- Joined
- Feb 3, 2012
- Messages
- 6,349
- Reaction score
- 5,562
A small Yagi antenna on either end for 900 MHz would work fine, since you know where it is and it's not moving.
This was a thread on how to build a wireless launch controller. Now it's a commercial advertisement with vague inference on why yours is better. How about paying forward a little with specific suggestions on how to make a safe continuity circuit. Or start your own thread with [ADV] in the title. :wink:
I'd be curious to see what Wilson uses for their keyswitch arming/disarming mechanism. It's obviously not a physical disconnect switch, since there's no physical connection between the control head and the pad relay box. My guess is that it's simply in series with the firing button... no keyswitch, no firing signal to the relay box.
And to the gentleman who thinks that this is an inappropriate response to the origin of this thread, I will quote llobdelljr's original post for this thread: "Does anyone have plans/suggestions for building/buying a one pad wireless launch controller with a minimum range of 1000 feet?"
He specifically asks for plans to build and/or suggestions for buying. So if my responses sound like an advertisement... well he did ask for suggestions where to buy.
Interesting. It's not immediately clear how you have the Xbees configured or how the I/Os are being used.This post hopefully will have the schematics for the proposed Shield configured as a Control Shield and a Pad Shield.
This post hopefully will have the schematics for the proposed Shield configured as a Control Shield and a Pad Shield.
What is the intended purpose of the IRLD112 MOSFET on the pad shield that has its gate connected to Vdd? (Reference designators would help!)
I wanted to know the threshold voltage but I cannot find that part number anywhere.
What is the intended purpose of the IRLD112 MOSFET on the pad shield that has its gate connected to Vdd? (Reference designators would help!)
I wanted to know the threshold voltage but I cannot find that part number anywhere.
Sorry, try IRFD112.
Interesting. It's not immediately clear how you have the Xbees configured or how the I/Os are being used.
If one is going to go to the trouble of making a board layout, supporting more than one channel would be nice. The XBee can handle up to 15 DIOs, I think. Seems like at least four relays would fit in the Arduino form factor.
Reverse Battery protection.
It would be cheaper and just as effective to connect the relay coil to "BAT" instead of "PWR".
Are those two lonely ground symbols the same net as those labelled "GND"?
If you used the Xbees in DIO line-passing mode (see https://learn.adafruit.com/xbee-radios/reference or https://www.digi.com/blog/videos/xbee-tech-tip-digital-io-line-passing-with-xbee/ ) then you could skip needing the Arduinos completely. Just an idea.The XBee units are configured in transparent mode, essentially the two Arduino units would be able to send and receive serial information between them.
If you used the Xbees in DIO line-passing mode (see https://learn.adafruit.com/xbee-radios/reference or https://www.digi.com/blog/videos/xbee-tech-tip-digital-io-line-passing-with-xbee/ ) then you could skip needing the Arduinos completely. Just an idea.[/url]
I think DIO line passing is only available in the 802.15.4 modules. I am using 900HP modules to get a reliable range.
From reading the datasheet, I'm pretty sure (though not positive) that it is supported in the 900HP, but you'd have to try setting it up in XCTU to be sure.I think DIO line passing is only available in the 802.15.4 modules. I am using 900HP modules to get a reliable range.
From reading the datasheet, I'm pretty sure (though not positive) that it is supported in the 900HP, but you'd have to try setting it up in XCTU to be sure.
I wonder if anyone would be interested in a DIY Wilson F/X wireless based system kit.
How would that work?True, however, I was attempting to isolate the spike from the recycling diode when the relay is released, since the shield will provide the power to the Arduino I was being extra careful.
Yes they are on the same node. I can change them if you think it is appropriate.
How would that work?
When Q1 turns off the relay coil is isolated from ground. The only way that could change is if the voltage on the drain of Q1 became negative so that the body diode conducts except that the relay is pulling it high. Or the voltage could rise high enough to push Q1 into breakdown but it can't do that because of D3.
Because the IRFD112 is avalanche rated, you don't even need the diode on the relay coil. Although I would still use it.
Q2 is a waste of space and because of the marginal ratings of the IRFD112 it could prevent the circuit from pulling in the relay under some conditions.
They must be the same net or the circuit will not work.
I can see several single point failure modes that would result in an energized output. With no warning unless you tap the clips together.
1) RLY1 contacts shorted. A not uncommon failure mode.
2) Q1 fails energizing RLY1
3) The Arduino fails turning on Q1.
At the bare minimum there should be an audible warning if the relay is closed. Better would be to include that and remove the single point failure modes.
The simplest being to have the relay switch the high side when the arm key switch on the controller is enabled. Then use a low Rds(on) FET to switch the low side. You might need a FET driver to fully enhance it. (The MIC5018 is my favorite.)
In addition a pad side safe/arm switch that disconnects the igniter outputs from the electronics is a very good idea. (DARS has had good results with 20A DPDT toggle switches.) Otherwise this system is totally dependent on the software operating correctly. Proving software correctness (not only what you write but in the Arduino libraries and in the XBee) is hard.
The keyswitch is wasted as it serves no useful purpose.
Enter your email address to join: