The Revo and standards

User avatar
LewisPolk
Posts: 2318
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2000 5:00 am

The Revo and standards

Post by LewisPolk » Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:10 pm

Dear All,

In the model airplane, car and boat fields, the standards all conform to the FCC world and must be listed by them. Each maker has his own operating system and no part is interoperable with any other makers. Futaba, JR, K.O., Hitec and a dozen others all on the same 2.4 bandwith, but cannot share transmitters or receivers. Only servos are interchangeable, but nothing else and the AMA does not try to standardize anything else other than to confirm FCC listings. They do offer flight insurance, so they need to check that the quality is correct. This works well and there is not discussion about standards. R/C for trains doesn't have that crash risk, so I don't understand the worry about standards for r/c.

In DCC there is a standard for a signal packets, but most equipment seems to be custom to some extent. The signal in r/c is standardized to the FCC requirements and is tightly controlled that way.

The signals in 2.4 are wide band and 1,000,000 or so signals work side to side and can jump from one to another if one interferes with another. Thus, there are no glitches or interferences from one to another. It's also approved for use anywhere in the world, so you can travel with your system and run on any track wherever you go.

All the best,
Lewis Polk

Ron McCormick
Associate Member
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 6:52 pm

Post by Ron McCormick » Sun Sep 15, 2013 1:56 am

Lewis, are you stating that the Revolution uses a standard 2.4 GHz protocol (Zigbee) where the other remote control (wireless) systems use proprietary communications protocols?

I'd have to agree that in this "view" the Revo meets standards more than any other wireless system.

Ron

robert sumsion
Associate Member
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 7:32 pm

Post by robert sumsion » Sun Sep 15, 2013 7:20 am

Ron McCormick wrote:Lewis, are you stating that the Revolution uses a standard 2.4 GHz protocol (Zigbee) where the other remote control (wireless) systems use proprietary communications protocols?

I'd have to agree that in this "view" the Revo meets standards more than any other wireless system.

Ron

I think I will get my eyes checked, I don't see any of these statements being made by Lewis.

Zigbee is not mentioned, but the ability to address more than one receiver is - which is the point that Lewis makes. That in itself does not mean that the Revo or any other R/C transmitter/receiver is more or less compliant (or proprietary) with the 2.4Gig specification.
regards,

Robert 'Doddy' Sumsion

---------- Recreating the Virginian Railway in G scale ---------- "You don't know what you don't know"

MParsons
Associate Member
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 4:03 pm

Other 2.4 ghz Applications

Post by MParsons » Sun Sep 15, 2013 1:19 pm

The posts got me thinking. It should be easy to set one of the switch controller "outlets" to instant (or one second) and use it as a wireless switch in parallel to a garage door opener push button. Or any of the multitude of appliance r/c applications flooding the market. The smoke board could control your low voltage driveway lights (or a string of lights in model buildings)..

Stan Cedarleaf
Associate Member
Posts: 2592
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 4:00 am

Post by Stan Cedarleaf » Sun Sep 15, 2013 2:14 pm

MParsons wrote:The posts got me thinking. It should be easy to set one of the switch controller "outlets" to instant (or one second) and use it as a wireless switch in parallel to a garage door opener push button. Or any of the multitude of appliance r/c applications flooding the market. The smoke board could control your low voltage driveway lights (or a string of lights in model buildings)..
What inquiring, inventive and curious minds can come up with!?!?!?! :) :D :)

Sounds like some fun "experiments"..... :D :)
Image
In May 2015, the PCSRR became a Fallen Flag Railroad
http://1stclass.mylargescale.com/stance ... len_x.html

Ron McCormick
Associate Member
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 6:52 pm

Post by Ron McCormick » Sun Sep 15, 2013 7:40 pm

So now I cannot see what the point is :(

p.s. The radios in the Revo are Zigbee.

User avatar
LewisPolk
Posts: 2318
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2000 5:00 am

Post by LewisPolk » Mon Sep 16, 2013 3:30 pm

Dear All,

Yes, we use a " zigby" like protocol that meets the same standards. Don't forget we are using a Texas Instrument chip that is a major 2.4Ghz industrial chip. One of the typical uses is to read gas and electric meters from outside the house, without having to go into each users house every month.

A main feature is that you can simultaneously operate hundreds of devices from the one chip in the transmitter without any visible degradation. I'm not an engineer, so I can't give you the number of signals per second, but it is impressive.

However, the FCC only checks the signal itself and not the protocols used. There are industry standards that are set for industrial use. It does also check to make sure that the signal does not interfere with other home devices like T.V.s.

All the best,

Lewis Polk

Ron McCormick
Associate Member
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 6:52 pm

Post by Ron McCormick » Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:12 am

TI ZigBee chips:

http://www.ti.com/lsds/ti/analog/zigbee ... +OT+zigbee

I think the ZigBee protocol is locked into these chips.

Ron

dbbotkin
Associate Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 4:42 pm

Zigbee and IEEE 802.15.4

Post by dbbotkin » Tue Oct 01, 2013 11:55 pm

Just clarify:IEEE 802.15.4 is the basis for Zigbee and 802.15.4 is what the Revo TI radio chip is using to communicate. In its present implementation, it is not Zigbee, not even close! The Zigbee protocol "stack" is a huge program compared to the code space of the ATMega88 MPU in the current Revo TX and RX. Among other things, Zigbee supports devices from multiple manufacturers seamlessly in most cases and I doubt that will ever be the case with Revo.

What we have is a proprietary system running on hardware that might be considered "off the shelf" in that it might be possible to replace the code, not that one would need to. The equipment that is used to control the railway is well thought out and very user-friendly.

Some might want to tinker. My little project was to come up with a way to automatically route a consist through multiple blocks with one button-press. This was accomplished after hours of (!%$#&^%$$## *see below) to figure out what the TX was sending to the RX on the switch controller. That was followed by more hours of getting an XBee 802.15.4 radio to play nicely with the controller. Then there was a bit of coding on an Arduino and a keypad to get the whole thing to work. Now I can play dispatcher on my mostly point-to-point railroad while someone else controls the train (that is until I can get the Arduino to do that too)

Hey, I'm into electronics and really like the MOW side of my railway business, I suspect most prefer to see the trains go 'round.

* well, if anyone is interested in 'how', send me a message.

User avatar
LewisPolk
Posts: 2318
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2000 5:00 am

Post by LewisPolk » Fri Oct 04, 2013 7:36 pm

Dear DB,

I said we had a Zigbee like system, by which I meant we could make it do much of what such a system could. If you have some things you would like us to make happen let me know and we will try to do so. While a trained engineer in r/f could work such a system; 99.9% of our customers likely can't do the zigbee programming. Let me know and we will try, though we're busy with closing down the train side now.

All the best,
Lewis Polk

Post Reply