|
|
||
|
Quote:
For instance I've personally measured three different levels from various Spektrum modules over the time I've been testing them.... |
|
|
||
|
||
|
Quote:
good idea, but i performed this test a time ago, without antenna, and even a finger placed over the antenna connector, and it still works fine. May be, i donīt hope so, my microwaveoven is very leaky. Its made from stainless steel which should block microwaves very well i suppose, sadly i have no leak-tester so i have no idea. I leave my kitchen since then when heating somethig up in my mwo. I was so impressed by this test, that until then i trust absolutely in FrSkyīs transmission pattern. FrSky in MW Regards Peer |
|
|
||
|
||
|
Quote:
The best way to compare the version will be to reflash the same module with both firmwares (as different one from the same batch can be +-2dB different IME). To do a better job of range checking you need to accurately position and orient the antennas repeatably for both tests, you need as much non free space from the ground as possible, and with no metallic reflectors near the test path(wooden ladders etc). To reduce RF power output to allow a reduced range to be used for testing, a microwave RF attenuator could be fitted between the TX modules RP-SMA connector and the TX antenna, say 20dB or 30dB. Then find the limit of one version, then see if the other is longer or shorter. Then to make quite sure, change locations and repeat the test and see if it still matches. Even then be a bit cautious about the results, but the evidence will be OK. One of the big unknowns with Spread Spectrum devices is the Process Gain (or Coding gain) component of the overall system gain figure, of which the RF power is another part. Only the designer will know this (AFAIK) as it's set by the chipping code ratio used in that device. The ratio is in some part set by the throughput data rate needed by the device and the bandwidth available. This is why for us an actual range test is a good way to compare them I think. (LOL, I just suggested we not get technical here Martin |
|
|
||
|
|
|
When performing a range test, it is absolute necessary to place the antennas in exact the same place, in german forums there is one RF guru who have measured the radiation pattern of a 2,4 System. The result will astonish the audience, see the pic attached (for example not for reference)
The long green "rock" is the position of the transmitter, and the rest of the pic shows the density of waves received. The ups and downs can be seen, like an egg-board, are in 12cm (4,7") distance, and the pic is inflated to make the difference better recognizable. Enjoy Regard Peer EDIT: See here to get part of the story click |
|
Last edited by JollyJoker; Oct 19, 2010 at 04:14 AM.
|
|
||
|
Quote:
The hassle is the oven is usually in a house, which is full of reflecting surfaces, so it's hard to really be sure about the results if comparing two systems. What it is good enough for IMHO is checking a TX to see if it's still as good or close too as it was last time you did that test. |
|
|
||
|
||
|
Quote:
In the past I had access to a proper RF shielded chamber at my work, it would have been great for these tests also. Maybe one day I'll have that sort of thing at hand again |
|
|
||
|
||
|
Quote:
sorry, didnīt got you? I use, as wrote, an pc with win xp and physical com port (in fact two of them). A friend also has another pc which i used to test on, but result is still the same, getting of UID and nothing further. Wrote that i will dig out my old 386 with win 3.11 to have another try with this. And i ordered an PIC with this FTDI device on it, just to be shure, meanwhile i go with V1 firmware. Regards Peer |
|
|
||
|
||
|
Range check w/ RP-SMA 50 ohm terminator.
If you want to do a range check in normal tx mode use a RP-SMA 50 ohm termination load in place of the antenna, there only a few bucks. You will still be radiating and any power level changes will be noticed by distance.
Great tool for range checking under full power and finding issues before you crash your aircraft. Derek Quote:
|
|
|
Last edited by derek4610; Oct 19, 2010 at 06:11 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Not a bad Idea, but will not work.
A microwave oven is not a faraday cage for the type of test needed, the RF will refract. This is not a valid test and will not work. Not a bad idea though.
Derek QUOTE=JollyJoker;16326340]Hi Ian, good idea, but i performed this test a time ago, without antenna, and even a finger placed over the antenna connector, and it still works fine. May be, i donīt hope so, my microwaveoven is very leaky. Its made from stainless steel which should block microwaves very well i suppose, sadly i have no leak-tester so i have no idea. I leave my kitchen since then when heating somethig up in my mwo. I was so impressed by this test, that until then i trust absolutely in FrSkyīs transmission pattern. FrSky in MW Regards Peer[/QUOTE] |
|
Last edited by derek4610; Oct 19, 2010 at 06:44 AM.
|
|
|
|
will do, after more tests are done.
FrSky is using a 2dbi antenna, this will add 2dbm, but now were talking about ERP. The output power should be >80 mw measured at the antenna connector. Remember: all these 2.4Ghz RC radio's seem to be following IEEE 802.15.4.
Derek |
|
|
|
||
|
Quote:
You are correct. Channel 8 shows up like that, because I did not have a probe connected to it....just the battery...but if I did, it would follow the order you mention... I was wondering if someone can confirm this from FrSky? If you look at my graph, you will see that it basically has overlapping channels...nothing per say wrong with that, but I am into flying Quads. many of the Quad boards on the forums require a PWM non-overlapping signal (Since they play tricks with acquiring the control signals of the remaining channels from the gaps between say odd numbered ones). As such, if this TX/RX combo is going to be used, there arises the need for a PWM to PPM converter, which is not the cleanest way to go..... I was wondering is anyone has confirmed this, or has any comments? Better yet, any chance of having firmware, that changes this to sequential?? That would be AWESOME! |
|
|
||
|
||
|
Quote:
Still bad as "I think" the update program is only suitable for winxp , vista and seven . It will not work in win 3.11. Realy bad luck to test with 2 suitable pcs and none did work . Trying to help , I have a (silly?) list of things you can do while you wait for the FTDI cable. 1) Check if you have ADMINISTRATOR rights on the pc , if not then this is a problem . 2) Try to test the com port itself by using the suplied cable ,not to update your tx module but to monitor the telemetry data that comes OUT of it.The program comes allso in your CD and you will need allso to have switched on your telemetry rx (or there will be no telemetry data sent back to the tx module). If there is no comunication out then I think you have a hardware/configuration problem in the com port or cable. |
|
|
||
|
||
|
Quote:
Wife : "Darling what did you put in the microwave that just exploded when I switched it on ? " Remember not to forget the tx or video cammera inside the oven !! <JOKE MODE OFF> |
|
|
Last edited by debianhot; Oct 19, 2010 at 10:15 AM.
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | |||||
Category | Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mini-Review | The video for FrSky 2.4Ghz | Chase Wu | Radios | 0 | Dec 16, 2009 02:18 AM |
Discussion | Realflight G5 Combat so far so good! | splitpilot | Simulators | 0 | Nov 22, 2009 07:36 AM |
Discussion | So far... So good | rikks | Mini Helis | 35 | Feb 17, 2006 01:42 PM |
Aerofly Deluxe so far so good! | Gary Morris | Simulators | 5 | Aug 19, 2005 07:23 AM | |
Schulze 18.46K v7.02 - so far, so good! | Jason M | Electric Heli Talk | 4 | Aug 11, 2002 01:25 AM |