testing so far, no serious range check done, with the HK copy, Rx only The HK Tx is on its way. The results are the same as the Flytron's Rx. I would not however make a final recommendation until the range check is complete. Meanwhile another Kid on the block http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1782034&page=8 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1782034&page=8) seems to be further developments of Mihai's code, may be worth a try. I will probably try it in the next few weeks whilst waiting for a HK Orange Tx and a Turnigy 9x, ordered about 20 days ago and of course for some one to tell me its rubbish or may be not.
Regards
John
any one know if flytrons V3 tx will work on the old v3.6 code?
simon.
Problem. :'( It don't seem possible to stay legal with Flytrons M3 (Latest Tx) in UK :o. As far as I can see its not possible to "turn down the wick" to get 100mW out. Data sheet of M3's rf module RFM 23BP suggests that the lowest setting is 28dBm approx 450mW. I have emailed both Hope, the module suppliers and Flytron, also asked on Flytrons forum but as yet no answers. If any one has got an answer please let me know. It may be possible to put an external attenuator between the module and the antenna, not sure if this is practical and it would need to have a gain of -8dBm. perhaps one of our more rf savy members could comment. Not withstanding the power out problem I see no reason why it should not work as the rest of the hardware apart from the unit power supply seems to be the same, it certainly uses the same Atmega 328P processor. I can only assume the above is true as I have no way of staying legal and testing.
Regards
John
Hi phibin,
Sorry about the delay in posting on your question "any one know if flytrons V3 tx will work on the old v3.6 code?"
I have been involved in testing another set of software, so far so good and posting on that forum. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1782034&page=6. (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1782034&page=6.) Well to answer now, as I said it don't seem possible to turn down the Power to 100mW, if anyone knows how they are staying quite about it. I have however decided to use a SMA to SMA 10 dB attenuator at the attenuator base to stay legal. Yes theUndeadMod V 4 and V3.6 both work fine on the Flytron M3 module with both Orange Rx and Flytron Rx. In fact they also work in that combination with the software openLRSng. I have done limited range checks of about 2 Km LOS ground to ground with a further 20 dB of attenuation at the Tx base. RSSI output filtered unbuffered into my Eagle Tree OSD Pro showed a drop from 210 to 130 actual about 3v to 1.8 volts rms after the filter. Range check limited by weather and temperature will try latter. Next tests will be with Turnigy Orange Tx Legal at 100mW Orange and Rx, when Hobby King finally get them to me, then the best bits can start some actual flying.
Added below 04/02/2013.
Just had an email from Eagle Tree support and that tells me that their OSD Pro does not at this point in time support PWM input for RSSI, which I find interesting it means that the PWM signal which the OpenLRS Rx outputs does not give meaningfull information to OSD Pro. I am filtering my RSSI out from Rx using a CR low pass filter and a ferrite core. I seem to get understandable results but will now have to do more tests. It seems the more you look at OpenLRS the more it seems we don't know, makes it interesting if you are prepared to check things out and keep an open mind.
Regards
John
Hi,
Been out of all things aeromodelling for a good bad year due to personal reasons. So, starting to make some small steps to hopefully get back again. Thought I would start by having a play with the current 'Open LRS' but I would like to check a few points out if you would be kind enough to advise.
Let me start by saying that I have no experience or knowledge of Arduino programming, so, if anyone has any links to online tutorial sites please let me know. I feel a lot of reading and large amounts of coffee coming my way!
Equipment required:-
Tx module Mk3 from Flytron(for Futaba FF9 Tx) http://www.flytron.com/openlrs/212-openlrs-m3-1w-tx-module-for-futaba.html (http://www.flytron.com/openlrs/212-openlrs-m3-1w-tx-module-for-futaba.html)
Rx from HK http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/uh_viewItem.asp?idproduct=27096 (http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/uh_viewItem.asp?idproduct=27096)
(I've had a quick read of this and the RCGroups threads and believe that the units should work together, if not please say.)
3.3v FTDI for Arduino from Flytron http://www.flytron.com/connectors-cables/117-3v-ftdi-for-arduino.html (http://www.flytron.com/connectors-cables/117-3v-ftdi-for-arduino.html)
Is this all I need, do I need any other items, cables for programming etc please advise? Don't want to order bits and then have to go back and reorder.
Thanks in anticipation for your forbearance of my ignorance.
Can't wait to join this crowd, having taken delivery of the HK Orange kit.
However, can't get serial comms to work to flash the darned things.
Arduino 1.0., set for 328 16MHz 5v as recommended. Code from thUndeadMod v4 - no compilation errors. USB to serial bridge installed OK on Com 21. But the upload process fails, with no reply from the Rx.
I've tried:
- Gnd, Rx & Tx, with OpenLRS 'wait until it's compiled then connect power' procedure, as well as crossing Rx & Tx.
- Gnd, Rx, Tx, 3.3v & DTR, tried crossing Rx & Tx, tried connecting from DSR on USB instead (equivalent to crossing this control line).
No luck. The best that happens is the Rx LED flashes about 2-3 times, then switches full on until Arduino times out and declares the error.
And I can't find anyone else losing hours over this step.
Anyone got any suggestions? It seems to me vanishingly likely it's a problem with the Receiver.
you need arduino that will do '.pde' files...
i think the the 1.0 version of arduino does the new '.ino' files?
try using arduino 0022 and see if you can flash it with that.
everything else looks good i think...
simon.
p.s.
tx-to-rx / rx-to-tx ;)
Okay, still no luck here. Both Rx & Tx modules now don't flash any LEDs at all when I try programming them, unless I use the FTDI programmer (which I know works fine, as I use it to flash my 9X transmitter), but I fear this is the FTDI programmer flashing the LEDs, not a sign of life in the modules. For a while the transmitter module seemed to have flashed OK (although I couldn't test it as the Rx won't flash) but now it too seems dead, just beeping and lighting up the 'Warning' LED on switch-on.
I have ordered another transmitter/receiver pair from HK (sigh), but I remain in the dark. I write firmware using thUndead's nice utility (v4), compile it with Arduino v.1, but I can't seem to upload. Using a USB to serial board (Gnd, Rx,Tx,3.3v,DTR) Arduino reports the 'can't connect' error, and using the FTDI I get the 'cannot set sck period' +/- 'verification error'.
I've reached the point - having Googled so much, and tried so many different variations - of wondering if I'm going mad (?). Yes, these things are usually the result of some small different thing I'm doing without realising it, and not a problem with the modules.
Would anyone who has successfully flashed their Tx & Rx to 459MHz consider having a go with my modules?
It would be nice to know it is the modules, and not me - and, of course, if you have more success, I'd be able to get on with the project in hand.
I wonder, would anyone be willing to have a go at flashing these for me -
such a shame you cant get it to work.... :/
are you verifying the sketch first in arduino?
the little button next to upload... it makes sure all is ok before you flash....
I have to say, again, im fairly certain you need an earlier version of arduino......
the file you are trying to write are '.PDE'
versions 1+ of arduino does '.INO' files.....
this will corrupt the FW and it wont work.
try down loading arduino 0022 if you can, and try flashing again.
I hope this helps a bit?
keep us posted...
simon.
I have been using the Orange OpenLRS kit on my TBS.. got a Diamond antenna on the TX and Sander on the RX..
I have had it running on 459Mhz.. but only getting around 2km.. so I have been looking to see if I can improve the range..
After doing a bit more investigation.. and using the Chrome browser based spectrum analyser ..
Easy to use.. jumper pins 3 and 4 on rx.. attach your FTDI adapter.. and run the softwware: https://github.com/cTn-dev/openLRSng-spectrum-analyzer (https://github.com/cTn-dev/openLRSng-spectrum-analyzer)
This the output... with everything on the TBS on... (GoPro didnt make any difference)
(http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/7668/graphhm.jpg)
As you can see .. there is a spike at 459.5... not sure what it is yet.. either OSD or FPV cam etc... but whilst pondering this.. thought would look at the setup again...
I am using KHA's latest build which is based on thunundeads code.. Firmware: https://github.com/kh4/openLRSng (https://github.com/kh4/openLRSng)
The Frequency band approved in U.K for RC Models I understand is - 458.5 to 459.5MHz.
This band is shared with other users, in particular between 458.95 and 459.1MHz. It is recommended that aircraft use frequencies above 459.1 MHz.
So using the above info then.. this looks like the following channels and freq are legal and recommended for UK..
Ch1 - 459.100
Ch2 - 459.125
Ch3 - 459.150
Ch4 - 459.175
Ch5 - 459.200
Ch6 - 459.225
Ch7 - 459.250
Ch8 - 459.275
Ch9 - 469.300
Ch10 -459.325
Ch11 -459.350
Ch12 -459.375
Ch13 -459.400
Ch14 -459.425
Ch15 -459.450
Ch16 -459.475
(From info sourced here: http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html (http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html))
So translating this to the settings required to flash the Orange OpenLRS kit...
I think it should be this ...
#define DEFAULT_CARRIER_FREQUENCY 459100000 // Hz startup frequency
And freq hop channels should be 1-16 (assuming starts at 1 and not 0).. also assume Orange OpenLRS channel spacing is 0.025 (25khz)
Does this look right ?
Thanks
@ Jumpy,
No.
The RF module can only be programmed in 10KHz steps, therfore you can only achieve 459.100, 459.150, 459.200 etc OR 459.125, 459.175, 459.225 etc depending on the startup frequency.
So, if you want 459.125, 459.175 etc, your startup frequency should be 459.125.
The reason I suggest starting above 459.100MHz is that below that, the band is available to other, non flying users, whereas from 459.100 to 459.500 is primary UK flying use only.
Don't forget that the last useable frequency should be 459.475 due to bandwidth.
http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html (http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html)
Nigel.
Thanks Nigel.. I think I get it.. :-X
So starting at 459.100 these would be the channels ? (so I can set the freq hop channels within the range)
Ch1 - 459.100
Ch2 - 459.150
Ch3 - 459.200
Ch4 - 459.250
Ch5 - 469.300
Ch6 -459.350
Ch7 -459.400
Ch8 -459.450
Yup, you got it :)
Nigel.
Surely 10kHz steps would be:-
459.100
459.110
459.120
Etc
????????!
Quote from: FPVSimon on April 02, 2013, 01:14:04 AM
Surely 10kHz steps would be:-
459.100
459.110
459.120
Etc
????????!
Correct, BUT, that doesn't conform to the allowed 459MHz channel spacing of 25kHz (or 50kHz due to the 10KHz steps).
Nigel.
Nigel,
I am no programmer.. and have been trying to understand KHA's version of the code that I am running..
One thing I am struggling with is ..how the channel hoping numbers relate to the frequency based on start freq..
I rightly or wrongly assumed that it was the same as Thundead's code as that what it was based on..
According to KHA, the bandwidth is 25Khz +/- the carrier..
So should really start at 459.125Mhz
Ch1 - 459.125
Ch2 - 459.175
Ch3 - 459.225
Ch4 - 459.275
Ch5 - 469.325
Ch6 - 459.375
Ch7 - 459.425
Ch8 -459.475 Cant use as would take upper freq above band allowed. ?
Nige l - do you know ...
Is it mandatory to stick to that schema? or is it more recommendation / best practice?
Are you allowed frequency hopping across the band?
I started looking at openuhf for first time last night as I have had soem modules kicking around. Looking at the code I think config for us is as follows...
I think its base frequency of 459100000 or 459125000
Hopping channels of 5,10,15,20,25,30,35
Does that seem right? I dont think channels are 1-8 as mentioned earlier, but I'm new to OpenUHF - purely looking at it from code / sheet
Just saw last post - so bandwidth used is 25k ? thats interesting, I would have thought it would have been less than 10. Thats quite wide. = better range though ! I assume thats adjustable?
And assume thats why the reference to not using the last ch.
@ Shikra,
I don't think it's manadatory to stick to the schema other than it would be 'polite' to existing fixed channel users (there are a few).
However, for frequency hopping, I guess it doesn't really matter, even if you use the whole band.
From what I remember of the early firmwares, the hopping of 5,10,15,20... etc seems right.
@ Jumpy,
I'm no programmer either!
I have been following kha's code on RCG, but I don't have any of my gear available at the moment as it is in storage during my house move/major refurbishment.
I would have imagined a bandwidth of less than 10kHz as well, but even this is programmable, I believe?
Even a deviation of 12.5kHz would give the 25kHz channel spacing (for fixed channels), leaving 459.475MHz still useable.
If we were to ignore the current schema and go for 10kHz 'channels' combined with hopping, most likely nobody would know we were there.
RCG threads
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1782034 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1782034)
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1778553 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1778553)
essentially Flytron's hardware
Nigel.
Thanks Nigel I'll have read through those threads. Another one to start following... just what I don't need :)
I had a quick look at the code and it looks like the peak bandwidth deviation is fixed at +/- 15khz from carrier .....
Hehe - did you know Melih has released some Wii copter code for OpenLRS
http://forum.flytron.com/viewforum.php?f=7&sid=4c67cbb03c290def631fa0425f7d94fd (http://forum.flytron.com/viewforum.php?f=7&sid=4c67cbb03c290def631fa0425f7d94fd)
http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list (http://code.google.com/p/openlrs/downloads/list)
Sorry, more stuff the read ;D
Nigel.
Ok,
Done some more testing using the Spectrum Analyser... So should really start at 459.125Mhz.. and to stay in band and recommendations.. channels recommended below..
Ch1 - 459.125
Ch2 - 459.175
Ch3 - 459.225
Ch4 - 459.275
Ch5 - 469.325
Ch6 - 459.375
Ch7 - 459.425
Quote//######### TRANSMISSION VARIABLES ##########
#define DEFAULT_CARRIER_FREQUENCY 459125000 // Hz startup frequency ---- FOR UK RECOMMENDED TO CHANGE TO 459.125MHZ AS SHOWN 459125000
//###### HOPPING CHANNELS #######
// put only single channel to the list to disable hopping
#define DEFAULT_HOPLIST 2,7,3,5,6,4 ---- CREATE RANDOM CHANNEL LIST OR SET TO SINGLE CHANNEL, RECOMMEND SPREAD CHANNELS - NOTE to keep in UK legal and recommended band - use Channels 1-7 only
@Devonian - I'm not looking.... yet!
@Jumpy - can you confirm the channels on the analyser. From the code I can't see it being set to 25khz spacing. To me it looks like default as can't see it being set differently unless in bind or beacon mode.
so if set a tx with a base frequency of 459.1 and a single channel of 15 in hopping, I would expect to see 459.250 on the scanner
I just tried a scanner here, but get nographs on the screen. Used stock code, shorted out pins 3+4.
Prob me being thick....
Seems to connect, get a couple of flashed on usb prog.
Had a look at the code.. but not smart enough to understand it..
KHA posted on RCG that its 25khz either side.... this is with my settings as above. (Channels 2-7 in hop)
(http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/7897/ukopenlrsgraph.png)
I must have read it wrong .. or there is something else transmitting on that frequency range!!
Thanks for posting. Will see if I can get the scanner running, have a play and take a more indepth look at the code. I'm just not seeing the channel spacing of 50hz being programmed anywhere!
I'd be inclined to run it with a few different single channels - to prove.
See if I can get my scanner working later
Right guys, I've had a look at this from the code perspective -
#0 you MUST always clear EEPROM for any changes to frequency etc. otherwise you will not see correct results ;) Having read the code, previous weird scanner results now make sense!
#1 set the correct default carrier and channels
#2 the default channel spacing is 60khz.. (explains jumpy07s slightly off scan)
#3 the deviation is 30khz = bandwidth of 60khz
So for us in the UK to be legal, use recommended aircraft band and play "nice" with other users as Nigel says....., this would be my recommendation.
in openlrsng.ino, set the following
//######### TRANSMISSION VARIABLES ##########
#define DEFAULT_CARRIER_FREQUENCY 459100000 // Hz startup frequency
or
#define DEFAULT_CARRIER_FREQUENCY 459125000 // Hz startup frequency
//###### HOPPING CHANNELS #######
// put only single channel to the list to disable hopping
#define DEFAULT_HOPLIST 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
#2 in common.h, change:
spiWriteRegister(0x7a, 0x06); // 60kHz channel spacing
to
spiWriteRegister(0x7a, 0x05); // 50kHz channel spacing
#3 in binding.h, change:
{ 4800, 50000, 0x00, 0x1a, 0x40, 0x0a, 0xa1, 0x20, 0x4e, 0xa5, 0x00, 0x1b, 0x1e, 0x27, 0x52, 0x2c, 0x23, 0x30 },
{ 9600, 25000, 0x00, 0x05, 0x40, 0x0a, 0xa1, 0x20, 0x4e, 0xa5, 0x00, 0x20, 0x24, 0x4e, 0xa5, 0x2c, 0x23, 0x30 },
{ 19200, 25000, 0x01, 0x06, 0x40, 0x0a, 0xd0, 0x00, 0x9d, 0x49, 0x00, 0x7b, 0x28, 0x9d, 0x49, 0x2c, 0x23, 0x30 }
to
{ 4800, 50000, 0x00, 0x1a, 0x40, 0x0a, 0xa1, 0x20, 0x4e, 0xa5, 0x00, 0x1b, 0x1e, 0x27, 0x52, 0x2c, 0x23, 0x14 },
{ 9600, 25000, 0x00, 0x05, 0x40, 0x0a, 0xa1, 0x20, 0x4e, 0xa5, 0x00, 0x20, 0x24, 0x4e, 0xa5, 0x2c, 0x23, 0x14 },
{ 19200, 25000, 0x01, 0x06, 0x40, 0x0a, 0xd0, 0x00, 0x9d, 0x49, 0x00, 0x7b, 0x28, 0x9d, 0x49, 0x2c, 0x23, 0x14 }
Note - dont bother trying to use the scanner to verify hopping through all channels. Its not accurate enough.
Try using 2 of the channels at a time in the default list and a 1500 sample. It will show up well then.
BTW - that was to go by the book. Not necessarily the optimal performance I guess - but Nigel can probably advise better !
Good work Gary - thanks.
I really don't know about the channel spacing.
In reality it's a specification from the past where you only built R/C radios with a single, fixed channel.
Personally, I can't see an issue with using smaller 'spacing' providing hopping is used.
I've emailed the UKRCC to see how they feel about 10kHz 'channel spacing' for FHSS on 459MHz.
http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html (http://www.ukrcc.org/459mhz.html)
It might pay to start a whole new thread as this one is for thundeads code and these more recent codes are quite different.
Nigel.
Cheers Nigel.
The one I'm using is openlrsng. Seems to be most up to date. Seems to work OK too, but I havent tested in the air - probably right to start a new one. Perhaps I'll do that one have a bit more experience with it.
I was thinking - maybe kha could add a "helper macro" as he calls for an easy UK setup. Real simple to do.
Here is a snapshot - I picked ch6 and it looks about right.
495.1 + 6*50 = 495.4
bandwidth reduced to 50khz. also looks about right
I have no idea what the norm would be for bandwidth in hopping setups. I vaguely recall ScherrerUHF is wide and dragonuhf is narrow. Also what implications are on range! I'll ask Thomas...
Asked KHA on his RCG thread and looks like next release will have some good stuff for us in it.
Prob for now best to stick with the 60k channel and bandwidth on CH1-6 whilst see impact of narrower band on the range. May have to accept a lower resolution or something if go down to 10k
Intersting stuff though. Nice to see it moving onwards.
as a ref...
EZUHF uses 20k bw, 50k spacing and 40 channels on 433
Scherrer uses 50k or 100k spacing. 16 or 32 channels. I think bandwidth = spacing as he says its quite wideband, but can't see that verified...
Quote from: Shikra on April 05, 2013, 12:59:01 AM
Right guys, I've had a look at this from the code perspective -
#0 you MUST always clear EEPROM for any changes to frequency etc. otherwise you will not see correct results ;) Having read the code, previous weird scanner results now make sense!
#1 set the correct default carrier and channels
#2 the default channel spacing is 60khz.. (explains jumpy07s slightly off scan)
#3 the deviation is 30khz = bandwidth of 60khz
So for us in the UK to be legal, use recommended aircraft band and play "nice" with other users as Nigel says....., this would be my recommendation.
in openlrsng.ino, set the following
//######### TRANSMISSION VARIABLES ##########
#define DEFAULT_CARRIER_FREQUENCY 459100000 // Hz startup frequency
or
#define DEFAULT_CARRIER_FREQUENCY 459125000 // Hz startup frequency
//###### HOPPING CHANNELS #######
// put only single channel to the list to disable hopping
#define DEFAULT_HOPLIST 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
#2 in common.h, change:
spiWriteRegister(0x7a, 0x06); // 60kHz channel spacing
to
spiWriteRegister(0x7a, 0x05); // 50kHz channel spacing
#3 in binding.h, change:
{ 4800, 50000, 0x00, 0x1a, 0x40, 0x0a, 0xa1, 0x20, 0x4e, 0xa5, 0x00, 0x1b, 0x1e, 0x27, 0x52, 0x2c, 0x23, 0x30 },
{ 9600, 25000, 0x00, 0x05, 0x40, 0x0a, 0xa1, 0x20, 0x4e, 0xa5, 0x00, 0x20, 0x24, 0x4e, 0xa5, 0x2c, 0x23, 0x30 },
{ 19200, 25000, 0x01, 0x06, 0x40, 0x0a, 0xd0, 0x00, 0x9d, 0x49, 0x00, 0x7b, 0x28, 0x9d, 0x49, 0x2c, 0x23, 0x30 }
to
{ 4800, 50000, 0x00, 0x1a, 0x40, 0x0a, 0xa1, 0x20, 0x4e, 0xa5, 0x00, 0x1b, 0x1e, 0x27, 0x52, 0x2c, 0x23, 0x14 },
{ 9600, 25000, 0x00, 0x05, 0x40, 0x0a, 0xa1, 0x20, 0x4e, 0xa5, 0x00, 0x20, 0x24, 0x4e, 0xa5, 0x2c, 0x23, 0x14 },
{ 19200, 25000, 0x01, 0x06, 0x40, 0x0a, 0xd0, 0x00, 0x9d, 0x49, 0x00, 0x7b, 0x28, 0x9d, 0x49, 0x2c, 0x23, 0x14 }
Note - dont bother trying to use the scanner to verify hopping through all channels. Its not accurate enough.
Try using 2 of the channels at a time in the default list and a 1500 sample. It will show up well then.
Cheers for this.. so was not too far off other than the channel spacing and binding
Wonder if we could get KHA to write the code so it is easier to configure for UK legal.. would stop others maybe just running the stuff illegally unaware..
Many Thanks
Craig
Yep was very close.
To keep completely in the right ranges, just use ch1-6
I'm not sure if it really matters, but if can meet recommended practice / work with others we should try.
Would be easy enough to add in a single #UKLEGAL to do it all easy enough.
Lets see what KHA does for V2 - sound like PC app coming to configure etc.
Lol - I only want to get about 150 meters... on my copter. But with 2.4 vid when I want!
(Sorry, I know we're on frequencies now, but this is a slightly diversified thread)
One step forward... but still no luck.
Delay in replying, as the original modules now seem dead. I probably inadvertently fired them at some point.
So, delivery of new Tx & Rx (OrangeRX OpenLRS modules) today. Progammed using a 3.3v serial board (connect board to module, then plug into PC). I now seem to have no Upload errors! Progress.
BUT, I still have no connection :(
Switch on Tx, board beeps, OK LED lights. Power to Rx, test servo on Ch 1 centres, then goes to extreme throw. And sits there, whatever I do with Ch 1 on the Tx. (Tx mix tested on 35MHz - when I wiggle Ch 1 stick, servo, initially centred, wiggles too). This suggests to me a code problem.
- I am using thUndead v.4, default settings, generating Tx & Rx code - only changing the Tx and Rx buttons while doing so, no other settings altered.
- I get the same result (and stuck output on receiver channels) whether I use Arduino 0022, 0023 or 1.0
This is really quite frustrating!
My request remains - anyone out there who isn't having these problems willing to take delivery of my modules and programmer, and see if they get the same results?
(Alternatively, if someone could just send me the Arduino output of thUndead v4 that they have uploaded to their OrangeRx modules - Rx & Tx versions, set for 459MHz - that worked for them, I can also use that to see if I'm setting something wrong. And if anyone is using the 'son of thUndead', ditto - I'm really not fussy, I just want to get these wretched things to work on 459MHz...)
Quote from: Doofer on April 05, 2013, 05:56:23 PM
(Alternatively, if someone could just send me the Arduino output of thUndead v4 that they have uploaded to their OrangeRx modules - Rx & Tx versions, set for 459MHz - that worked for them, I can also use that to see if I'm setting something wrong. And if anyone is using the 'son of thUndead', ditto - I'm really not fussy, I just want to get these wretched things to work on 459MHz...)
Are you using PPM on your TX ?.. also what TX is it ?
Are you using traditional RX channels or PPM SUM ?
Would recommend KHA's code rather than theundead as its more up to date.. https://github.com/kh4/openLRSng/archive/master.zip (https://github.com/kh4/openLRSng/archive/master.zip)
Details here of how to flash and code changes http://www.multi-rotor.co.uk/index.php?topic=1226.msg13453#msg13453 (http://www.multi-rotor.co.uk/index.php?topic=1226.msg13453#msg13453)
If you really stuck can flash them and check them for you.. pm me
Thanks Jumpy07. I'm reasonably confident about the RC Tx side of things, if not simply because the Orange modules have all worked fine 'out of the box' i.e. using the HK stock firmware on 433MHz. It's just when I try the move to 459MHz that it all stops working.
I'm initially just using the conventional 8 separate PPM channels (although I will be wanting to use a PPM train output, to feed a Dragon OSD, at some point).
I've just tried KHA's code, with the tweaks recommended in that multi-rotor thread, using Arduino 1.0. Yup, still no link :(
That's a very kind offer - if no-one else on this forum makes any suggestions, I'll PM you.
Try this..
Power up RX on airframe.. (make sure no jumper pins)
Make sure TX is turned off, hold bind button down.. switch on TX.. continue to hold bind button for 7 + secs. (buzzer beeps continuously). .. ...let go button... then turn off TX and turn back on again and check link
if you don't do this.. any changes to settings will not be loaded..
Matching place-mats, microwave oven and cuddly toy to Jumpy07 !!!
Houston, on the bench at least, we have a connection! :D ;D :D
(I hardly dare ask, but where is that documented? This is where I find there is a simple manual on how this works... believe me, I've googled...)
Yes, the servo now moves as I wiggle the stick on 459! Phew.
I may be pushing it, but can you also tell me how to get a PPM pulse-train from the receiver?
Glad you got it going.. its actually in the readme.. but easy to miss..
To enable PPM SUM (combined) mode connect a jumper between CH7-CH8 on the RX. PPM SUM will be available on CH5
PWM channels 1-6 are available at CH1-CH4,CH6,CH7(which is jumpered to CH8).. this is handy as you can use PPM SUM for Flight Controller.. and still plug traditional servos or servos switches into the RX.
Remember first pin is RSSI.. so Ch 1 starts from the second pin..
Great stuff!
Where is this readme? I've been looking for such a thing for these modules since Christmas...
https://github.com/kh4/openLRSng/blob/master/README.md (https://github.com/kh4/openLRSng/blob/master/README.md)
QuoteopenLRSng
my fork of openLRS code (based on thUndeadMod of openLRS)
TRANSMITTER HW:
•
Flytron openLRS M2/M3 TX unit -- set TX_BOARD_TYPE 2
•
OrangeRX UHF TX unit -- set TX_BOARD_TYPE 2
•
Flytron openLRS M2 RX as TX -- set TX_BOARD_TYPE 3
◦connect PPM input to 5th slot (fifth from left )
◦button between ground and ch4 (fourth frem left
◦buzzer at ch3 (active high)
•
OrangeRX UHF RX as TX -- set TX_BOARD_TYPE 3
◦connect PPM input to 'ch4' slot
◦button between ground and ch3
◦buzzer at ch2 (active high)
•
openLRSngTX -- set TX_BOARD_TYPE 4
RECEIVER HW:
•Flytron openLRS RX
•
OrangeRX UHF RX
RSSI output at 'first' connector (marked as RSSI on OrangeRX) 32kHz PWM signal. To make this analog you can use a simple RC filter (R=10kOhm C=100nF).
CH1-CH8 are parallel PWM outputs for channel1-8 (50Hz)
To enable PPM (combined) mode connect a jumper between CH7-CH8. PPM will be available at CH5. PWM channels 1-6 are available at CH1-CH4,CH6,CH7(which is jumppered to CH8) NOTE: you can make the connection in the AVRISP header (MISO-MOSI) to have servo at CH7 (=channel6) NOTE: it is also possible to force the PPM mode in the .ino and thus get PWM output for channels 1-7 (CH1-CH4,Ch6-CH8).
SOFTWARE CONFIGURATION:
Modify configurations in openLRSng.ino as needed, mostly you are intrested in:
•
DEFAULT_CARRIER_FREQUENCY
◦sets base frequency
•
DEFAULT_RF_POWER
◦limits maximum power
•
DEFAULT_HOPLIST/default_rf_magic
◦these two parameters bind the tx/rx, note that you can generate random values by using the "randomize channels and magic" feature on TX.
Note: for settings to take effect the TX must be reinitialised by either randomizing or by resetting to 'factory settings'. The RX will need to be paired again.
UPLOADING:
Use a 3v3 FTDI (or other USB to TTL serial adapter) and Arduino >= 1.0.
o set board to "Arduino Pro or Pro Mini (5V, 16MHz) w/ atmega328" (yes it runs really on 3v3 but arduino does not need to know that)
o define COMPILE_TX and upload to TX module
o comment out COMPILE_TX and upload to RX
USERS GUIDE
TX:
•Enter binding mode ◦power up while keeping button down and release button after ~1 second. Buzzer should emit short beep ~5 times/s in sync with led.
◦To exit bindmode powercycle TX.
•Reset settings and randomize channels and 'magic' ◦power up while keeping button down for ~3 seconds (buzzer starts to emit beeps) and release button
◦binding mode is entered automatically
•Reset settings to .ino values ◦power up the TX and keep button down for >~7 seconds (buzzer beeps continously).
◦binding mode is entered automatically
•Setting failsafe ◦Press and hold button for ~1s during normal operation until red LED lights and buzzer beeps, release button.
•LEDs ◦Green(or blue) LED is lit when module is transmitting
◦Red LED indicates setting of failsafe, or problem with radio module.
RX:
•Binding ◦RX always binds at boot (and times out after 0.5s) so it is enough to put TX to bind mode and power up RX. On successful bind blue led lights up (both LEDs remain on until TX is put on normal mode)
◦RX will also enter bind mode forcibly (without timeout) if EEPROM data is incorrect or a jumpper is placed between CH1 and CH2
•Failsafe: ◦Failsafe activates after ~2s of no input data
•LEDs ◦Blue LED lights when packet is received (losing a single packet shows as no pulse on LED)
◦Red LED indicates trouble, it blinks when two consequent packets are lost, and lights up when more than 2 packets are lost
•Beacon (if enabled) automatically starts after 'deadtime' with no data from TX, the beacon will send three tone 'FM' modulated signal hearable on PMR channel 1. The signal starts with 500Hz @ 100mW and continues with 250Hz @ 15mW and 166Hz @ 1mW. The degrading signal allows to estimate distance. ◦you can use cheap PMR walkie to listen to this signal and using your body as shield determine the direction of it. Alternatively use a directional 433Mhz antenna.
SPECIAL FUNCTIONS ======= =========
Both TX and RX can be used as spectrum analysers with the "openLRS spectrum analyser GUI). See http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1617297 (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1617297)
TX: Put TX into binding mode and connect with GUI (may need to press update once).
RX: put jumper on CH3-CH4. This will force the RX to act as spectrum scanner.
Fantastic! Thanks.
KHA has released V2.0 of his code, this a major release with some significant changes.
All configuration is now down via terminal on the TX unit and the configuration is copied to the RX's on bind (after loading V2.0 via Arduino)
You can also set channel spacing now, once you have completed your config it will also calculate the freq used based upon you channel hop list and base freq... this is a neat feature that lest you check if you are using a legal config.
V2.0 can be downloaded from here: https://github.com/kh4/openLRSng/archive/master.zip