| |
charliex Heliman Location:
| It would accomplish my point that PCM receivers have a better signal to noise rejection ratio. You cannot filter an analog PPM signal well, because you cannot do any real predicition, you can with a digitally encoded signal, since you know what the rejection limits are, and how to reshape the signal into a more usable stream, one of the key reasons to switch to a digital signal in any device is for fault tolerance, its amazing how much information you can recover from a bad signal.
Ok answer me this,(unless you don't want to play anymore , i've had four shots of coffee in my starbucks this morning so i'm all up and about, and this is very interesting area to me, debate for me makes me think about things more, learn more, and hopefully generates more knowledge) if PPM allows you to better control the craft during times of intereference, why does every industrial radio control system that i know of use PCM, why does robotic comabt use it?
Sure they might get more interference with PPM from the metal 2 metal and charge imbalance, but if both PPM and PCM suffer exactly the same from interference as you suggest, then why not go with the PPM given as you've said PPM is easier to control under interference than PCM.(since PCM supposedly allows no control (before lockout) )
And if the amount of interference is the same, then PCM would lockout, whereas PPM would not ? Especially given that you can reasonably shield a lot of interference that the device generates.
I would say the engine and bearings should be causing a fair amount of metal to metal contact, certainly dissimilar, temperatures varying (which is where the real problem lies), spinning shafts, servos etc etc.
Certainly when i put my scope on the bird it was very noisy,
I certainly agree with you that the PPM can be used to find fault, as you do, no argument there, i just don't know if i agree that its a good enough reason, or not. But thats by the by really, we all have our ways.
Whats interesting, is that you and I both seem to been on the same track, that its important not to ignore the electronic side of the heli, we just have different methods, all too commonly i hear people telling me how they've done it for N years and never had a problem, then watch as they crash every other week, or more. Wrapping antennas round engines, cutting them up, rolling them into a ball. Switching XTALs willy nilly.
I saw a rep fror a heli company crash his bird after losing radio, and after they were fiddling with the XTALs, but yet claiming it was a radio hit. TWICE! |
| 09-05-2001 Over year old. | | | |