Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:21 AM - Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft (gregmchugh)
2. 07:09 AM - Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft (gregmchugh)
3. 07:16 AM - Re: Looking for suggestions (user9253)
4. 10:34 AM - Re: Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft (Jeff Luckey)
5. 11:51 AM - Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft (gregmchugh)
6. 12:35 PM - Re: Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft (Jeff Luckey)
7. 01:47 PM - Re: Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft (Daniel Hooper)
8. 03:01 PM - Re: Re: Looking for suggestions (John MacCallum)
9. 03:38 PM - Re: Re: Looking for suggestions (Dan Billingsley)
10. 04:29 PM - Re: Looking for suggestions (user9253)
11. 04:38 PM - Re: Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft (Ken)
12. 08:26 PM - Re: Looking for suggestions (maca2790)
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft |
Bob,
Could you post a higher resolution version of the schematic that
you provided in a previous post. It is hard for me to make out
the details.
The PICkit 1 Flash Starter Kit arrived from Microchip and I cleared
some space on the bench, set up a PC to use for software development,
connected the starter kit via USB (the LED's flashed as they should),
loaded the Starter Kit software from the CD provided (this does the
downloads to the PIC12F675 provided on the kit board).
I also downloaded the latest Microchip MPLAB IDE (version 8.84)
from the web (the CD provided is an older version). Checked that
the download worked by loading the first tutorial lesson code and
that seemed to work just fine. All-in-all no real problems getting
things up and running. I will write up a short tutorial on how to
get started for anyone who wants to do it.
I will take a look at the tutorial lessons in the next few days. In
fact the first tutorial covers switch debouncing and controlling
LED's so I expect we have the core for the wig-wag software right
there.
Greg McHugh
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370671#370671
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft |
Raymond,
I second what Daniel says.
I agree that C should be your next step if you have gotten your
feet wet with BASIC on Stamp or PICAXE. C is pretty much
the language used for most embedded software.
>From a software engineering point of view it would have been
nice if another language had come out as the leader. It is
easy to get in a lot of trouble with C but most of the examples
you see in tutorials for beginners keep you away from the
problems by keeping the code well structured and avoiding
the parts of C that are error prone. But don' be surprised when
your get some unexpected behavior. It only takes a small typing
error to get some amazing results in C.
I also agree that learning at least one assembly language
is useful for embedded software developers. In addition
to improving your understanding of what is really going on
with the processor, there are times when assembly language is useful
(e.g., low level device drivers, high speed signal processing) even
when the majority of the code is in C. But for the vast majority
of applications C will get your job done quickly and it will
generate fast enough code to get the job done.
I also agree on the recommendation for Arduino. It provides the most
widespread infrastructure support. The development environment for
C on Arduino is easy install, easy to use, and well proven for the
novice.
There aren't too many applications that I can think of that
haven't been covered by an Arduino example already in
existence. Sparkfun and Adafruit are reliable suppliers in the US
and the prices are reasonable. Arduino compatible shields
(daughterboards) are available to interface with everything
you can think of and ARM based motherboards that are
compatible with the shields are available when you want
to give that a try for even more processing power. There
is nothing that has the infrastructure in place like Arduino.
If am surprised that no one seems to have adapted
one of the Arduino autopilots for hobby drones to use in an
experimental aircraft. Maybe someone has but I have
not heard of it as yet. I worked on the software for the
navigation, guidance, and control systems on the original
Tomahawk cruise missile and the capability most of the Arduino
autopilots goes way beyond any of what was done there.
They are called "experimental" aircraft but this is something
not recommended for beginners. Kids, don't try this
at home...
But, it is hard to beat Arduino for developing embedded
control of just about anything...
Greg McHugh
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370681#370681
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Looking for suggestions |
> (I still find it strange that the whine goes away when I turn on the E-Switch
Since the whine is still there after re-routing the fat wires, it seems as if the
whine is filtered out when the current passes through the battery on its way
from the alternator to the radio via the E-Bus switch. The easiest solution
to the whine problem is to do nothing except to leave the E-Bus switch on. Doing
so will not hurt anything unless the pilot forgets to shut it off at the
end of a flight or forgets to shut it off in the event of smoke in the cockpit.
Another possible solution is to install a filter in series with the radio or
in series with the E-Bus diode. Or a large capacitor connected from the Radio
12V supply to ground might help.
As for the radio fuse blowing, what type of fuse is it? The old automotive glass
type of fuses are prone to fail. Even if the fuse is the ATC / ATO type,
I would not be too concerned unless the fuse blows a second time.
Joe
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370682#370682
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft |
I will 3rd that. C is the way to go. It takes some effort to move from
BASIC but it is worth it. Get the de facto C bible: "The C Programming
Language" by Kernighan & Ritchie.
I would also like to suggest that people look at the AVR line of
uControllers from Atmel.
I started many years ago on Parallax & pretty quickly needed more
performance. Then I latched onto PIC because they are very popular in
industry & I had some acquaintances who were professional electronic types,
and they were using them.
The thing I did not like about PIC was that you needed different programming
hardware, software, techniques for different families of their uCons. I
like to use the little 8-16 pin devices & they were difficult to get
programmed in C. On the very small PICs, they recommend you program them in
assembler. (this may have changed by now)
So I began exploring AVR
http://www.atmel.com/products/microcontrollers/avr/default.aspx
and now primarily use them.
I like:
1. One programming environment for their entire family
2. Their Tiny(tm) chips are programmed in C
3. All ATMEL development tools are free & pretty good
4. Very good programmer/debuggers are available for around $100.
Aside from those differences, the product lines among uController
manufacturers are surprisingly similar. So my logic at the time was, as a
newbie, I did not want to go spend a couple of hundred dollars on
programming tools (both software & hardware) only to find out later that the
tools did not support the chip I had chosen or that I needed another
emulator, etc.
It seemed that Atmel made that decision much safer because the software
tools are free.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
gregmchugh
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 06:06
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Open source product development for OBAM
aircraft
Raymond,
I second what Daniel says.
I agree that C should be your next step if you have gotten your
feet wet with BASIC on Stamp or PICAXE. C is pretty much
the language used for most embedded software.
>From a software engineering point of view it would have been
nice if another language had come out as the leader. It is
easy to get in a lot of trouble with C but most of the examples
you see in tutorials for beginners keep you away from the
problems by keeping the code well structured and avoiding
the parts of C that are error prone. But don' be surprised when
your get some unexpected behavior. It only takes a small typing
error to get some amazing results in C.
I also agree that learning at least one assembly language
is useful for embedded software developers. In addition
to improving your understanding of what is really going on
with the processor, there are times when assembly language is useful
(e.g., low level device drivers, high speed signal processing) even
when the majority of the code is in C. But for the vast majority
of applications C will get your job done quickly and it will
generate fast enough code to get the job done.
I also agree on the recommendation for Arduino. It provides the most
widespread infrastructure support. The development environment for
C on Arduino is easy install, easy to use, and well proven for the
novice.
There aren't too many applications that I can think of that
haven't been covered by an Arduino example already in
existence. Sparkfun and Adafruit are reliable suppliers in the US
and the prices are reasonable. Arduino compatible shields
(daughterboards) are available to interface with everything
you can think of and ARM based motherboards that are
compatible with the shields are available when you want
to give that a try for even more processing power. There
is nothing that has the infrastructure in place like Arduino.
If am surprised that no one seems to have adapted
one of the Arduino autopilots for hobby drones to use in an
experimental aircraft. Maybe someone has but I have
not heard of it as yet. I worked on the software for the
navigation, guidance, and control systems on the original
Tomahawk cruise missile and the capability most of the Arduino
autopilots goes way beyond any of what was done there.
They are called "experimental" aircraft but this is something
not recommended for beginners. Kids, don't try this
at home...
But, it is hard to beat Arduino for developing embedded
control of just about anything...
Greg McHugh
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370681#370681
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft |
Jeff,
On the PIC vs AVR question I am also getting the feeling that PIC
may not be the best long-term choice. Bob has some PIC's in
stock and has a board designed so I have no issue with supporting
a software application for the wig-wag on that module. As I noted
before I have no real experience with PIC, or with AVR for that
matter, but I do see that PIC development tools are not universal.
When I looked at adding a PICkit 3 Debug Express (their $45 low
end debugging tool) to get real time debugging I found that I
would have to also add an interface board ($9) then a debug board for
each of the chips that do not have onboard debug support. The
interface board essentially has a version of the chip in a larger
DIP package to include the debugging support. Each of these
goes for $25. So, as you change processors in the PIC line you
are looking at additional cost for development tools. If Atmel
works around this with universal tools then I think that is a
significant plus in their favor.
Not sure if the consistency between the general AVR chips and
Arduino plays into this. Similar to PIC and PICAxe but not
quite the same since Arduino runs compiled C code. Can a
generic AVR chip be made Arduino compatible with
the download of the Arduino Loader onto the chip?
Greg McHugh
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370721#370721
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft |
Greg,
I haven't had the time to play w/ Arduinos (but I know many people who
have). I believe that Arduinos are AVR chips just like PICAXE are PICs and
accomplish the same mission (i.e. making the chip more user-friendly) but I
think they suffer a performance hit, also.
I'm not familiar enough w/ Arduino to answer your question.
-Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
gregmchugh
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 10:49
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Open source product development for OBAM
aircraft
Jeff,
On the PIC vs AVR question I am also getting the feeling that PIC
may not be the best long-term choice. Bob has some PIC's in
stock and has a board designed so I have no issue with supporting
a software application for the wig-wag on that module. As I noted
before I have no real experience with PIC, or with AVR for that
matter, but I do see that PIC development tools are not universal.
When I looked at adding a PICkit 3 Debug Express (their $45 low
end debugging tool) to get real time debugging I found that I
would have to also add an interface board ($9) then a debug board for
each of the chips that do not have onboard debug support. The
interface board essentially has a version of the chip in a larger
DIP package to include the debugging support. Each of these
goes for $25. So, as you change processors in the PIC line you
are looking at additional cost for development tools. If Atmel
works around this with universal tools then I think that is a
significant plus in their favor.
Not sure if the consistency between the general AVR chips and
Arduino plays into this. Similar to PIC and PICAxe but not
quite the same since Arduino runs compiled C code. Can a
generic AVR chip be made Arduino compatible with
the download of the Arduino Loader onto the chip?
Greg McHugh
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370721#370721
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft |
Yes, check out this fairly minimal implementation here:
http://arduino.cc/en/uploads/Main/Arduino-Pro-schematic.pdf
U2 is the 3.3v or 5v regulator, depending on the board variant, and the odd-looking
0.1uF cap (C2) coupled to DTR allows the serial dongle to reset the chip.
This makes programming the Arduino simpler with many of the USB<->serial TTL
converters out there. (the chip must be reset to enter the bootloader, and if
it times out before programming begins, it will not work. This allows the Arduino
IDE to enter the bootloader/programming mode without requiring the user to
press reset)
Additionally, following the 'FTDI Basic' header convention at JP5 gives you several
options for plug-and-play arduino programmers. (Make sure you pick the right
one, either 3.3v or 5v!)
And don't forget the ISP port JP3 so you can load the Arduino bootloader, or alternately
load programs with AVR Studio and an AVR ISP device, without taking
the chip out of the board.
Overall, making an Arduino clone should be pretty straightforward.
--Daniel
On Apr 13, 2012, at 1:49 PM, gregmchugh wrote:
> Can a
> generic AVR chip be made Arduino compatible with
> the download of the Arduino Loader onto the chip?
>
> Greg McHugh
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Looking for suggestions |
The Whine is a function of ripple in the output Voltage of the Alternator
and it is dependent on current flow.
Depending on how you have wired things up when you turn the E bus on you are
most likely reducing the current being
drawn from the main Alternator. Less Current, less voltage sag from the
Peak Voltage on the Main Buss and therefore less
whine. I would re-visit all of the connections in the Main Buss to main
alternator.
The Voltage regulation needs to be checked as well. Is it Internal or
external? Check the condition of the Alternator
Slip rings and brushes if these are ok sometimes replacing the diode pack
gets rid of a noisy diode.
If no joy with the above try getting rid of it by installing an output
capacitor and is this doesn't solve the problem
investigate a high current Loss Pass filter arrangement with an Choke in
series and the filter capacitor in Parallel.
You can buy these high current chokes these days quite easily from a Car
Audio specialist supply house.
Cheers
John MacCallum
VH-DUU
41016
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of user9253
Sent: Saturday, 14 April 2012 12:12 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Looking for suggestions
--> <fran4sew@banyanol.com>
> (I still find it strange that the whine goes away when I turn on the
> E-Switch
Since the whine is still there after re-routing the fat wires, it seems as
if the whine is filtered out when the current passes through the battery on
its way from the alternator to the radio via the E-Bus switch. The easiest
solution to the whine problem is to do nothing except to leave the E-Bus
switch on. Doing so will not hurt anything unless the pilot forgets to shut
it off at the end of a flight or forgets to shut it off in the event of
smoke in the cockpit.
Another possible solution is to install a filter in series with the radio
or in series with the E-Bus diode. Or a large capacitor connected from the
Radio 12V supply to ground might help.
As for the radio fuse blowing, what type of fuse is it? The old automotive
glass type of fuses are prone to fail. Even if the fuse is the ATC / ATO
type, I would not be too concerned unless the fuse blows a second time.
Joe
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370682#370682
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Looking for suggestions |
Thanks Joe and John, that gives me some more to think about and tinker with.
Unfortunately the alternator is tucked into the back of a Rotax 912S and the
only way to get to it would be to pull the engine. Will try several of the other
things first and then may just live with it for as long as I can.
Appreciate the thoughts and suggestions,
Dan
________________________________
From: user9253 <fran4sew@banyanol.com>
Sent: Fri, April 13, 2012 7:11:55 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Looking for suggestions
> (I still find it strange that the whine goes away when I turn on the E-Switch
Since the whine is still there after re-routing the fat wires, it seems as if
the whine is filtered out when the current passes through the battery on its way
from the alternator to the radio via the E-Bus switch. The easiest solution to
the whine problem is to do nothing except to leave the E-Bus switch on. Doing
so will not hurt anything unless the pilot forgets to shut it off at the end of
a flight or forgets to shut it off in the event of smoke in the cockpit.
Another possible solution is to install a filter in series with the radio or
in series with the E-Bus diode. Or a large capacitor connected from the Radio
12V supply to ground might help.
As for the radio fuse blowing, what type of fuse is it? The old automotive
glass type of fuses are prone to fail. Even if the fuse is the ATC / ATO type,
I would not be too concerned unless the fuse blows a second time.
Joe
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370682#370682
Message 10
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Looking for suggestions |
I was not thinking very clearly when I posted above that the alternator current
passes through the battery on its way to the radio via the E-bus switch. The
moving electrons get closer to the battery but do not pass through it.
The filter suggested by John MacCallum is worth a try.
I am curious to know if the diode has anything to do with the alternator whine.
With the E-bus switch remaining off, short across the diode with a jumper to
see if the whine goes away.
The alternator on the Rotax 912 is actually a single phase dynamo with permanent
magnets. Other than a wire breaking, there is not very much that can go wrong
with it. The permanent magnets are integral with the flywheel. As long
as the engine is running, so are the magnets spinning with the flywheel. The
external voltage regulator also rectifies the AC output of the dynamo.
It is not as easy to smooth out the AC ripple of the Rotax single phase dynamo
compared to a 3 phase alternator.
Joe
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370753#370753
Message 11
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Open source product development for OBAM aircraft |
Another option is a $20. Atmel Butterfly demo board from digi-key. It is
based on the Atmel 169 and has many on board capabilities to grow into.
For example I use a Butterfly to monitor amphib gear position, hydraulic
pressure, engine rpm and to trigger appropriate voice alerts. It also
integrates EFI pulses and displays fuel flow and fuel remaining for me
on its aphanumeric LCD display. Not bad for $20. of hardware. The
butterfly comes with a 3 volt coin cell or it accepts external power and
it also just needs a serial (RS232) cable to program it.
Ken
On 13/04/2012 4:45 PM, Daniel Hooper wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Daniel
> Hooper<enginerdy@gmail.com>
>
> Yes, check out this fairly minimal implementation here:
>
> http://arduino.cc/en/uploads/Main/Arduino-Pro-schematic.pdf
>
> U2 is the 3.3v or 5v regulator, depending on the board variant, and
> the odd-looking 0.1uF cap (C2) coupled to DTR allows the serial
> dongle to reset the chip. This makes programming the Arduino simpler
> with many of the USB<->serial TTL converters out there. (the chip
> must be reset to enter the bootloader, and if it times out before
> programming begins, it will not work. This allows the Arduino IDE to
> enter the bootloader/programming mode without requiring the user to
> press reset)
>
> Additionally, following the 'FTDI Basic' header convention at JP5
> gives you several options for plug-and-play arduino programmers.
> (Make sure you pick the right one, either 3.3v or 5v!) And don't
> forget the ISP port JP3 so you can load the Arduino bootloader, or
> alternately load programs with AVR Studio and an AVR ISP device,
> without taking the chip out of the board.
>
> Overall, making an Arduino clone should be pretty straightforward.
>
> --Daniel
>
> On Apr 13, 2012, at 1:49 PM, gregmchugh wrote:
>
>> Can a generic AVR chip be made Arduino compatible with the download
>> of the Arduino Loader onto the chip?
>>
>> Greg McHugh
>
Message 12
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Looking for suggestions |
I'm not familiar with the Rotax Alternator/ Dynamo
A Dynamo is a DC device that is self exciting but an Alternator can be
either self exciting or externally excited.
Don't short out the Diode because if it's a Alternator you will induce
a dead short to ground.
I just looked at the Circuit diagram. From the diagram it appears to be an
Alternator. If Joe is correct with it being only single phase output then
that is the source of the whine. The Ripple frequency will be twice the
Alternators RPM. Probably exactly in the right range for it to be
annoying in the Headset.
Switching the external Alternator on reduces the current flow from the
Internal and transfers it to the other. ( the one with the highest output
Voltage wins)
If you want to stick with the Internal Alternator you really don't have
much choice but to try a Low Pass Filter as I suggested.
I would leave the External Alternator on and run off it if it has the Capacity
to do that.
cheers
John MacCallum
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=370761#370761
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|