Getting better resolution out of TX

[JYZoom]

Been looking at upgrading my TX, primary to see if I can get a better resolution on cyclic. Been playing with cyclock and happy with it other then another box and wires on the heli.

I have been in the past setting up my cyclics with my tx travel adjustment set at 100% for Ail, elv and pit for both direction. Then setup the servo arm hole position to get the right pitch range.

From experience on cyclock, I now testing ( not maiden yet ) to have all travel to maximun 150% in both directions on all 3 cyclic servos. Then use the servo hole further towards the centers. The goal is to get higher resolution from the servos and TX to use all that range.

Questions:
- Is this normal ?
- You see any potential impact to the life of the servo?

Jonathan

[mave]

Hi Jonathan,

(sorry, I am no expert in this, but just want to discuss)
If you set the travel adjustment to 150%, aren't you reducing the resolution? you are increasing the "throw" but reducing the resolution. putting on the outer hole will give the same result. The reason being that for every degree turn on the servo, the linkage is expected to travel a futher distant. i.e. less resolution.
right?

Been looking at upgrading my TX, primary to see if I can get a better resolution on cyclic. Been playing with cyclock and happy with it other then another box and wires on the heli.

I have been in the past setting up my cyclics with my tx travel adjustment set at 100% for Ail, elv and pit for both direction. Then setup the servo arm hole position to get the right pitch range.

From experience on cyclock, I now testing ( not maiden yet ) to have all travel to maximun 150% in both directions on all 3 cyclic servos. Then use the servo hole further towards the centers. The goal is to get higher resolution from the servos and TX to use all that range.

Questions:
- Is this normal ?
- You see any potential impact to the life of the servo?

Jonathan

[JYZoom]

please do

Mave,

please do continue to share, that is the ideas of posting this. As mention I have not maiden with this but on bench seems like it is the right direction.

This is a extract of the cyclock (CSM) notes:
Exploits full resolution of the RC link:

Because of the geometry errors in CCPM linkages become more apparent when large servo travels are employed it is normal for the total servo travel of the swash plate servos to be less than the standard (100% ATV) throw. Furthermore, each control (aileron, elevator, and collective) is responsible for only a small proportion of the total servo travel. Where the CCPM mixing is done in the transmitter all this adds up to a big loss in resolution with which the commands are transmitted. Lets assume you are using an RC system with a resolution of 2048 points. This 2048 points has to cover the maximum servo travel obtained with say 140% ATV set. So at 100% ATV you are already down to 1463 point resolution. At a typical CCPM servo travel of 70% you are down to 1024 points. If the collective throw only covers 50% of the CCPM servo travel you are down to 512 point resolution and for elevator and aileron the situation is probably worse. So, if you use in-transmitter CCPM mixing you can be reducing the control resolution of the best 21 century radio systems down to that of a 512 point system that went out of fashion the 1980's!

With CycLock you transmit the aileron, elevator and collective signals at maximum ATV (say 140%) and exploit the full resolution potential of the RC system. CycLock then mixes the signals and transmits the resulting servo commands at 4800 point resolution losing none of the control resolution of your radio system.



Jonathan

[Super-Hornet]

IMHO

If u want finer resolution (without changing servo), u use the closest servo horn hole as possible (nearer to the center of the servo horn).

The reason is that, servo movement is constant feedback and the reading is more in digital steps. In other word, the servo move in a step instead. It is like it is moving with resolution of 1/2 degree at minimum. So, by choosing the closest hole, u gain more precision/resolution.

The bad point of using the closest hole is that, your total servo travel become smaller. U can compensate it by setting higher end point travel instead.

Another bad point of using closer servo horn hole is that the overall response/speed is actually slower. That mean u need to increase the sensitivity of the gyros to compensate it.

SH

[JYZoom]

exactly what I a, doing

IMHO

If u want finer resolution (without changing servo), u use the closest servo horn hole as possible (nearer to the center of the servo horn).

The reason is that, servo movement is constant feedback and the reading is more in digital steps. In other word, the servo move in a step instead. It is like it is moving with resolution of 1/2 degree at minimum. So, by choosing the closest hole, u gain more precision/resolution.

The bad point of using the closest hole is that, your total servo travel become smaller. U can compensate it by setting higher end point travel instead.

Another bad point of using closer servo horn hole is that the overall response/speed is actually slower. That mean u need to increase the sensitivity of the gyros to compensate it.

SH

exactly what I am doing.

Jonathan

[JYZoom]

Great

Love this setup, resolution is great. I did move my 9650 from 5V to 6V to compensate. Four flights with better control.

Jonathan