Going the other way...

Often forgot about but boats are a great way for the youngsters to get into radio control or even the oldies!
Post Reply
Dodgy Geezer
Posts: 32
Joined: 17 Jun 2018, 09:54

Going the other way...

Post by Dodgy Geezer » 22 Jun 2020, 18:31

I know that the main thrust of this site is the emulation of single channel control using modern 2.4ghz equipment, but I still have a hankering for the old mechanical controls....

It's possible to get old TX/Rxs, but there are few actuators (particularly for boats) around in good condition. So I have been looking at building simple actuators with modern, easy to obtain parts. Here is a prototype I have put together - a compound motor-driven rudder actuator with a separate 'quick-blip' motor control facility.

And there are no Pics or clever electronics! Just a couple of motors, some acrylic sheet, microswitches, a relay, a diode and a resistor....

http://oldboats.tk/single%20channel%20actuator.mp4

Tobe
Posts: 239
Joined: 16 Feb 2018, 06:19
Location: Varberg or Stockholm, Sweden

Re: Going the other way...

Post by Tobe » 22 Jun 2020, 19:31

Nice jobb indeed, hat off.
I think you are main streamer in this forum otherwise I have to rethink my position as I build GG-Galloping Ghost actuators of all kind.

Cheers

Tobe

User avatar
Phil_G
Posts: 413
Joined: 15 Feb 2018, 23:32
Contact:

Re: Going the other way...

Post by Phil_G » 22 Jun 2020, 19:40

I love to see the mechanical stuff Dodgy, our very first R/C model was an Aerokits Sea Commander with a Taycol, homebrew valve radio and an actuator my Dad had made from a wind-up alarm clock, it looked a bit similar to yours but with a huge paxolin rotor.
As Tobe says, you're as mainstream as any of us here, you're doing it where theorists on other forums talk about doing it :D
Only the other evening I was going through my old superregen receivers marking which ones worked, and sorting my Macgregor S/C superhets with crystals as best I could. Its all good :D

So if the QB contacts operate whilst the button is pressed, the motor servo stays put, but if the QB contacts make whilst the button is released, the motor servo moves to its next step in sequence?

Do you have Youtube account Dodgy? its much easier for videos, saves everyone downloading a 70mb file, and it gets a wider audience. Or I could host that one for you (in your name of course)?

Dodgy Geezer
Posts: 32
Joined: 17 Jun 2018, 09:54

Re: Going the other way...

Post by Dodgy Geezer » 23 Jun 2020, 10:43

Ah, Phil, I have a lot of time for the theorists - if they do the theory properly. When you need to work at the bleeding edge, there are really only two ways to do it - trial and error, or using first principles derived from theory. When done properly, the latter approach is very powerful. When done incorrectly you get Fergurson's predictions, and the whole sorry climate change farrago.

I was always most impressed with the way in which theory informed practice during the development of the atomic bomb. You recall the occasion when there was a concern that the bomb could cause nitrogen atoms in the air to fuse - igniting the atmosphere? Konopinski did the calculations and determined that it would not happen, so they went ahead. It must be wonderful to have that degree of confidence in a subject that was only a few years old. Most early modelling tended to be done by trial and error....

You are right about the action. The motor is powered through a microswitch operated by a 4-position cam. The 'QB' is fed to the motor, and the little turn closes the microswitch. In parallel, the pulse is also sent to the self-latching relay, which then powers the motor until the microswitch opens again, 1/4 turn later. There's no need for your resistor trick, as the cam positions can be very broad. And switching resistors in plays merry hell with the circuitry. That was why I needed to put a diode in the QB power line - otherwise we got voltage coming back through the switched wiring and operating the selector randomly...

I have a natural aversion to using the big web service companies. They will be looking to monetarise their monopolies, and I don't like depending on an external service. If I had the time, I would be melting my own sand to make the silica for my computer chips! And having a big audience in these febrile times strikes me as dangerous anyway. Present company excepted, of course!

I can add a video to a web page in a 'play' mode, rather than requiring download. It gets complex doing multiple browser and version support, but i tried putting up a simple video a while ago and it seemed to work. I append an example of one of my small EeZeBilts below - if you think it works any better I will put the actuator up in the same way. First the page (scroll to the bottom), and then a link to the video...

http://eezebilt.tk/RAFmasterpics.html

http://eezebilt.tk/raf2.MP4

Dodgy Geezer
Posts: 32
Joined: 17 Jun 2018, 09:54

Re: Going the other way...

Post by Dodgy Geezer » 24 Jun 2020, 11:35

Anyone find that this method of displaying videos works better?

User avatar
Phil_G
Posts: 413
Joined: 15 Feb 2018, 23:32
Contact:

Re: Going the other way...

Post by Phil_G » 24 Jun 2020, 11:53

Its stop-start buffering all the time for me Dodgy and thats on 35 meg broadband. If for some reason you dont like Youtube, how about Vimeo? these sites are optimised for streaming :)

User avatar
Shaun
Posts: 567
Joined: 15 Feb 2018, 21:49
Location: West Yorkshire

Re: Going the other way...

Post by Shaun » 24 Jun 2020, 13:13

Not bragging but I also have a big fat pipe and its stop start for me as well. :o

Shaun

Colonel Blink
Posts: 138
Joined: 21 Mar 2018, 12:43
Location: Ilkley, UK

Re: Going the other way...

Post by Colonel Blink » 25 Jun 2020, 08:01

I have actually found that Vimeo doesn't degrade video quality like YT tends to.

Post Reply