Thread Tools
Jun 02, 2011, 07:48 PM
Registered User
twang's Avatar
No he is referring to general receiver mounting guidelines be it one or several. I am assuming that on the centreline would put the RX behind the motor in certain aspects.

Quote:
Originally Posted by E_ferret
Hi Jim,
I am really getting confused here. The above quote suggests that to improve reception (avoiding blanking), two rx are better than one when mounted in separated locations. To my recollection only a satellite setup fullfills this, not two rx in master/slave configuration
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Jun 02, 2011, 10:12 PM
↓↘→ + (punch)
theKM's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by E_ferret
Hi Jim,
I am really getting confused here. The above quote suggests that to improve reception (avoiding blanking), two rx are better than one when mounted in separated locations. To my recollection only a satellite setup fullfills this, not two rx in master/slave configuration
on a giant scale plane, you typically need two nanos for the channels (one has channels 1-6, tell the next one to be channels 7-12 or whatever). So the two receivers Jim mentions is just to get the channel count, not as a satellite or whatever...
Jun 03, 2011, 02:15 PM
Registered User
So can I have the RX right under the canopy, about 3 inces higher than they are now, or do I need to move them to the turtle deck?
Jun 03, 2011, 11:47 PM
Xtreme Power Systems
Just up is fine. The idea is to try to change the angle in reference to the center line and transmission antenna.
Jun 14, 2011, 09:09 AM
What Canary?
KeithK's Avatar
Jim,

In the Aurora 9 thread you stated "This is why our receivers reboot at 2.1v, and our next generation reboot at 1.8v." Is the next generation what is being sold now? If not, when will they be out?

Keith
Jun 14, 2011, 09:30 AM
Xtreme Power Systems
The next generation will be sold later this year.
Jul 17, 2011, 11:00 PM
AMA # L576
vhoward1122's Avatar
The antenna whiskers on the Nano, should they be placed straight out like in the picture on the XPS website? Or 90 degrees to each other?
Jul 18, 2011, 12:49 AM
↓↘→ + (punch)
theKM's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by vhoward1122
The antenna whiskers on the Nano, should they be placed straight out like in the picture on the XPS website? Or 90 degrees to each other?
the two whiskers form one antenna... keep 'em straight out
Jul 18, 2011, 11:24 AM
AMA # L576
vhoward1122's Avatar
OK. Thanks.
Jul 18, 2011, 12:01 PM
Foam abuser!
crxmanpat's Avatar
FWIW, I've placed these things in tiny spaces and had the whiskers at all sorts of funny angles, never an issue. But I try to keep them in line if possible.

Pat
Jul 19, 2011, 07:55 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithK
Jim,

In the Aurora 9 thread you stated "This is why our receivers reboot at 2.1v, and our next generation reboot at 1.8v." Is the next generation what is being sold now? If not, when will they be out?

Keith
i realize that a low reboot voltage is a required operating parameter for brownout preventition but haven't we as a RC community been there for a while. Most if not all servos quit operating around 3.5 to 4v IIRC so what's the point to continue to develop lower and lower receiver operating voltages when the servos quit working long before 3v? Am I missing something?
Jul 19, 2011, 11:22 AM
↓↘→ + (punch)
theKM's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostRider32
i realize that a low reboot voltage is a required operating parameter for brownout preventition but haven't we as a RC community been there for a while. Most if not all servos quit operating around 3.5 to 4v IIRC so what's the point to continue to develop lower and lower receiver operating voltages when the servos quit working long before 3v? Am I missing something?
protection against bigger and badder spikes in load... I also imagine it's just a thing that they can improve, so why not?
Jul 19, 2011, 11:56 AM
Xtreme Power Systems
Quote:
Originally Posted by GhostRider32
i realize that a low reboot voltage is a required operating parameter for brownout preventition but haven't we as a RC community been there for a while. Most if not all servos quit operating around 3.5 to 4v IIRC so what's the point to continue to develop lower and lower receiver operating voltages when the servos quit working long before 3v? Am I missing something?
Yes, you are missing the fact that most servos operate down to 2.5v, which is why it was important for us to make sure our reboot voltage was well below that. Servos are following the same path that we are, trying to obtain lower and lower operating voltage because of the current loads they cause. Just like 2.4GHz radio systems, they are using microcontrollers to control them. If the voltage is too low, the servo won't function.
Jul 19, 2011, 02:17 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDrew
Yes, you are missing the fact that most servos operate down to 2.5v, which is why it was important for us to make sure our reboot voltage was well below that. Servos are following the same path that we are, trying to obtain lower and lower operating voltage because of the current loads they cause. Just like 2.4GHz radio systems, they are using microcontrollers to control them. If the voltage is too low, the servo won't function.
That's cool then. I wasn't aware that servos would operate down to 2.5v. If that's the case then it makes sense.

What doesn't make sense to me though is the part where you say that servos are trying to go lower because of the current loads they cause. To me that is the exact opposite of what you want if you are trying to lower servo current. If a servo operates at 6v and draws 1 amp for a total of 6 watts then the same servo will draw approx. 2 amps at 3 volts for a total of 6 watts. Seems to me that the higher voltage one goes that the less current it draws.
Jul 19, 2011, 06:58 PM
iva
iva
Registered User
iva's Avatar
I believe that current will be lower as voltage drops. Servo does not know that it needs to produce 6W of power.
The formula should be I = E/R where I is current, E is voltage and R is resistance.


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wanted AR6300 nano RX flyinjrc74 Aircraft - General - Radio Equipment (FS/W) 3 Apr 02, 2011 04:59 PM
Discussion A truly SLICK product (for hunters) realtimerecon Life, The Universe, and Politics 15 Dec 12, 2010 08:13 PM
Discussion Blue Arrow 5ch Nano Rx & Esky 8g Nano Servos daniirwan Radios 6 May 03, 2007 11:07 AM
Just picked up a PHX-Link, Cool Product DavidJ Castle Creations 2 Apr 29, 2004 03:38 PM