By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
Forum sponsored by:
Forum sponsored by CML

Your standard insatallation of FRSKY equipment

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
Andy Joyce04/05/2020 14:56:48
avatar
265 forum posts
54 photos

Continue to see the odd post on this forum and on other sites of lock outs issues when using FRSKY equipment, so pondering what is the preferred setup for reliable operation.

Up to now I have only been using a single Rx and direct power source in my models, but wonder if a secondary Rx and battery should be used particularly if an ignition system is present. Certainly confused as to what secondary Rx type should be selected for use with an X8R or RX8R Pro.

Have had telemetry drop outs when flying and what I believe to be an un-commanded servo moment on one occasion, so think I need to rethink my standard installations of RC equipment in my models.

So if we look at the following arbitrary model types, interested to see what others consider as a good installation. A suggested starting point for discussion is offered.

Electric Park Fly; Any FRSKY Rx compatible with model size and number of channels required, single battery, BEC and a single On/Off Switch?

Mid size airframe 2 or 4 stroke glow fuel; X8R, + secondary Rx, single battery and On/Off switch?

Large size airframe with petrol engine; RX8R Pro + secondary Rx, Dual battery with independent linear regulators, Independent power switching to each battery.

The key information that I attempt to illicit is when to use a secondary receiver, Rx type(s) to be selected and when to use dual batteries. Do assume there is no hard a fast rules on this topic as each build and installation is unique to the airframe type and size.

flight104/05/2020 16:52:15
avatar
736 forum posts
37 photos

this is one where it is going to be a lot of personnel preferences, to it needs to be a general guide .

I belive on powered planes at about >7kg you should think about using dual batteries and if 1/5 warbirds 1/3 bi/ vintage planes dual rx set ups with the redundancy function and when large power servos aree used the rb20 should be considered as if one servo fails you don't want it to bring the plane down.

With some of my planes i have a 1/4 scale wwi bi-plane it has two batteries/switches and a x8r rock sollid never any issues (glow asp 1.60 engine) .30% tiger moth rx8r+& xm+ and rb 20with twin 6 cell nimh (petrol engine) , rock solid as well.

All my other gliders and glow powered planes(some scale) from .40fs to 1.20fs engines have one battery and x8r/x6r/s6r ,xm types never any issues, except when on one plane one of the whisker ends of on aerial became partly brocken and got lost telemetry during a few flights until I found out the issue.

Aerials placement should be considered and they should not flop about ie the ends should be supported in a tube or taped in correct location

On having said that with frsky setup if you got a redundency reciever then using a another rx is belt and braces.

Edited By flight1 on 04/05/2020 16:55:47

Edited By flight1 on 04/05/2020 16:59:20

Andy Joyce04/05/2020 17:34:35
avatar
265 forum posts
54 photos

Flight1, when using the RB-20 with a petrol powered engine set up, do you use the ignition battery supply as Battery No 2 or do you have three onboard batteries?

For my 1/4 scale Tiger Moth which has a petrol engine fitted I currently have separated the power supplies for the engine and Rx but wonder if these could be combined in the RB-20 to provide power redundancy for both the engine and Rx.

flight104/05/2020 19:18:43
avatar
736 forum posts
37 photos

In reply Andy i use rb-20 with two 5 cell nimh Battery packs one x8 pro and xm+ recievers the ignition is fed off a y lead from one of the batteries to a ultra ibec (very good), but i have now pluged this into one of the sevo outputs of the sb-20 as the current draw is less than a high power servo and i want it to draw off both batteries(ceeps it all ballanced), but i have onle one flight like that as covid lockdown.

so for you if you got a ultra ibec or equivelent filter I say it's a very good redundancy method.

and in the states many fly with one battery feeding both ignition and rx, but with a ultra ibec feeding and isolating the ignition for a few years now with absolutly no issues.

Andy Joyce05/05/2020 16:22:11
avatar
265 forum posts
54 photos

That ultra ibec looks very interesting, did you buy direct from the US or a UK importer?

Ron Gray05/05/2020 17:45:28
2226 forum posts
978 photos

For me, when using an Rb-20 I use 2 batteries for the receivers and a separate battery for the ignition, no point messing about imo.

flight105/05/2020 17:56:23
avatar
736 forum posts
37 photos
Posted by Andy Joyce on 05/05/2020 16:22:11:

That ultra ibec looks very interesting, did you buy direct from the US or a UK importer?

a few times now direct from the USA paid my 20% (once not) no problems. not the cheapest but super quality and reliability and best filtering and voltage regulating going(very reinsuring to use)

flight105/05/2020 18:05:08
avatar
736 forum posts
37 photos
Posted by Ron Gray on 05/05/2020 17:45:28:

For me, when using an Rb-20 I use 2 batteries for the receivers and a separate battery for the ignition, no point messing about imo.

Yes that works to and in large planes 3 battries is not an issue, i like my ultra ibecs functions

Andy4805/05/2020 18:22:59
1549 forum posts
10 photos

Unless you have a ignition system, FrSky stuff is very robust. Yes you will get the odd telemetry lost, but rarely is that any sort of issue. Not at all sure what you mean by "lock out". All my models are electric and I always use the receiver power through the ESC, and in over 5 years I've never had a problem.

What nobody seems to do is perhaps the most obvious. Log every flight and then after a few flights look at how the RSSI behaves.

This is the crucial test, it shows exactly what is happening in flight, both close in and at full range. You will get the odd spike down to just over 40, but this is still well within the limits of the FrSky range.

Then if all appears well, carry on with your models as they are.

Edited By Andy48 on 05/05/2020 18:23:32

Ron Gray05/05/2020 19:28:59
2226 forum posts
978 photos

On my CDI 'planes I now tend to have the RX8R-Pro plus R9 RXs as this not only gives me RX redundancy but also frequency redundancy too. Can't have too many belt and braces!

Mike Blandford05/05/2020 19:41:53
avatar
645 forum posts
25 photos
Posted by Andy Joyce on 04/05/2020 14:56:48:

. . .
Have had telemetry drop outs when flying and what I believe to be an un-commanded servo moment on one occasion, so think I need to rethink my standard installations of RC equipment in my models. . . .

Are you aware of the problem notified by FrSky of the "lockout/uncommanded servo movement" problem with the "X" protocol, and the recently released firmware update for Tx modules and receivers?

Mike

Ron Gray05/05/2020 21:52:39
2226 forum posts
978 photos

Only problem with the latest firmware update is you have to update all of your RXs too otherwise they no longer work. When you have over 40 that's a lot of work even if you only do a few at a time!

Andy4805/05/2020 22:24:28
1549 forum posts
10 photos
Posted by Ron Gray on 05/05/2020 21:52:39:

Only problem with the latest firmware update is you have to update all of your RXs too otherwise they no longer work. When you have over 40 that's a lot of work even if you only do a few at a time!

If you leave an Sport lead connected permanently to each receiver, it only takes a few minutes before you take the plane out to fly it.

Ron Gray06/05/2020 07:16:05
2226 forum posts
978 photos

Agreed, and that’s fine with new builds but on a lot of ‘planes already built it can be somewhat difficult to get to the RX. Anyway I can’t help but feel that there is an ulterior motive by FrSky with this upgrade (Jumper ???).

Andy4806/05/2020 08:58:47
1549 forum posts
10 photos
Posted by Ron Gray on 06/05/2020 07:16:05:

Agreed, and that’s fine with new builds but on a lot of ‘planes already built it can be somewhat difficult to get to the RX. Anyway I can’t help but feel that there is an ulterior motive by FrSky with this upgrade (Jumper ???).

Possibly, but this upgrade is to improve a particular, but rare bug that was discovered in the firmware. That point was claimed about ACCESS but there are some significant improvements in the range and latency of ACCESS to make it a reasonable development for FrSky.

Ron Gray06/05/2020 09:06:37
2226 forum posts
978 photos

Maybe I'm a cynic but despite the fact that I really like my FrSky equipment I think that this says enough

Mike Blandford06/05/2020 11:36:28
avatar
645 forum posts
25 photos

Perhaps don't believe everything you see on videos!

The "lockout/uncommanded servo movement bug" in V1 firmware has been proven (I've done it myself!), so the firmware needed to change. Due to the nature of the bug, the protocol HAD to change in a way that makes V2.1 not compatible with V1. FrSky did put in some other changes that maybe were not necessary, but at least one of those changes was removed before the firmware was released.

Why should any manufacturer be concerned about "third party" compatibility. The third parties haven't paid anything! In any case, the multiprotocol firmware was already updated to use V2.1 before V2.1 was released. That wasn't made "public" in case anything changed before release (as one thing did). The multiprotocol does support V2.1 protocol.

I also have firmware available that runs on "D8" receivers and supports D16 protocol. This also supports V2.1 protocol (autodetected at bind time).

Mike

Andy Joyce06/05/2020 16:47:46
avatar
265 forum posts
54 photos

Just to be safe I upgraded my X10S software last month along with all my receivers but of course yet to test any of these upgraded systems in flight. Was a pain doing these upgrades, but once one worked the other receiver types quickly followed.

Still undecided if an RB-20 and Ultra Ibec is the way to go as running out of space in my Tiger Moth to conceal both items. So for the moment will simply add a second Rx on all my models.

Andy

Chris Bott - Moderator06/05/2020 18:46:48
avatar
Moderator
6838 forum posts
1429 photos
1 articles

I see there's no V2 RF firmware for S6R or S8R available yet. Does anyone know how soon they mean by "Coming soon"?

At the moment, if I upgrade my fleet then I render these useless.

Chris Bott - Moderator06/05/2020 19:43:21
avatar
Moderator
6838 forum posts
1429 photos
1 articles

Andy I designed and built these units as something in between using a single supply and using a RB unit.

img_20200110_140845.jpg

It accepts two supplies via decent (not servo plug) connectors and combines the two via diodes.
This combined supply feeds directly to the servo pins and also down to power the receiver. The receivers signal pins are routed up to the servo pins.

Each incoming supply is seperately telemetered.

img_20200110_140928.jpg

I'm at the point where I've had a handful of flights by way of testing them in anger.
In the model I'm using one in, I have a Neuron ESC with it's 7A UBEC supplying one side and a 2S LiFe via a switch to the other side. I've set Neuron UBEC to be slightly higher voltage than the LiFe battery, so that is the master supply and the battery is the backup.
Telemetry is set to shout at me if the UBEC input falls below a set voltage, announcing "Warning - systems on backup power" - just for a bit of a giggle.

I haven't thought through how this would work with an RX8R and a "satellite" Rx? But can't see why that would be any different.

I had intended a lot more flying with them by now. After that the plan was to find out if anyone else might be interested in them.

screenshot_20200110-182413~2.jpg

screenshot_20200110-215907~2.jpg

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Support Our Partners
Slec
Sussex Model Centre
electricwingman 2017
CML
Advertise With Us
Sarik
Latest "For Sale" Ads
Has home isolation prompted you to start trad' building?
Q: The effects of Coronavirus

 Yes - for the first time
 Yes - but Ive bashed balsa before
 No - Ive existing projects on the bench
 No - Im strictly an ARTF person

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find RCM&E!