HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Closed Thread
Thread Tools
Old Dec 27, 2012, 01:39 PM
Registered User
Grich's Avatar
Joined May 2002
225 Posts
Zero, the RF section (Radio Frequency) has the antenna directly attached to it and tuned to it. If it were possible to move the antenna away from the rf section via tiny coax, you would have to re-tune it.
Grich is offline Find More Posts by Grich
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Dec 27, 2012, 02:35 PM
Registered User
E_ferret's Avatar
Launceston Arpt, Tasmania, Australia
Joined Jan 2004
564 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew View Post
Just an update... I finished the design for the new separated RF section. .
I hope the connector to the bus is laying flat (3 pins horizontal).
E_ferret is offline Find More Posts by E_ferret
Old Dec 27, 2012, 03:50 PM
Xtreme Power Systems
Lake Havasu, AZ
Joined Jun 2005
15,720 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcbirk21 View Post
that sounds cool. so are you saying the servo extension that would connect this channel expander can be used for binding as well?
Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcbirk21 View Post
Would you even need to bind it if plugging into a nano rx?
You always need to bind the RF portion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcbirk21 View Post
and i am assuming you are not far enough along to know this, but how long of an extension can you you use?
I have tested 60 feet without any issues.
JimDrew is offline Find More Posts by JimDrew
RCG Plus Member
Old Dec 27, 2012, 03:52 PM
Xtreme Power Systems
Lake Havasu, AZ
Joined Jun 2005
15,720 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by E_ferret View Post
I hope the connector to the bus is laying flat (3 pins horizontal).
Yes, it is. The DivBee RF module is 1" (W) x 1" (L) x .25" (H) with servo connector laying flat against back and included in the total height.
JimDrew is offline Find More Posts by JimDrew
RCG Plus Member
Old Dec 27, 2012, 04:01 PM
Barefoot Birkinsomething
rcbirk21's Avatar
United States, CA, Hayward
Joined Aug 2004
9,349 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew View Post
You always need to bind the RF portion.
So both the nano and the channel expander would need to be bound? just making sure i am understanding things correctly. i interpreted it as a simple channel expander, didnt realize it would communicate with the tx. If they both need to be bound, does that mean for updating and programming that only one needs to be connected, or would they need to be treated as completely seperate?
rcbirk21 is online now Find More Posts by rcbirk21
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: Joe's Battery Contraption
Old Dec 27, 2012, 05:14 PM
Xtreme Power Systems
Lake Havasu, AZ
Joined Jun 2005
15,720 Posts
No, only the RF portion needs to be bound. You can bind the RF unit either by using the push button (DivBee version), or remotely through the servo portion.

The servo portion (channel expander) does not communicate to the Tx. It communicates with the RF portion. I really need to pick some names for these things so its easier to understand what I am referring to!

The Nano will stay the Nano, as a receiver with servo pins. However, the Nano guts (no servo pins) will become one of two different RF portions available.
JimDrew is offline Find More Posts by JimDrew
RCG Plus Member
Old Dec 27, 2012, 05:18 PM
Xtreme Power Systems
Lake Havasu, AZ
Joined Jun 2005
15,720 Posts
RF Unit (RFU) --------------- servo extension -----------Servo Control Unit (SCU) - servos and power input

The RFU could be located anywhere you like, using a simple servo extension as the connection to the SCU. The RFU has its own voltage regulator system so you can feed it 1.8v to 16v, through the SCU.
JimDrew is offline Find More Posts by JimDrew
RCG Plus Member
Old Dec 27, 2012, 05:19 PM
Barefoot Birkinsomething
rcbirk21's Avatar
United States, CA, Hayward
Joined Aug 2004
9,349 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew View Post
No, only the RF portion needs to be bound. You can bind the RF unit either by using the push button (DivBee version), or remotely through the servo portion.

The servo portion (channel expander) does not communicate to the Tx. It communicates with the RF portion. I really need to pick some names for these things so its easier to understand what I am referring to!

The Nano will stay the Nano, as a receiver with servo pins. However, the Nano guts (no servo pins) will become one of two different RF portions available.
ohhh, that makes more sense. can you use the channel expander with a nano rx? just saying that because i have a few and would be very convenient to just plug in a servo extension to the nano and use the expander to have more convenient plug in location for my servos and get better reception for the nano
rcbirk21 is online now Find More Posts by rcbirk21
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: Joe's Battery Contraption
Old Dec 27, 2012, 06:24 PM
Xtreme Power Systems
Lake Havasu, AZ
Joined Jun 2005
15,720 Posts
Yes, that would be possible. It will require a firmware upgrade to do it as the Nano does not support XPS packets, only a PPM stream currently.
JimDrew is offline Find More Posts by JimDrew
RCG Plus Member
Old Dec 27, 2012, 09:18 PM
↓↘→ + (punch)
theKM's Avatar
central PA.
Joined Sep 2004
20,165 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew View Post
Just an update... I finished the design for the new separated RF section. I am not sure what to call this yet. The unit can be bound using either a command from the servo port side (not sure what to call that yet either) or via the push button. This way you can bury the RF portion in the fuse and you don't need access to the button to bind it later. The RF portion can output a XPS, Spetrum, Futaba S-Bus, or PPM data stream. The servo portion will retain the failsafe, channel mapping, reversing, etc. information. This allows you to simply remove the RF portion and put it in a different airplane without having to change all of the settings again. The RF portion is what sends the telemetry data, but the servo portion will be the interface to the telemetry devices.
awesome. remote binding is a handy idea too.


RFU sounds fine to me... better than the SSW that I came up with.
theKM is offline Find More Posts by theKM
Old Dec 27, 2012, 09:24 PM
↓↘→ + (punch)
theKM's Avatar
central PA.
Joined Sep 2004
20,165 Posts
a receiver does two things... gets a signal, translates the signal to drive servos. these two things have been separated. Just like satellites in the Spek setup "get the signal" and the body of the receiver "drives servos", only... well, better.


maybe it's easiest to just roll over and call the RFU's "satellites", "antennas", or more simply "receivers". When looking at a "receiver" people will soon complain that there's nowhere to plug in servos, and then you tell them that they need servo driving unit for that... and then when they go to complain that they don't like buying two things when they used to only buy one, explain that it's superior, and that the total cost is still lower than their old receivers and that they will now have a better setup

...it's actually pretty much what Futaba are doing with the SBus receivers that have 6 servo outputs... totally analogous to the Nano in this new model.
theKM is offline Find More Posts by theKM
Last edited by theKM; Dec 27, 2012 at 09:32 PM.
Old Dec 28, 2012, 12:23 AM
Registered User
E_ferret's Avatar
Launceston Arpt, Tasmania, Australia
Joined Jan 2004
564 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew View Post
RF Unit (RFU) --------------- servo extension -----------Servo Control Unit (SCU) - servos and power input

The RFU could be located anywhere you like, using a simple servo extension as the connection to the SCU. The RFU has its own voltage regulator system so you can feed it 1.8v to 16v, through the SCU.
I go with RFU. However servo extension projects an image of something between a servo connector block and a servo.
maybe RFU fly-lead or umbilical or data highway or control link.
but nothing with the word 'servo' included.
E_ferret is offline Find More Posts by E_ferret
Old Dec 28, 2012, 03:11 AM
Registered User
Son, Norway
Joined Sep 2004
3,265 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew View Post
Yes, that would be possible. It will require a firmware upgrade to do it as the Nano does not support XPS packets, only a PPM stream currently.
So these are not valid any more?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew View Post
Well, I found a new feature today for the expander... It can be used to convert a PPM stream into individual servo outputs too!
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew View Post
Also, I could use it to convert a Spektrum or S-Bus stream to servo outputs.
Fred
flarssen is offline Find More Posts by flarssen
Old Dec 28, 2012, 09:13 AM
↓↘→ + (punch)
theKM's Avatar
central PA.
Joined Sep 2004
20,165 Posts
I think Jim means that he just needs to get a firmware update into the Nano so it can output the XPS packets
theKM is offline Find More Posts by theKM
Old Dec 28, 2012, 09:59 AM
Xtreme Power Systems
Lake Havasu, AZ
Joined Jun 2005
15,720 Posts
Correct!

The other planned features are still valid though. You could use the channel expander with a Spektrum satellite receiver, or a Futaba S-Bus receiver.

Yeah, datalink or something like that is probably better than servo extension.

We will still have Nano receivers, and possibly even larger 12/16 channel receivers that have the RF capability. Those receivers are large enough where I can include the DivBee module interface, whether it is used or not. That gives me the option to make them a stand alone receiver or use a remote receiver setup. That's win-win.
JimDrew is offline Find More Posts by JimDrew
RCG Plus Member
Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sold JR Channel Expander Clavin01 Aircraft - General - Radio Equipment (FS/W) 1 Apr 13, 2012 06:48 AM
Looking to expand my operation... CyberJay Coaxial Helicopters 14 May 17, 2005 05:50 PM
PFM is looking to expand into the larger scale aircraft. WJ Birmingham Sport Planes 12 Jan 02, 2004 09:31 PM
Expand battery bay in flying wing? navyflier Foamies (Kits) 7 Apr 08, 2003 10:27 AM