×

Notice

The forum is in read only mode.
  1. Forum
  3. Development
  5. Protocol Development
  7. Frsky compatibility

Frsky compatibility

More
23 Mar 2014 00:40 #21740 by Hexperience
Replied by Hexperience on topic Frsky compatibility
No issue. As you said just reporting that it's working so far and that I think I have it correctly wired for telemetry. I wasn't sure if it was enabled yet.

Cheers!
There are 10 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary and those that don't.
More
23 Mar 2014 12:56 #21750 by Hexperience
Replied by Hexperience on topic Frsky compatibility
Not sure, but I may have messed up my devo12.

I now have weird lines running across the screen, or some kind of color shift. Some thing is wrong with it.

Also, when I select PPM protocol for simulators my voltage displays at a steady 4.2v, when I select devo or dsmx protocol, it shows steady 4.17. However, if I select SLT or Frsky the voltage display flickers between 4.13-4.17

I must have wired something wrong?
There are 10 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary and those that don't.
More
09 May 2014 23:35 #23091 by PhracturedBlue
Replied by PhracturedBlue on topic Frsky compatibility
I got a few frsky telemetry connectors today (HUB, voltage and temp monitors) so I'll start work on telemetry for Frsky soon. I'm not sure about the S.Port stuff. It appears to be a different protocol. We'll have to see.
More
10 May 2014 21:07 #23120 by PhracturedBlue
Replied by PhracturedBlue on topic Frsky compatibility
Well, I got the Hub, and after a while playing around with my Frsky equipment, I figured out that it doesn't actually support the Frsky data hub. I can read RSSI, V1, and V2 directly from the Rx, but the Hub isn't supported.

So now I've ordered 2 new receivers (one 'D' supporting the hub, and an 'X' using S.Port). I also ordered an S.Port telemetry sensor. So hopefully with all that, i can actually get full Telemetry support functioning.
More
11 May 2014 08:59 #23136 by robca
Replied by robca on topic Frsky compatibility
What is the status of the FrSky protocol?

I'm planning to replace a Lemon Rx PPM (which is only 6 channels) with a DR4-ii (which can output 8 channels as PPM) in one of my quads, but I wonder if it's safe enough to use at this point (I love Deviation Tx with the Lemon Rx, of which I have a few)

And, yes, I understand I need to add the right module, it has been sitting in a drawer for some time :)
More
11 May 2014 13:40 #23138 by PhracturedBlue
Replied by PhracturedBlue on topic Frsky compatibility
Frsky seems to work well for Tx in the nightly builds. There is no telemetry yet though. I have not range tested it either, though I don't expect that to be an issue since the Skyartec protocol has good range.

That said, it has only seen very limited testing by others than myself. The DSM2/X protocol was exceptionally difficult to get working robustly on everyone's hardware. I don't expect the same issues with Frsky, but I cannot be 100% confident in that.
More
11 May 2014 14:48 - 11 May 2014 14:48 #23139 by IMback!
Replied by IMback! on topic Frsky compatibility

PhracturedBlue wrote: Skyartec protocol has good range.


It dose but the mw numbers dont corolate at all with the range in any reasonable way (see the skyartec range bugreport) maybe the power nummbers should be renamed to 1, 2, 3, 4 etc or made different for diffrent modules?
Last edit: 11 May 2014 14:48 by IMback!.
More
11 May 2014 14:49 #23140 by SeByDocKy
Replied by SeByDocKy on topic Frsky compatibility

PhracturedBlue wrote: Frsky seems to work well for Tx in the nightly builds. There is no telemetry yet though. I have not range tested it either, though I don't expect that to be an issue since the Skyartec protocol has good range.

That said, it has only seen very limited testing by others than myself. The DSM2/X protocol was exceptionally difficult to get working robustly on everyone's hardware. I don't expect the same issues with Frsky, but I cannot be 100% confident in that.


Good news ... coz I would prefer to have FrSky RX than DSMX. FrySky RX are know to have very good range ...
More
11 May 2014 21:48 #23149 by PhracturedBlue
Replied by PhracturedBlue on topic Frsky compatibility
The odd thing is that the tables for the cc2500 should be fine (except the lowest value which appears wrong and is probably undefined in strength). The CC2500 has similar range to the CYRF6936, and the mW valus should be quite close (as opposed to the A7105 or nrf24l01 where the values will not be very accurate)
More
12 May 2014 08:07 #23156 by IMback!
Replied by IMback! on topic Frsky compatibility
Could the pa simply be very non linear? somone else should do a range test with a different module
More
12 May 2014 10:30 #23157 by robca
Replied by robca on topic Frsky compatibility

PhracturedBlue wrote: Frsky seems to work well for Tx in the nightly builds. There is no telemetry yet though. I have not range tested it either, though I don't expect that to be an issue since the Skyartec protocol has good range.

That said, it has only seen very limited testing by others than myself. The DSM2/X protocol was exceptionally difficult to get working robustly on everyone's hardware. I don't expect the same issues with Frsky, but I cannot be 100% confident in that.


Good enough for me :) I'll solder the CC2500 and give it a try

thanks!
More
18 May 2014 01:00 #23310 by PhracturedBlue
Replied by PhracturedBlue on topic Frsky compatibility
I added Frsky support today. I only have a few sensors, but it seems to work with my Sensor Hub and analog voltage measurements. The SPort stuff I am unsure about. I have a S.Port variometer, and it converts data from the sensor hub to S.Port. But the protocol seems to look the same as the old 2-way for the sensor hub data.

I haven't figured out what the variometer data looks like yet, so I'm not sure if it is part of the 2-way data or if the s.port transmission is something else. I see a bunch of other data in the stream on the X6R, but it is all '0x0f'. LikelyS.Port doesn't work properly yet.
More
19 May 2014 04:35 #23331 by vlad_vy
Replied by vlad_vy on topic Frsky compatibility
Description of FrSky S.Port Protocol
code.google.com/p/telemetry-convert/wiki/FrSkySPortProtocol
More
19 May 2014 04:56 #23332 by PhracturedBlue
Replied by PhracturedBlue on topic Frsky compatibility
Yep, I found that. It implies that the Taranis Tx has code to decode it (I haven't investigated that yet). But I don't see any actual data in the SPI transfers I captured. It is possible that S.Port transmission is only active when in D16 mode (Deviation only supports the legacy D8 at the moment) and that in D8 mode it uses the legacy 2-way protocol. Or possibly there is data there, and I'm just not seeing itin my captures.
More
19 May 2014 05:20 #23333 by vlad_vy
Replied by vlad_vy on topic Frsky compatibility
Note: early documentation for the FVAS-02 sensors indicated the sensor would also be able to bridge S.Port sensor data to D8-mode receivers, thus allowing future S.Port sensors to be used on the D8-mode receivers. This function is not in fact supported by the FVAS-02 sensors.
More
19 May 2014 13:24 #23345 by PhracturedBlue
Replied by PhracturedBlue on topic Frsky compatibility
Hmm. That doesn't mention whether it works for D16 receivers operating in D8 mode (which is what I'm testing). I only have the sensor hub wired to the receiver via the Variometer S.Port, so the data is definitely going from 2-way->SPort->2-way protocol syntax. I'm just not sure if the Variometer is also transmitting it's payload too.

I need to wire up to the Taranis SPI and take a look at the D16 protocol.
More
19 May 2014 14:18 - 19 May 2014 14:22 #23350 by vlad_vy
Replied by vlad_vy on topic Frsky compatibility

The X8R must be bound in D16 mode for any S.PORT sensors to work in S.PORT mode.

D8 mode on a X8R will only give you RSSI telemetry, no other sensors will work.


My new X6R receiver states in the instructions that SPort Telemetry is only available in D16 mode.

Last edit: 19 May 2014 14:22 by vlad_vy.
More
19 May 2014 16:16 - 19 May 2014 16:18 #23356 by PhracturedBlue
Replied by PhracturedBlue on topic Frsky compatibility
Thanks. That explains why I didn't see any S.Port data then. I'll need to snoop the Taranis I guess to figure out the new protocol. For folks with Frsky Rx, I'll need some feedback on the screen layout for Devo8/10. For now, I basically copied the Devo telemetry screen (though it is not identical). But Frsky has more options for telemetry, so it will likely make sense to use a more customized display.

On my X6R, I didn't see any note about S.Port only being available for D16. Maybe I should read the manual more carefully
Last edit: 19 May 2014 16:18 by PhracturedBlue.
More
28 May 2014 13:25 #23729 by mazi
Replied by mazi on topic Frsky compatibility
Where do you buy X6R (or X8R) receiver?
More
28 May 2014 13:40 #23730 by PhracturedBlue
Replied by PhracturedBlue on topic Frsky compatibility
I bought mine from alofthobbies. I've bought all my FrSky stuff from them and never been disappointed.
  1. Forum
  3. Development
  5. Protocol Development
  7. Frsky compatibility
Time to create page: 0.424 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
Force desktop display