RSS Facebook

RCMF

* *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 30, 2014, 22:13:22 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion  (Read 8570 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JohnB

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Ace
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 43
  • -Receive: 34
  • Posts: 4,538
  • Liked: 8
  • Country: gb
  • No longer an active participant
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #40 on: April 09, 2012, 06:24:54 AM »
I do like this line in the listing

"You install this at your own risk - we take no responsibility for installation problems. The forum is there to help - any doubts use it. Warranty is null and void once this has been modified or installed"

And I hate to mention, has anybody checked the legalities of modifying tx's from the BMFA and insurance perspectives? I know in the past this has been a definate no no, I'm not aware of the position changing.

J
No longer an active participant.

Offline Yoyo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Ace
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 4
  • Posts: 7,408
  • Liked: 84
  • Country: gb
  • Wahey!!
Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #41 on: April 09, 2012, 09:04:59 AM »
And I hate to mention, has anybody checked the legalities of modifying tx's from the BMFA and insurance perspectives? I know in the past this has been a definate no no, I'm not aware of the position changing.

Last time I tried to answer that I got slapped down for reopening old wounds.

I have several modified txs and I fly with a clear conscience.
Doing what you like is Freedom
Liking what you do is Happiness

Offline FrankS

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Ace
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 23
  • -Receive: 35
  • Posts: 2,666
  • Liked: 29
  • Country: gb
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #42 on: April 09, 2012, 10:07:36 AM »
Interestingly the new 2012 BMFA handbook (download from website) has a whole section on CE marking and that it's the importers responsibility to ensure the equipment has a valid (i.e. not fake) CE mark, but no mention anywhere Tx conversions.


Offline Yoyo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Ace
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 4
  • Posts: 7,408
  • Liked: 84
  • Country: gb
  • Wahey!!
Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #43 on: April 09, 2012, 10:10:59 AM »
Interestingly the new 2012 BMFA handbook (download from website) has a whole section on CE marking and that it's the importers responsibility to ensure the equipment has a valid (i.e. not fake) CE mark, but no mention anywhere Tx conversions.

FRSky hack modules are CE marked.
Doing what you like is Freedom
Liking what you do is Happiness

Offline JohnB

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Ace
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 43
  • -Receive: 34
  • Posts: 4,538
  • Liked: 8
  • Country: gb
  • No longer an active participant
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #44 on: April 09, 2012, 10:54:22 AM »
FRSky hack modules are CE marked.
It's my understanding that it's the unit as a whole that needs to be compliant hence why the DSX9 is different to the JR version elsewhere. I will find out the situation because we have a few shows coming up and a couple I'm going to have some responsibility for, I too need to have a clear conscience!

Maybe macman can advise, he seems to be an authority in this area having considerable 1st line experience.

J
No longer an active participant.

Offline Yoyo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Ace
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 4
  • Posts: 7,408
  • Liked: 84
  • Country: gb
  • Wahey!!
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #45 on: April 09, 2012, 12:32:23 PM »
It's my understanding that it's the unit as a whole that needs to be compliant hence why the DSX9 is different to the JR version elsewhere. I will find out the situation because we have a few shows coming up and a couple I'm going to have some responsibility for, I too need to have a clear conscience!

Maybe macman can advise, he seems to be an authority in this area having considerable 1st line experience.

For a public show it depends entirely what the insurer says. For personal use I would suggest it's  different.

As far as official regulations go, a CE certificate is something the seller needs to have to legally sell anything. OFCOM regulations cover the transmit power level and the specs of the wanted and unwanted RF generated.

I can't see how replacing the rf stage of the tx (using the PPM interface to a module or an internal board, not by changing individual components) is any different from making your own battery pack, or just doing the onboard wiring loom between rx and servos, when it comes to the reliability of the system.
Doing what you like is Freedom
Liking what you do is Happiness

Offline PDR

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • RCMF Ace
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 5
  • Posts: 19,359
  • Liked: 253
  • Country: gb
  • Beware Geeks bearing gifs
  • BMFA Number: 63119
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #46 on: April 09, 2012, 12:57:59 PM »
As far as official regulations go, a CE certificate is something the seller needs to have to legally sell anything. OFCOM regulations cover the transmit power level and the specs of the wanted and unwanted RF generated.

For the bits specific to RC equipment, yes. But they also have to meet a raft of general standards for electrical equipment [etc] as well as asserting that the item is suitable for its intended use by its intended user.

Quote
I can't see how replacing the rf stage of the tx (using the PPM interface to a module or an internal board, not by changing individual components) is any different from making your own battery pack, or just doing the onboard wiring loom between rx and servos, when it comes to the reliability of the system.

We've been over this before. In summary there are two issues:

1. Whether the unit is electromagnetically compatible with the host Tx - operating microwave devices in close proximity with microprocessor and memory devices can result in unintended consequences (which is why we're a bit careful about putting mobile phones close to operating transmitters).

2. Whether the "PPM interface" is actually compatible. There are no generic standards for these in terms of impedance, voltages, waveforms, timings etc. In most cases the "PPM interface" is simply the manufacturer's own connection between the Tx logic and his own RF modules. Some work at battery voltage (anything from 6 to 12v) some work at logic voltages (either 5 or 3.3v), and feeding excess voltage into some devices will work initially but cause a risk of unannounced failure days, weeks or years later. In most cases there will be no conditioning or protection at the "interface" (voltage clamping, bootstrapping, current limiting etc) as you might find or expect at a generic interface because the manufacturer knows exactly what the connections will see (for its intended purpose).

Without a detailed understanding of the circuit designs item (2) needs some measurement and a bit of thought (like the reverse-biased diode approach recommended when using Frysky patch modules). Item (1) can only be *really* established with extensive testing, including operation in all modes with the Tx antenna in all possible orientations.

Well you did ask...

PDR
There are no shortcuts on the long, hard road to success. But if your dad's rich there could a limo service...

Offline Yoyo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Ace
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 4
  • Posts: 7,408
  • Liked: 84
  • Country: gb
  • Wahey!!
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #47 on: April 09, 2012, 13:04:15 PM »
Well you did ask...

PDR

Not a problem. I'd still feel safer using a system that's been in use for several years by people with a wide range of skill levels over some ultra cheap no-name Far East system, *or* a 30 year old top branded European system that hasn't been looked after.

CE marking is like an MOT test, but worse - it only tests one or two samples, not every instance, and even then is only really valid at the point when the test is done, there's no guarantee it will carry on working well for years afterwards.

After that it's up to the owner to look after it, in exactly the same way as the airframe, mechanicals and servos/wiring aboard the plane.
Doing what you like is Freedom
Liking what you do is Happiness

Offline Patmac

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Ace
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 22
  • -Receive: 103
  • Posts: 6,990
  • Liked: 128
  • Country: gb
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #48 on: April 09, 2012, 14:55:50 PM »
With any luck the weather might improve enough for some flying in the next few days.  :''
Pax vobiscum

Offline pchristy

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Squadron Leader
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 3
  • Posts: 178
  • Liked: 20
  • Country: gb
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #49 on: April 10, 2012, 18:15:43 PM »
The whole CE marking thing is a can of worms. I've used the FrSky hack modules in pre-CE transmitters and have had no issues whatsoever. In fact its proven just as reliable as my JR gear so far.

I've checked the legal position with an Ofcom chap, who whilst wary, conceded that if the "whole system" compliance theory were valid, just about every computer wireless network in the country would have to be shut down. After all, how can you prove that the card you've just bought from PC World was actually tested in a computer the same as the one you have at home? Of course you can't, and to suggest otherwise is clearly nonsense. And of course, our gear comes under the same regulations!

Ofcom pointed me toward some paperwork, which is at home (I'm at work at the moment), which I now carry with me whenever I use the system outside of my club. One is the FrSky compliance certificate (obtainable from their website). The other is the guidance given to component suppliers for WiFi networks. This quite clearly states that "whole system" compliance testing is ONLY required if bringing a product to the market - ie: if you are intending to sell it!

If it is for *your own personal use* it is sufficient to install certified equipment following the manufacturers instructions.

In other words, if you install a FrSky hack module in one of your old transmitters for your own use, it does not need to be CE tested. It is still perfectly legal, PROVIDED its installed in compliance with FrSky's instructions.

Of course, event organisers may take a different view, and that is their prerogative. This is why I always carry a copy of the relevant paperwork with me. I haven't tried to enter an event with my hack system yet, and may never do so. (Its used for fixed wing sport flying using an old single-stick transmitter.) But equally, I have entered other events, and even the British Nationals using my own designed and built 459 MHz system. But there again, I'm unlikely to interfere with anyone else on THAT frequency..............!!

--
Pete
 "No matter how much you push the envelope, it'll still be stationery."

Follow members gave a thank to your post:


Offline PDR

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • RCMF Ace
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 5
  • Posts: 19,359
  • Liked: 253
  • Country: gb
  • Beware Geeks bearing gifs
  • BMFA Number: 63119
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #50 on: April 10, 2012, 18:21:22 PM »
I have entered other events, and even the British Nationals using my own designed and built 459 MHz system.

So YOU'RE the one who's always hogging the peg. Let me know when you're done with it...

PDR
There are no shortcuts on the long, hard road to success. But if your dad's rich there could a limo service...

Offline pchristy

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Squadron Leader
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 3
  • Posts: 178
  • Liked: 20
  • Country: gb
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #51 on: April 10, 2012, 18:40:21 PM »
So YOU'RE the one who's always hogging the peg.......

 :nananana:

--
Pete
 "No matter how much you push the envelope, it'll still be stationery."

Offline onewinglow

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Flight Lieutenant
  • **
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 3
  • Posts: 70
  • Liked: 8
  • Country: gb
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #52 on: April 10, 2012, 20:46:42 PM »
.......using my own designed and built 459 MHz system. But there again, I'm unlikely to interfere with anyone else on THAT frequency..............!



Not so. There is a small group of people using a 433mHz FH (only hopping not spread spectrum) with open source firmware with re written firmware to opperate on 459mHz. Mixed success at the moment though.
Base units from here http://flytron.com/16-openlrs
You will find links to the shops forum on this site. Can give links to other sites if interested.
Plus, there is an off the shelf system (UK legal) available from 'ImmersionRC'.

Offline pchristy

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Squadron Leader
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 3
  • Posts: 178
  • Liked: 20
  • Country: gb
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #53 on: April 11, 2012, 11:03:59 AM »
Yes, but if its spread spectrum, it shouldn't "see" my fixed system - and vice versa! And since there are 39 "fixed" channels available on 459 MHz, the chances of a frequency clash are remote - though not non-existant!

I have to say that in over 20 years of flying on 459 MHz, I've never come across anyone else using that frequency at an event, though I'm aware there are other users out there!

Yes, I'm aware of the Immersion R/C system. At the moment spread spectrum is not officially permitted on 459 MHz, though Ofcom say (unofficially) that they would treat any request for it sympathetically. As a consequence, I've been trying to get an Immersion system for evaluation, but to no avail! Communications with them are best described as "erratic"! Which is a shame.....

--
Pete
 "No matter how much you push the envelope, it'll still be stationery."

Offline Phil_G

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 147
  • -Receive: 36
  • Posts: 2,970
  • Liked: 183
  • Country: gb
  • 56 and still racing!
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #54 on: April 11, 2012, 12:04:32 PM »
Mine was based on a Wood & Douglas 70cm ham transmitter board and a Pocketfone PF1 receiver.. Was never reliable, needed constant tuning, the rx was too big and I never flew it.
My current 'indoor' set is based on a commercial low-power AM 433mhz ISM module (car alarms etc) and believe it or not a super-regen receiver which works fine!  I use the Bruce Abbott pic 12F675 decoder, its very good.
Cheers
Phil

Yes, I'm aware of the Immersion R/C system. At the moment spread spectrum is not officially permitted on 459 MHz, though Ofcom say (unofficially) that they would treat any request for it sympathetically. As a consequence, I've been trying to get an Immersion system for evaluation, but to no avail! Communications with them are best described as "erratic"! Which is a shame.....

Offline pchristy

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Squadron Leader
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 3
  • Posts: 178
  • Liked: 20
  • Country: gb
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #55 on: April 11, 2012, 17:51:55 PM »
Hi Phil, yes, I had a play with the Wood & Douglas board as well, but it was expensive and complex. Plus starting off at around 12 MHz (from memory) didn't help the final frequency stability! I also had the service manual for the PF1, but by the time I built my own system, the PF1 was pretty outdated. What finally made it viable as a "home" project was the availablity of "off-the-shelf" helical filters!

However, this is getting off the topic a bit. Perhaps we should start a 459 MHz thread?

--
Pete
 "No matter how much you push the envelope, it'll still be stationery."

Offline Phil_G

  • Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 147
  • -Receive: 36
  • Posts: 2,970
  • Liked: 183
  • Country: gb
  • 56 and still racing!
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #56 on: April 11, 2012, 18:01:26 PM »
Sorry that was meant to be sent as a PM Pete, dunno why it came through as a post... I'm not really venturing outside the antique RC board now, fewer toes to tread on there  :-\
Cheers
Phil

Offline Yoyo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Ace
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 4
  • Posts: 7,408
  • Liked: 84
  • Country: gb
  • Wahey!!
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #57 on: April 11, 2012, 18:11:32 PM »
Sorry that was meant to be sent as a PM Pete, dunno why it came through as a post... I'm not really venturing outside the antique RC board now, fewer toes to tread on there  :-\

Seems perfectly OK to me Phil, please keep your knowledgeable contributions coming!
Doing what you like is Freedom
Liking what you do is Happiness

Follow members gave a thank to your post:


Offline pchristy

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Squadron Leader
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 3
  • Posts: 178
  • Liked: 20
  • Country: gb
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #58 on: April 11, 2012, 18:20:05 PM »
Seems perfectly OK to me Phil, please keep your knowledgeable contributions coming!

Hear! Hear!

But is anyone interested in a 459 MHz thread?

--
Pete
 "No matter how much you push the envelope, it'll still be stationery."

Follow members gave a thank to your post:


Offline Yoyo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Ace
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 4
  • Posts: 7,408
  • Liked: 84
  • Country: gb
  • Wahey!!
Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #59 on: April 11, 2012, 18:29:04 PM »
Why 459? Just to be different?

I haven't heard of it as an rc frequency before, what are the ups and downs?

A new thread to cover that sounds good to me!
Doing what you like is Freedom
Liking what you do is Happiness

Offline onewinglow

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • RCMF Flight Lieutenant
  • **
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 3
  • Posts: 70
  • Liked: 8
  • Country: gb
Re: Frsky 2.4Ghz Hack Conversion
« Reply #60 on: April 11, 2012, 22:42:46 PM »

 

RCMF Team

 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 30, 2014, 22:13:22 PM

Login with username, password and session length

BloQcs design by Bloc
SMF 2.0.2 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines
TinyPortal © 2005-2012
Page created in 1.563 seconds with 55 queries.