[NSRCA-discussion] Twin elevator servo issue using Futaba 9 ZAP

[Dave Smith]

Peter:   It was my understanding the MSA-10 only corrected for servo centres and end point. From your description it seems to adjust travel anywhere in the servo travel?
I have the same problem as you described,and would like to find I am wrong in my assumption that the MSA-10 only adjusts end point and servo centering.

Thanks,,,,,,,,,Dave
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Peter Pennisi 
  To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' 
  Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 10:01 AM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Twin elevator servo issue using Futaba 9 ZAP


  Hi all,

   

  I appreciate all the feedback in relation to this topic.

   

  I have had a closer look at my setup and have come to the following conclusion.

   

    1.. The mechanical setup of both elevators is close to identical but not exact. This is certainly part of the problem. 
    2.. Servos are not identical and therefore contribute to the problem 
    3.. There is a slight delay between master and slave channels if using the Ailevators function 
   

  I went out and picked up one of the Futaba MSA-10 servo matchbox. This item certainly removed a majority of my mismatch without touching too much else. I had originally started to use a point mix and tried to fix it electronically in the radio but it all became too difficult.

   

  I went out this afternoon and flew the model with the matchbox and I could certainly tell the difference. It was a big improvement over what I had before; believe me I had spent a considerable amount of time trying to get it right. The model tracked perfectly in very tight to medium sided loops both upright and inverted. I also noticed a big improvement in the hourglass maneuver as the model tracked more precisely.

   

   

  Peter 

   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Bob Richards
  Sent: Friday, 11 August 2006 8:31 PM
  To: NSRCA Mailing List
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Twin elevator servo issue using Futaba 9 ZAP

   

  Brian,

   

  I think there are two problems. 1) Movement commands from the radio arriving at the servos at the same time (dynamic) and 2) Control surface throws matching through the entire range (static).

   

  What you are describing is a dynamic problem, ie: does the radio do all the mixing and send the information to the servos *at the same time*.  In other words, while the servos are moving, one is lagging behind the other since the radio is processing one channel before the other. Also adding to the dynamic problem are the speeds of the servos, they must be the same.

   

  The other problem is what I was talking about, when the servos stop, are the control surfaces tracking together. This depends on the linkage geometry as well as the servos being linear.

   

  A matchbox attempts to correct both problems. However, a matchbox only matches 3 points in the entire travel range, and the problem described (as I understood it) is that the throws don't match halfway between the neutral and endpoints.  It would be nice if there were multiple points in the range (5, or 7) that could be programmed in the matchbox. This feature could even be used to program in expo, seperate from the transmitter.

   

  Servos can have linearity problems due to the manufacturing tolerances of the feedback potentiometers. I have seen pots (not from servos) that were "adjusted" by milling away material around the perimeter of the conductive material, but I wonder if anyone does this for the small servo pots used in our systems.

   

  IMHO, the processing speed is not as much of a problem for us, at least in pattern, as we might think it is. It is much more important that the surfaces end up at the same position, since that will affect the flight more than the small difference in position *while the surfaces are moving*.

   

  Bob R.



  brian young <brian_w_young at yahoo.com> wrote:

    I think this is a problem with the processing capability of the TX. You have a progammed mix, it reads one channel then the next. I had a 9CAP where this problem was very noticable. Now on my 9Z its not as noticable, it looks like the slave servo is a little slow to catch up. Only real solution in my opinion is a match box, y-cable or similar device.

     

    I can sit back and pick which servo is the slaved just watching the surfaces. 

     

    Im understanding that your endpoints match when the surface are finished moving, and the middle is matched as well. You should be able to stop at any point in the travel and the pointers line up, when they stop moving. If this is the case your linkage would be ok. 

     

    I think the speed of the servos has passed the processing speed of the radio.

    Bob Richards <bob at toprudder.com> wrote:

      That might be the cause, or it could simply be a difference in linearity between the servos.

       

      Bob R.



       



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  NSRCA-discussion mailing list
  NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
  http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20060811/1fa7b876/attachment.html