ERSKY9X Coding

erskyTx runs on many radios and upgrade boards
ersky9x was a port of er9x for use on the sky9x board.
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

With Reinhard's Split program and using the last short file I produced (...192531xxx), it ismuch easier to see that, indeed, when any third device (FCS40 or vario) is removed from the daisy-chain, the first MLVSS refuses to answer to its poll and only starts to respond properly once the third device is replaced.
While this merely validates what we can already see, it does show the proper sequencing of the XJT polls looking for the correct devices and the second MLVSS not being 'clobbered', but still able to respond normally.
I guess we can now only wait for Mike's deeper digging, using more software tools and logic analyser, etc.

regards,
ozphoenix
ozphoenix wrote: Fri Jan 04, 2019 9:42 pm Hi Reinhard,
Got it! Thanks for going to this extra trouble - it will be useful in this instance, but I think it will also help resolve questions in the future.

I'll install it later this morning and have a look through some files that I've collected, to educate myself a bit more.

Again, thanks and much appreciated.

regards,
ozphoenix
ReSt wrote: Fri Jan 04, 2019 6:39 pm @ozphoenix

I succeded to get a version of my Split program that is working on Win10.

The only culprit is, you must install it (14 files totally).

The zip file contains a setup.exe that you must run to install the program. The program offers a simple user interface where you can select the input file. The output file will be written to the same path where the input file resides.

Reinhard


WinSplit.zip

ReSt
Posts: 1581
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 11:34 pm
Country: -

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ReSt »

Glad it is working and thanks for the feedback

Reinhard
User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17992
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by MikeB »

I've captured the data on the SPort of the receiver with two MLVSS sensors, and can see one sensor failing to respond.
I've created a file with data in it for 1 MLVSS on ID 1, 1 MLVSS on ID 2, both MLVSS and both MLVSS with a vario (when all works), and forwarded this, together with a description of our findings, direct to FrSky. They may not see this until Monday.

I did try changing the APP ID of the MLVSS with ID 1 to 0301, but I still only got 1 of them to respond.
I shall try 1 MLVSS and 1 FLVSS next.

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
User avatar
Kilrah
Posts: 11108
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:56 pm
Country: Switzerland

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by Kilrah »

Does the ID physical ID actually change anything? Maybe you set it to (say) 10, but it still responds to 1...
User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17992
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by MikeB »

Yes, the ID has changed. I'm monitoring the receiver SBUS live.
Single MLVSS sensor on ID 1:
7E A1 10 00 03 40 FA 17 7F 1B

Single MLVSS sensor on ID 2:
7E 22 10 00 03 30 CE 97 7E D7

Both MLVSS sensors:
7E A1
7E 22 10 00 03 32 B3 07 00 00

Both MLVSS sensors with Vario on ID 0:
7E 00 10 10 01 00 00 00 00 DE
7E A1 10 00 03 42 F6 67 7F CC
7E 22 10 00 03 32 B8 07 00 FA

FLVSS on ID1 and MLVSS on ID2 work OK.
FLVSS on ID11 and MLVSS ID1 sort of work, but the MLVSS only responds occasionally.

Two FLVSS sensors by themselves work OK.

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!

ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

Hi Mike,
All good stuff!

Thank you for persisting with this and getting to a point where FrSky will now likely do something about it.

This is the first time I have needed to use 2x MLVSS in one plane (obviously) but I am hoping it will not be the last -- these bigger models are attractive :)

Here's hoping we get a resolution from FrSky soon, in the form of a simple update to the firmware.

Any further information from your further testing would also be interesting to me, so I hope you keep posting new details as you find them.

Once again, thanks for your assistance.

regards,
ozphoenix

MikeB wrote: Fri Jan 04, 2019 10:52 pm I've captured the data on the SPort of the receiver with two MLVSS sensors, and can see one sensor failing to respond.
I've created a file with data in it for 1 MLVSS on ID 1, 1 MLVSS on ID 2, both MLVSS and both MLVSS with a vario (when all works), and forwarded this, together with a description of our findings, direct to FrSky. They may not see this until Monday.

I did try changing the APP ID of the MLVSS with ID 1 to 0301, but I still only got 1 of them to respond.
I shall try 1 MLVSS and 1 FLVSS next.

Mike
User avatar
Kilrah
Posts: 11108
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:56 pm
Country: Switzerland

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by Kilrah »

Weird bug!

The 2x MLVSS setup isn't popular since it's highly recommended to use FLVSS in multiple sensor configs unless you're really sure you know what you're doing. Since the MLVSS isn't isolated you can only use multiple if the batteries share a common ground. It's your case now, but if on your next big plane you need 2 packs in series then the MLVSS can NOT be used to monitor both or you'd be in for some fireworks, need the FLVSS.

Since people with a working setup are likely to just reuse what they know instead of rechecking everything is still appropriate for the new setup one tends to recommend to always use FLVSS to be on the safe side. The small price difference is less than the bunch of burnt stuff people would be left with in case of a mistake.
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

Mike,
Today, after having a little breather from the MLVSS problem, I bound another S6R (a Spitfire) to my QX7 (rolled back to r222c9), instead of the normal 9XRPro, using the Internal Module of the QX7, not the External XJT (in the QX7, I have an Orange DSMx-compatible module).
All worked as expected - all surfaces moved, bind was strong, things looked good. Then, as an experiment, on the ground at home in preparation for tomorrow's flying day, I enabled Double Rate (PB14 is not an option with QX7) - not good - surfaces immediately stopped responding. Disabled Double Rate - things started to work again.
For now, both radios have Double Rate and PB14 Heartbeat (yes, I know there's a hardware change to come for the 9XRPro) disabled permanently.
Can I ask that you investigate this phenomena a little further, when you have available time, please? Happy to help in any way that I can, including sending you data packets, etc.
regards,
ozphoenix
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

Yes, weird indeed!
But, the MLVSS is what I had in stock at present -- bought a bunch for my single battery/single ESC/single motor planes after I ran one battery to LVC and had a foamie to repair :( I had bought the plane used and didn't notice that the ESC was set to 'cut power on LVC' :(

Anyway, thanks for the warning about series batteries and MLVSS versus FLVSS - yes, I have a common ground at present, but might not always.
This B17 is probably the most complex electronics I have set up so far, with 4x ESC, 4x motors, 2x batteries, 1x BEC, 1x FCS40 (for now), 2x MLVSS, 2x retracts and so on - not adding lights or bomb drop at present :lol: :lol:

regards
ozphoenix
Kilrah wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 8:37 am Weird bug!

The 2x MLVSS setup isn't popular since it's highly recommended to use FLVSS in multiple sensor configs unless you're really sure you know what you're doing. Since the MLVSS isn't isolated you can only use multiple if the batteries share a common ground. It's your case now, but if on your next big plane you need 2 packs in series then the MLVSS can NOT be used to monitor both or you'd be in for some fireworks, need the FLVSS.

Since people with a working setup are likely to just reuse what they know instead of rechecking everything is still appropriate for the new setup one tends to recommend to always use FLVSS to be on the safe side. The small price difference is less than the bunch of burnt stuff people would be left with in case of a mistake.
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

BTW, the only warning I have found about the MLVSS is to not put two of them in series - nothing about not being recommended (or, conversely, FLVSS being recommended instead) for systems which require two devices (in any combination, except as noted below).
From both the FrSky-rc site and the HorusRC site (which is mostly just FrSky stuff copied) on the MLVSS:
By removing the OLED screen from the original FLVSS and reconfiguring the remaining circuit FrSky has managed to reduce the size and weight of the original by almost 50% which is ideal for smaller aircraft models. The functionality of the MLVSS is identical to that of the FLVSS except that you cannot connect two of these in series to measure voltages in excess of 25V (6s).

I know that the MLVSS is 50% lighter, smaller and cheaper than the FLVSS - all reasons why I started to use it on my smaller planes, where they are buried away down in the fuse of the plane - in the B25 and some of my others, the FLVSS would be ok size- and weight-wise and justified cost-wise.

Conversely, I see nothing on the FrSky-rc site that says that you CAN (or, further, recommending that you can) connect two FLVSS in series for larger measuring ranges. Do you know that you can do this, as a fact?

Thanks, in advance, for the information.

regards,
ozphoenix
Kilrah wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 8:37 am Weird bug!

The 2x MLVSS setup isn't popular since it's highly recommended to use FLVSS in multiple sensor configs unless you're really sure you know what you're doing. Since the MLVSS isn't isolated you can only use multiple if the batteries share a common ground. It's your case now, but if on your next big plane you need 2 packs in series then the MLVSS can NOT be used to monitor both or you'd be in for some fireworks, need the FLVSS.

Since people with a working setup are likely to just reuse what they know instead of rechecking everything is still appropriate for the new setup one tends to recommend to always use FLVSS to be on the safe side. The small price difference is less than the bunch of burnt stuff people would be left with in case of a mistake.
User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17992
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by MikeB »

ozphoenix wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 9:11 amToday, after having a little breather from the MLVSS problem, I bound another S6R (a Spitfire) to my QX7 (rolled back to r222c9), instead of the normal 9XRPro, using the Internal Module of the QX7, not the External XJT (in the QX7, I have an Orange DSMx-compatible module).
All worked as expected - all surfaces moved, bind was strong, things looked good. Then, as an experiment, on the ground at home in preparation for tomorrow's flying day, I enabled Double Rate (PB14 is not an option with QX7) - not good - surfaces immediately stopped responding. Disabled Double Rate - things started to work again.
I've put r222C9 on my QX7, bound to a X8R (I have EU-LBT firmware on the internal XJT module so that is the only Rx I may currently use with compatible firmware). All works fine with double rate on or off. The QX7 has the heartbeat built in.
Could you try with the Orange module removed? The heartbeat signal is also on the external module connector, so if the Orange module is sending something on that it could cause a problem.
I assume you have the external module disabled. Even disabled, it is possible the module could be coupling the SPort signal onto the heartbeat signal.

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
User avatar
Kilrah
Posts: 11108
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:56 pm
Country: Switzerland

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by Kilrah »

ozphoenix wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 11:11 am BTW, the only warning I have found about the MLVSS is to not put two of them in series - nothing about not being recommended (or, conversely, FLVSS being recommended instead) for systems which require two devices (in any combination, except as noted below).
From both the FrSky-rc site and the HorusRC site
That's a recommendation people with knowledge and common sense would give you.
The user manual for the MLVSS also does have a note about not supporting combination for more than 6s.
ozphoenix wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 11:11 am Conversely, I see nothing on the FrSky-rc site that says that you CAN (or, further, recommending that you can) connect two FLVSS in series for larger measuring ranges. Do you know that you can do this, as a fact?
Yes, 100%.
User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17992
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by MikeB »

I've tested doublerate and PB14 sync. on my 9XR-PRO and it all works OK. Tested using an external XJT module.
To connect PB14, you need to add a wire from the pin second from the top in the module bay to the unused place (pin 2) on J2 (10 way-connector on the right when looking at the board from the back of the radio.

When you have PB14 connected and enabled, you get a tick mark at the right of the display beside the PB14 check box when the protocol data is synchronised with the heartbeat.

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17992
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by MikeB »

A small feature I'm adding to ersky9x is to allow FM0, FM1 to FM6 to appear as "switches" in the DR/EXPO menu. This may help selecting DR/EXPO settings with flight modes.

As an example, setting:
DRsw1 to !FM0 and
DRsw2 to FM2
will select high rates in FM0, medium rates in FM1 and low rates in FM2.

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17992
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by MikeB »

jhsa wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 3:15 pm Mike, just an idea here (probably a stupid one :) ), but what about a sub menu in the Telemetry menu called for example "Manage sensors"??
Perhaps we could then select which telemetry fields would be attached to each of them. If both (or more) have voltage sensors perhaps some Identifier name for each sensor could be created, example "1CL2", meaning sensor 1, cell 2. I know, it looks confusing. If only you could make the name at least one character longer it would be nice..

This would probably mean a rewrite of how the telemetry works and is displayed?

João
There already is a "Sensors" option in the Telemetry popup. You may create names for the custom sensors and handle unknown sensors there.

If the sensor names were longer, I don't think they will fit on the custom telemetry screens as well as their data.

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
User avatar
jhsa
Posts: 19480
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 5:13 pm
Country: Germany

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by jhsa »

Thanks for the Flight modes additions Mike.
Sorry, I didn't see the "sensors" menu.. I guess I will have to be back to the RC stuff soon. Been a bit busy with some work, and that is taking longer time :( Last summer didn't even have much time to fly my models :(
I still check the forum though :) Trying to stay updated :)

Thanks

João
My er9x/Ersky9x/eepskye Video Tutorials
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5uJhoD7sAKidZmkhMpYpp_qcuIqJXhb9

Donate to Er9x/Ersky9x:
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=YHX43JR3J7XGW
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

Kilrah wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 1:38 pm That's a recommendation people with knowledge and common sense would give you.
The user manual for the MLVSS also does have a note about not supporting combination for more than 6s.
Ok, guess I hadn't spoken with any of those people with knowledge and common sense about the comparisons of the MLVSS and FLVSS units until now -- I was just trying to understand if I had missed a written instruction from FrSky or somewhere else, other than the MLVSS one I previously mentioned. Thanks, I'll continue to listen to people with knowledge and common sense and ignore the others.
Kilrah wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 1:38 pm Yes, 100%.
Ok, good - now I know, with confidence from you, that I can do this with the FLVSS when I need to do it and, until then, I am still safe to use the MLVSS for single units and for multiple units if I have a common ground.
Since my largest plane so far is a 5S, I guess I'm safe from the newly-learned perils of the multiple-FLVSS installation for a while yet.

Thanks for your considered advice and feedback :)
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

Hi Mike,

Regarding my 'loss of bind' problem:

A thought occurred to me that maybe I overlooked before - on the 9XRPro, is the PB14 mod also required before the Double Rate option will work or can they be used separately? Since the QX7 already has the PB14 Heartbeat equivalent by default and you are now providing the Double Rate mode as an option there, I guess the answer is no??

Anyway, I've gathered more empirical data for you, but I'm now not sure what steps to take next. I'll write down everything I've noted today and try to make it as clear as possible. My apologies, in advance, for being so verbose and long-winded, but I do not have concrete, numbers- and letters-type, data yet, so descriptive text is necessary, I believe. I had initially set up my video camera and tripod to film for you, but decided that describing those videos was probably no more benefit than writing this text, so I'll try to break it up into related and digestible chunks :)

What I guess I'm looking for next is some guidance from you as to what tests or experiments I can try to gather more meaningful information.

This is where I am up to -- I flew five planes today (total of about 8-9 flights, then the wind came up too strong) using my QX7, which has an Orange DSMx module in the external bay, as noted earlier. Four of those planes were using the internal FrSky XJT module communicating with 4x FrSky S6Rs, one used the external DSMx module communicating with a genuine Spektrum Rx brick. During that time, I detected no noticeable loss of bind/communication or erroneous behaviour though, in light of what I saw later in the day at my workshop, it is possible that minor instances, without catastrophe, might have been occurring (see later notes).

I came home and later started to try to reproduce the 'loss of bind/comms' phenomena. In that, I succeeded, with both the 9XRPro AND the QX7 both experiencing the events but, given that I used the QX7 successfully during the morning, I am not sure why I can now reproduce the fault at home on one of the planes I flew (once) successfully this morning -- a bit of a pattern emerged, but nothing 100% clearly predictable yet, though close.

Before I describe the failure mode again (previously provided in an earlier post), let me clear up some background information. To try to eliminate environmental issues as a possible cause, I performed this series of these tests inside my workshop (which is, for the moment, a 7mx3.5m metal shed, roller door opened at one end, with metal roof but with the rafters stuffed with EPO and balsa models) and also outside my workshop, in the open air. I performed some tests with my mobile phone switched off and also a local Wi-Fi access point (2.4GHz, I believe) turned off. Testing while inside the shed, outside the shed, with phone on or off, with Wi-Fi on or off, seemed to make no difference - I still lost bind/comms on occasions and the frequency and duration of the loss didn't seem to vary with those changes in environmental conditions.

Now, some detail of my radio/Rx environment this afternoon. First, the Rxs, as that's easiest to describe. On my B17, I have an FrSky S8R with antenna passed through a tube in the fuse to the outside world and taped to the underside of the fuse at 90deg to each other. On an AXN Floater (small powered glider) I use an FrSky X4R, again with antenna passed out through the fuse and taped outside at 90deg to each other. On both planes, however, today I left off the canopy to be able to watch the bind LED. I also used a Spitfire with S6R, again with canopy off and antenna exposed, which had been flown once this morning with the QX7 internal module.

EDIT: For each of the tests, I was standing no less than a metre away, often 2 metres and sometimes 3 metres - if necessary, tomorrow I can retry some testing from about 10 metres away, if you think it will make a difference (vis-à-vis swamping of the signal).

Failures (each in a similar manner) occurred with each of the S6R, S8R and the X4R (I'll describe the failure mode(s) in a moment), though I have to say that the S6R and S8R seemed more prone to fail more often and sooner than the X4R (which still experienced failures, but not as much).

Both the 9XRPro and the QX7, which were each tested against each of the three Rx units once they were bound to each of the Txs, experienced failures though, without a doubt, the 9XRPro experienced failures more often and more quickly than the QX7 - as much as 5x-10x more often with the 9XRPro as the QX7. Further, with the QX7, the External DSMx module was disabled and, sometimes physically removed. The presence of the Orange DSMx module (even disabled) seemed to make almost no difference though, if pressed, I might say that removing it made the QX7 slightly less prone to bind failure but I couldn't quantify it. With the 9XRPro, at no time did I enable the PB14 Heartbeat option, as I have not yet made the required hardware mod.

All three of the Rx -- S6R, S8R and X4R - experienced failures. This surprised me, in light of your earlier test on an X8R, so I placed extra tests on the X4R - it DOES fail, though more with the 9XRPro than the QX7. The worst combination seems to be the 9XRPro with an FrSky S6R or S8R.

To trigger a failure, the only stimulus I needed was to tick the enable box for Double Rate and exercise the control surfaces. A partial degradation or a full loss of bind will occur within 15-20 seconds, often instantaneously. To make the failure go away, sometimes it was as simple as unticking the box. However, on more than half the occasions, it was necessary to power cycle the Tx (but never the Rxs) to regain a bind. I'm not sure what other less-intrusive recovery methods work, yet.

The failure events seemed to fall into one (or, progressively, all) of three levels of observable severity:
1. A slight flickering of the Green bind light with no apparent impact on control surfaces being constantly and actively (even aggressively) exercised at the time but no report from the radio of poor RSSI (it's possible I had this today at the field and didn't notice it, hence the reason to leave the canopies off later today and watch the bind LED)
2. A constant flickering/flashing of the Green bind LED and occasional stuttering of control surfaces being constantly and actively exercised at the time and an occasional though infrequent report from the radio of poor RSSI
3. A complete loss of the Green bind LED (Red was apparent), complete loss of control surface movement and report from the radio of no telemetry and loss of radio signal

On most occasions, the failure would progress from Level 1. to Level 3. with time (over 10-15 seconds) but on many occasions, the Rx would go straight to '3' - full loss of bind even as I was lifting my finger from the MENU button from ticking the Double Rate box. On a small number of occasions, immediately unticking the Double Rate box re-established bind, but this did not happen often - in the majority of times, a power cycle of the radio was required.

I do understand that you have said that you tested it at your end and have not had a failure. However, while I cannot yet predict how quickly I can cause a failure nor how severe it will be, I can reliably say that I will see a failure, on these two radios (though, more often on the 9XRro) and with these three Rxs (again, the 'S' series MIGHT be more susceptible, but I don't think I'm ready to sign to that yet).

At this point, I am not sure what steps to take next, though a 'sleep on it' might bring new ideas.

Maybe you can make some suggestions.

regards,
ozphoenix
MikeB wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 10:15 pm I've tested doublerate and PB14 sync. on my 9XR-PRO and it all works OK. Tested using an external XJT module.
To connect PB14, you need to add a wire from the pin second from the top in the module bay to the unused place (pin 2) on J2 (10 way-connector on the right when looking at the board from the back of the radio.

When you have PB14 connected and enabled, you get a tick mark at the right of the display beside the PB14 check box when the protocol data is synchronised with the heartbeat.

Mike
User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17992
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by MikeB »

Have you any idea what firmware is on the internal XJT of the QX7 and on the external module for the 'PRO?

It does seem odd using two Tx and 3 Rx they all show the same symptoms.
On the QX7, rather than a complete power cycle, you could try disabling the internal module then re-enabling it. That will power cycle the XJT, not the whole Tx.

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

The XJT firmware version in the internal module of the QX7 is whatever came with it from the factory when they were first introduced a year or two ago - is there a way I can check that version number? In the external XJT module, the firmware is XJT_141017.frk, the latest fcc (non-EU) one on FrSky-rc web site for non-EU use.
Is there a simple method to power cycle just the external module in the 9XRPro? Maybe switching protocol going away from XJT and back again? Can you update me on the question I had in the beginning of my post, about PB14 and Double Rate together, please, to remove that doubt for me?
User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17992
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by MikeB »

Plug a 3.5mm jack into the trainer socket, then switch the power switch off and on will cycle the power just to the module.

Double rate and PB14 work for me with none selected, just one (either) selected or both. I will run a few more tests however.

I don't recognise "XJT_141017.frk". I've downloaded and kept most, if not all, XJT firmware. I do have "XJT_141016.frk".
I think I'm running "XJT_NONEU_170317.frk" on the external module and ""XJT_EU_170317.frk" on the QX7 internal module.

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

Sorry, my early morning typo madness - yes, XJT_141016.frk, not XJT_141017.frk
XJT_NONEU_170317.frk didn't appear to be relevant to me - should I be running my external XJT on that, anyway?
Am doing acreage work this morning - will try to test a few more Rx units and scenario for you later today, if possible, and post results.
regards,
ozphoenix
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

Hi Mike,
Well, I believe I finally have something predictable for you to look at. I can now reliably induce the failure and remove it. I believe the failure mode is somehow related to Rx Number, though the technical reasons as to why will have to wait for your feedback. Here's why I believe there is a connection:

This afternoon, I took a completely different set of Rx that I had on the shelf and which have not been involved in any testing so far -- 1x S6R, 2x X4R, 2x S8R receivers of various ages (S8R very new, S6R fairly new, X4R at least 1-2 years old). I then took 2 servos and an u/c servo/strut (so I could watch something moving from about 5m away from the test kit), a battery, ESC, 9XRPRo radio with external XJT module and put them all on a large plastic storage bin lid and took them 20+ metres into the middle of a grassed area, completely away from everything. I left my mobile phone in my shed - I believed that this way, there was minimal chance of interference of any type.
I connected the servos, etc to each Rx in turn, bound it to my radio (Rx Number 0) using XJT protocol, D16 with 16 channels, stepped back about 5metres and tried to get a failure by selecting Double Rate. Not one single Rx unit lost bind.
I went and got my telephone - tested each and all again, re-binding each time - no failures - so, scratch the interference idea
I took the entire collection back in to my shed, bound each to my radio in turn (with devices connected) - again, not a single unit failed. Ok, maybe it's not something in the shed, after all.
Then, I had a small epiphany -- try the Rx number of one of my planes. The background is that I only use Rx Number '0' for bench testing -- I refuse to use Rx Number '0' in a flyable plane to reduce any possibility of conflict with another plane/radio/whatever when at a field. All of my planes that use a 'settable' Rx number have individual numbers. For example:
(Reserved for Bench testing: 0)
Spitfire S6R: 1
My flyaway Pietenpol was S6R: 4
AXN Floater X4R: 13
B17 Bomber S8R: 37
I tried Rx Number 1 on each of the five Rx's (with connected devices) -- every single unit of the five Rx's successively then started to fail and lose bind, even though it took 15-20 seconds (usually)
I tried Rx Number 13 on each Rx -- every single Rx lost bind, and it was sooner than with Rx Number '1'
I tried Rx Number 37 on each Rx -- every single Rx lost bind, some of them as soon as I pressed MENU on the Double Rate tick box
I then tried other numbers in the higher ranges -- 38, 65, 71 -- they all lost bind and did so very quickly
To test my theory, I then took my Spitfire out to the spot 20m from everything and exercised the control surfaces while the radio was bound as Rx Number '0' -- I could not get a failure. I then re-bound with Rx Number '1' -- I got failures, but they took some time (20-30 secs) to occur. I then re-bound with Rx Number '38' -- I got almost immediate failures.
I then returned to my workshop and re-set the Rx Number of each new Rx unit to '0' -- as earlier, none of the Rx units demonstrated a lost bind in up to 30 secs of trying.

So, for some testing, please change your Rx Number to a high number - it appears that the higher it is, the faster you will see a failure.

While speaking of Rx Number, I have three questions and one further observation (noticed during the above testing):

Q1. What are the limitations on the available Rx numbers to use in the FrSky/ESky9x system?
Q2. Is there anything special about Rx Number '0' -- that is, will a Rx that has been set to '0' bind with a Tx model profile that is set to another Rx number?
Q3. If a Rx is bound with any given Rx Number, should it not lose bind (almost immediately) if the Rx Number in the radio model profile is changed?

Observation: During my testing, I noticed several times that if I had a RX which had been bound with my radio using Rx '0', then tested its operation (all ok), then switched off both radio and Rx power, then turned on radio and changed the Rx Number in the model profile to (say) 38, then turned on the Rx, it immediately showed a Green (bind) LED and the servos operated. I left power on all equipment and slowly but progressively changed the Rx Number in the model profile one number at a time - the bind did not drop until I hit '15' after about 20 seconds - then the Green LED went out and the radio announced 'lost telemetry'. I was expecting immediate loss of bind when I left the number '38'. I have not yet dug further into this phenomena, so I cannot give you as much detail as for the 'Dual Rate' issue, but it might require further testing, depending on your answers to the questions I have posed.

So, enough testing and typing for me for the afternoon - I hope your own testing can now reproduce some (or, preferably, all) of my symptoms.

Regards,
ozphoenix
User avatar
Kilrah
Posts: 11108
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:56 pm
Country: Switzerland

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by Kilrah »

There are known issues with the internal RF modules of "old" Taranis radios and the SxR receivers where some RX numbers don't work properly.

It's unrelated to ersky9x/OpenTX, just a thing that's between the RF module and receiver that we can't do anything about and isn't fixed by module firmware updates.
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

Thanks, kilrah.

Yes, I've seen reports of a problem with Rx number-related issues with initially achieving a bind, but this XJT module is less than 12 months old and I have not experienced any of the reported problems with binding with SxR Rxs - as you might guess, I have a few -- 20x S6R and 5xS8R. That said, I AM having some problems MAINTAINING a bind and it DOES seem to be related to Rx Number, but only after a successful bind and only (I think) after I go to Double Rate mode.

That said, there is nothing yet that assures me that the bind on higher Rx numbers isn't already 'just holding on' in normal use and possibly DOES break away when stressed, as the Double Rate mode possibly does do.

I wait with bated breath for Mike's research and results, now that I can produce a predictable failure scenario.
Kilrah wrote: Mon Jan 07, 2019 9:46 am There are known issues with the internal RF modules of "old" Taranis radios and the SxR receivers where some RX numbers don't work properly.

It's unrelated to ersky9x/OpenTX, just a thing that's between the RF module and receiver that we can't do anything about and isn't fixed by module firmware updates.
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

Mike, just FYI -- I just now went to by hobby shed and tried this same testing on 1x S6R and 1x X4R (from this afternoon's group) with the internal XJT module of my QX7 on Rx Number(s) 13 and 38 -- in a few minutes of testing across those combinations, I could not reproduce a failure.
User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17992
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by MikeB »

RxNum values should be independent and if you bind with one, the Rx should NOT respond to any other. I see I have a mistake, FrSky RxNums go from 0-63, and I allow 124! I just checked and 64 is the same as 0, 65 as 1 etc. I'll change the menu to limit it to 63.

My XJT is over 5 years old and my international internal modules are also very old. All my newer internal modules currently have EU-LBT firmware on them, so some of my testing is using different firmware.

With early modules, I have problems with the S6R/S8R. They always bind, but fail to operate reliably. From an investigation I did this was due to the Tx and Rx using different frequency hopping tables. The problem occurs with specific RxNums. Testing with RxNum values from 0 to 10, they divide into 2 groups, 0, 3, 4, 7, 9 and 10 in one group and 1, 2, 5, 6 and in the other. With some Tx modules the first group work OK while with other modules it is the second group that are OK.
My suspicion is that this problem is related to the unique number in the Tx module, rather than how old it is, just older modules use IDs that show the problem. I recall someone reporting a similar problem with a newer module or Tx.

If you could, please try RxNums from 0-10 using the XJT and a single Rx.

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

Ok, it does seem as though I am moving down a 'possible suspect' path here - thanks for the additional information.

I'll likely have a little available time later today, so I'll try to do some additional specific testing, as you noted, on Rx Num 1-10 and the XJT. If I get a chance, I'll include some particular bits for the QX7, but my main focus will now be on the 9XRPro and the XJT module, since that seems to be the more susceptible combination.

Just for background information, I have a bit of an idea why Double Rate might be enough to push the bind over the edge, if it truly is something in this area, but maybe you might like to hypothesise some possible more specific ideas?

Thanks for the confirmation about Rx Number limitations - yes, it did seem strange to me to be able to select a number greater than 63, hence my question. I look forward to a correction in an upcoming version. That said (and for that reason) I don't think I extensively used any numbers greater than 63 in my testing. Further, I think I need to do some further testing to get you specific details relating the 'retaining bind across Rx Number' scenario - I'll forward those details after I have completed the specific testing mentioned above.

If there, indeed, turns out to be a problem with Rx Numbers, this would prove to be a major deficiency in the FrSky protocol concept, relative to (say) a Spektrum protocol, where being able to reliably distinguish between models and prevent conflicts is a major selling point (at least, in my mind). Surely, if this is the case, this would be something FrSky would want (or need) to address. Can this not be addressed in a firmware update to the modules? Surely this part of their protocol is not 'cast in silicon'?

Back on PB14 Heartbeat for a moment -- is it possible that the QX7 seems to be less susceptible to this 'loss of bind' issue than the 9XRPro/XJT because it already has the 'PB14 Heartbeat' concept internalised? That is, put another way, are the Double Rate and PB14 Heartbeat potential performance improvements (why you considered these changes in the first place) totally unrelated, or would the PB14 Heartbeat also 'help' the Double Rate' concept??? What I'm getting at, I suppose, is that (according to my understanding) the QX7 already has the PB14 Heartbeat 'internalised', with a hardware mod not required, and it APPEARS to be less likely (though not immune) to see the Double Rate 'loss of bind' issue (than the 9XRPro/XJT). Given that I have not done the hardware mod for PB14 on my 9XRPro and erroneously tried to use it without having done that (so my problems in that area are not really relevant at present), do you see a potential for improvement in Double Rate in the 9XRPRo by me doing the PB14 hardware mod? I am not planning to do anything about the hardware mod just yet, as I do not want to disturb the 'bind failure scenario' until we understand more about it, but this is a question that has been lurking in my mind. Or, are the two totally unrelated and only seemingly related due to the time-proximity of when the concepts were introduced?

BTW - can you provide an answer to this posed question, please: XJT_NONEU_170317.frk didn't appear to be relevant to me - should I be running my external XJT on that, anyway?

regards,
ozphoenix
MikeB wrote: Mon Jan 07, 2019 4:48 pm RxNum values should be independent and if you bind with one, the Rx should NOT respond to any other. I see I have a mistake, FrSky RxNums go from 0-63, and I allow 124! I just checked and 64 is the same as 0, 65 as 1 etc. I'll change the menu to limit it to 63.

My XJT is over 5 years old and my international internal modules are also very old. All my newer internal modules currently have EU-LBT firmware on them, so some of my testing is using different firmware.

With early modules, I have problems with the S6R/S8R. They always bind, but fail to operate reliably. From an investigation I did this was due to the Tx and Rx using different frequency hopping tables. The problem occurs with specific RxNums. Testing with RxNum values from 0 to 10, they divide into 2 groups, 0, 3, 4, 7, 9 and 10 in one group and 1, 2, 5, 6 and in the other. With some Tx modules the first group work OK while with other modules it is the second group that are OK.
My suspicion is that this problem is related to the unique number in the Tx module, rather than how old it is, just older modules use IDs that show the problem. I recall someone reporting a similar problem with a newer module or Tx.

If you could, please try RxNums from 0-10 using the XJT and a single Rx.

Mike
User avatar
MikeB
9x Developer
Posts: 17992
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:24 pm
Country: -
Location: Poole, Dorset, UK

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by MikeB »

Mostly there is no problem with the RxNum values, they provide a unique bind. There is this known problem with early XJT modules and the SxR where only some RxNums work, but they still provide a unique bind.
As soon as I change to a different RxNum, the Rx stops responding and restarts as soon as I return to the "correct" value.

I have 2 or 3 versions of the XJT firmware between the one you are using and the "latest" 170317, at least one of which (161214), no longer appears on the FrSky site!

I would think, for now, stay with the firmware you have on the module.

The "PB14 heartbeat" and the "doublerate" options do not rely on each other. Doublerate just sends all 16 channels to the module in 9mS instead of 18mS. The heartbeat option synchronises sending the data to when the module is about to transmit. The QX7 has the heartbeat hardware so this is now always enabled.

Mike
erskyTx/er9x developer
The difficult we do immediately,
The impossible takes a little longer!
ozphoenix
Posts: 404
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:51 am
Country: Australia

Re: ERSKY9X Coding

Post by ozphoenix »

Ok, all good information - thanks, Mike.
As before, I will try to get a little extra time today to do some further testing, as promised, and post the results when available.
regards,
ozphoenix

EDIT: No, I don't intend to change the firmware in my XJT just yet - while we've got an issue and a possible test environment, I'll keep using it the way it is - for now.

Post Reply

Return to “erskyTx (was ersky9x)”