<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><DIV>Good point Jay. Remember, no matter WHAT people say (or would like to have us believe), we live in an analog world. Trying to digitize an "analog" motion is best accomplished with the largest number of bits that bandwidth (and memory) allows. But there's more to our control systems than meets the eye.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>One thing to keep in mind is that Pattern setups are almost totally opposite from "3D" setups. Pattern strives for maximum control precision with the least amount of surface travel whereas "3D" does the opposite. What this means is that our linkages are configured to give the servo maximum mechanical advantage. This is like putting a transmission in low gear. You have lots of torque but not a lot of speed. It also means that the "resolution" of the control system (meaning servos and encoding process) does not play as large a part in the total positioning accuracy as it does with a "3D" setup. Not that high-resolution numbers are "bad" - they're certainly not, but in a Pattern setup they're not as important as you might think. If the servo has a 3:1 mechanical advantage over the control surface (as opposed to a "3D" setup which may be close to 1:1) then a 1 degree "error" at the servo only gives us .3 degrees at the control surface. Can you
even measure that with one of the "standard" weighted-pendulum deflection gages? On the other hand a "slow" servo will become very noticeable in this case. When the servo must rotate to it's extremes while only moving the control surface a slight amount, it will take a noticeably long time if the servo is slow. When you look at the mechanics in detail it becomes apparent that a good Pattern control system could actually compromise on "resolution" and instead look to improve the "speed" + "response". So maybe the Airtronics Engineers hit the nail on the head. I'm sure if you told them to build the BEST control system possible they would throw in 2048 resolution if they could, but in this case they had to make a decision and it looks to me like they made the right one. As long as you're a Pattern pilot anyway. :)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>John Pavlick</DIV><BR><BR>--- On <B>Mon, 8/24/09, Jay Marshall <I><lightfoot@sc.rr.com></I></B> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid"><BR>From: Jay Marshall <lightfoot@sc.rr.com><BR>Subject: Re: [<SPAN>NSRCA</SPAN>-discussion] SD-10<BR>To: "'General pattern discussion'" <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>Date: Monday, August 24, 2009, 7:58 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail>A liner, non-digital system such as PPM, has infinite resolution and<BR>therefore the ultimate "smoothness". I agree, however, that you probably<BR>can't "feel" a 1/2048 digital step. I suspect that the major improvements<BR>have been in less latency.<BR><BR>Jay Marshall<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: <A href="http://us.mc805.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org" ymailto="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</A><BR>[mailto:<A href="http://us.mc805.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org" ymailto="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</A>] On Behalf Of Atwood, Mark<BR>Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 4:19 PM<BR>To: '<A href="http://us.mc805.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"
ymailto="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A>'<BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] SD-10<BR><BR>I'll take a stab, and I'm blind copying Mike Greensheilds (don't feel<BR>comfortable putting his email out on the list) who is the product manager<BR>for ATX here in the states. He may chime in with additional background. <BR><BR>My understanding is that when Sanwa was evaluating speed vs resolution,<BR>speed was deemed a much more critical factor. 1024 resolution is already to<BR>the limits of our ability to "feel" any difference where as the<BR>speed/latency was much more noticable. Cost does come into the equation<BR>such that for a $500 radio, they couldn't do both. <BR><BR>1024 resolution provides better than 1/10deg at 90 deg of rotation. That's<BR>less than 1/1000" on a 1" servo wheel. <BR><BR>The speed on the other hand is just now approaching our limits of
"feel".<BR>The faster systems clearly feel more connected and are noticable when flying<BR>Snaps and other rapid input maneuvers and especially flying 3D with the<BR>helis. <BR><BR>So the choice was to invest in a fast response system with 1024 resolution.<BR><BR><BR>Does anyone know the tolerances of our servo accuracy? I'd be curious to<BR>know how high a resolution they can accurately replicate. <BR><BR>Mike? Any input from the source?<BR><BR>-Mark<BR>--------------------------<BR>Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld<BR><BR><BR>----- Original Message -----<BR>From: <A href="http://us.mc805.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org" ymailto="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</A><BR><<A href="http://us.mc805.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org"
ymailto="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</A>><BR>To: 'General pattern discussion' <<A href="http://us.mc805.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" ymailto="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A>><BR>Sent: Mon Aug 24 15:30:03 2009<BR>Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] SD-10<BR><BR>Hi Anthony, Jim, Mark , and Others who Responded,<BR><BR><BR><BR>Thanks for your valuable input. I've read that this radio's resolution is or<BR>is among the very fastest; so much so that even digital servos can't keep<BR>up with it. I understand that the system is 1024 , but can't help but<BR>wonder why it isn't 2048. I'm sure I'll get past my hangup, but would<BR>appreciate everyone's insight's on that one.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Thanks,<BR><BR>Frank Imbriaco<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing
list<BR><A href="http://us.mc805.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" ymailto="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A><BR><A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target=_blank>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR><A href="http://us.mc805.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" ymailto="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A><BR><A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target=_blank>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></td></tr></table>