carrera makes a wireless analog controller as far as i know.
You can google it
cheers

 

QUOTE (grego @ 15 May 2009, 09:16) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>carrera makes a wireless analog controller as far as i know.
You can google it
cheers

That may well be true, but an analogue controller, wireless or otherwise, isn't going to be of much use on a digital set. What the OP is asking is whether there is a system whereby a digital wireless controller is used to 'talk' to the PB rather than the car.

This would require just the PB to be modified rather than every single car.

 

QUOTE (Scarecrow @ 15 May 2009, 05:45) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>That may well be true, but an analogue controller, wireless or otherwise, isn't going to be of much use on a digital set. What the OP is asking is whether there is a system whereby a digital wireless controller is used to 'talk' to the PB rather than the car.

This would require just the PB to be modified rather than every single car.

The Carrera wireless controllers do talk to the powerbase for Digital 132 (they are not just for analog), but it still doesn't help SSD users. SF member brumbaer has decoded the Carrera wireless protocol. They use infrared transmitters, so they are limited by line of sight.

Because of the infrared limitation (not to mention the thumb plunger styling), my guess is that any one with the skills and talent to take brumbaer's info and adapt it to SSD may be better served by starting from scratch. But I sure don't have those skills or that talent, so I may be full of it....

 

I've thought about this issue, actually. I have a close friend who loves to solve electronics puzzles and we've been talking about it. Hopefully we'll be doing some prototyping and testing this summer.
There are two ideas at the moment. A whole new controller with the needed controls and wireless, plus a dongle at the PB, or a dongle (at the PB) plus a box (belt clipped) that one would plug a standard controller into. Since we haven't even prototyped, we have no idea which of the two would cost more, and keeping costs down would be a high priority for us. The other priority is that it would not require mods to the PB, and so will work on PB6, PB4, and the new PB6 (assuming they don't change something with how it works).

Right now, consider it a pipe dream. If we get anywhere, I'll certainly start a new thread about it.

-Greg

 

Mr F,

That sounds great, exectly what I was getting at, and cheap is always good.

Do keep us up to date with the development when you do start.

 

QUOTE (MrFlippant @ 16 May 2009, 04:43) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>The other priority is that it would not require mods to the PB, and so will work on PB6, PB4, and the new PB6 (assuming they don't change something with how it works).

Depends if you want a professional looking unit or another box with leads to each controller port. And the box would need to be powered.
The only inconvenience of hardwiring is you lose your PB for 2 weeks while it is upgraded.
To use controller ports means a box that receives digital data from controller, converts it back to analogue so it can routed via controller ports, then conversion back to digital for processing, the lag would be noticeable.
Better off having transceiver wired directly to board, would probably work out cheaper and look neat. Lag would be mimimal.
What about using Scorpius controllers only and keep SSD car chips and track electronics, PB pro and the rest?
Wraith, not sure if you've seen this thread?
Scorpius controller thread

 

Injectorman,

Out of the box the scorpius controller won't work with SSD?
Or will it merely provide throttle/braking and lane change functions?
I assume that the PB-Pro will require re-programming to enable the controller to use the dynamic braking, throttle curve etc?

Cheers

mark

 

Hi Miveson,
No sorry Scorpius is wireless, SSD requires a 0-5.1ohm wired analogue signal into the PB controller port.
Dynamic braking and throttle curve are a function of the controller with Scorpius and yes its useable in this situation.
We could rejig a car chip to do the job now but problem is you'd need one chip per channel.
You dont need to do anything to PBPro as far as I can think.

 

Here's a thought, would it be possible to have a unit on the controller that sends throttle settings to a USB wireless network dongle plugged into your computer and have the throttle settings sent from the computer to the to the PB Pro via a RichG USB cable. Advantages would include no more wires conected to the PB in fact no throttle cables either.
As I said, just a thought!

 

Leads to each controller port from another box... how is this worse than tangled wires from the PB to each controller, then?

Controlling through a PC to the track via SSDC (or other) and a PB-Pro was definitely a consideration, but that leaves out everyone with a PB4, and possibly those who get the new PB6 if it can't be reprogrammed the same was as the older PB6.

In any case, this would in no way be competition for Scorpius. Anyone with enough dosh and desire to go with them should absolutely do so. Like I said, my friend and I are still only talking about the concept and trying to figure out what would be needed. I'll tell you what, though, I don't put anything past him. That said, I'd love for someone else to do this rather than me and him. Maybe Scorpius will take a stab at the "toy" market and come up with something that PB4 users can use. Maybe Pendle or Slot.It or someone else will do it. Maybe I will. We'll see.

 

You mean one those poor unfortunate barstewards, like I was up to a week ago, that don't have PB Pro! I am not sure but I think I may not have been clear on my last post... I meant that a small belt box for each controller that is 6 boxes, not 6 controllers into one box. Remember this is only the rambling thoughts of an old university calculus teacher.

 

QUOTE (Richard TB @ 17 May 2009, 04:02) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Here's a thought, would it be possible to have a unit on the controller that sends throttle settings to a USB wireless network dongle plugged into your computer and have the throttle settings sent from the computer to the to the PB Pro via a RichG USB cable. Advantages would include no more wires conected to the PB in fact no throttle cables either.
As I said, just a thought!

Theres lots of ways to do it but rememeber the word "lag".
If you want instant (or close to it) throttle response you need to go the most direct route.
Yes the interface needs to be designed and built but 60% of the work is already complete if you use the Scorpius controller.
Anyone could build the interface, Rich, Riko, me, even Flippant, as long as it works. Like I said if you wanted to mount 6 car chips in a box and 6 leads to controller ports we can do that now, but to me not a professional, cost effective solution and the response time would not be the best. Having said that it may be possible to go via controller ports for those who want a plug n play (albeit messy) alternative but needs to be tested for lag before commiting.

Rick

 

For the sake of discussion only, since we are not even prototyping yet, let's assume that my friend and I can figure out how to do it without noticeable lag issues. At that point, whether it's a clip or a replacement controller for the controller side will depend on costs. If it can be made (and there fore sold) cheaper by reusing the digital controller parts and shell, then that's what it will be. If it's cheaper as a clip that a controller plugs into, then that's what it will be.

My thinking is to offer a variety of "receiver" units. Single, for the people that don't need wireless for all their controllers. Triple, for one side of a PB6. Quadruple, for the PB4, and probably a sextuplet, for the new PB6. Each would probably be configurable to one of 6 "channels", but would come preset depending on the version (a triple would come set to 1, 3, and 5, for example) and according to the order itself.

It's also possible that we'll only be able to make singles for a while, and people will have to hide or recase them if they want them to be prettier. I'm sure we'll offer options like, DC power jack for quad and six.

My friend also loves PIC programming, so I know he'll take a shine to things like selectable or programmable throttle curves.

Again, this is all academic until we have something to announce. But I'm definitely open to new ideas.

Of course, if it all turns out to be more expensive than a Scorpius Controller and car chip (plus whatever mods/interface Rick keeps alluding to), then we'll ditch it and suggest people do that.

Or, if we develop something that costs just a little less than Rick's idea, but isn't worth making for lack of profit, then we'll just publish the design for people to build their own.

 

QUOTE (MrFlippant @ 17 May 2009, 10:37) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Of course, if it all turns out to be more expensive than a Scorpius Controller and car chip (plus whatever mods/interface Rick keeps alluding to), then we'll ditch it and suggest people do that.
You dont need the Scorpius car chip with this idea.
Suggest if you want to keep costs down just make one 6 car unit rather than a variety of 4 units.
Also building a professional controller around a mass produced controller has its advantages and disadvantages. These must be weighed up. I once chipped and race tested 16 SSD controllers and the general concensus was it was a wireless controller sure, but still a toy like feel and a lot of variation between controllers, no adjustable brakes or throttle curver adjustment and typical maintenance issues, so we ditched it. The standard now is surely hall effect. So is adjustable brakes and throttle curve.
Screen and vibrator also has big advantages but this may be out of the scope of works.
As far as programming curves etc, if PB Pro or SSDC has these features then you need not worry about this aspect. No point in doubling up.
Id like to get this up and running pronto, but I need to concentrate on our current projects so this cannot at this stage be a priority. This is why Im suggesting if anyone can make a wireless interface by all means go for it

Rick

 

I really would love to hear more about this idea. You've been very circumspect in regards to it. Are you wanting to keep it close to your vest until everything settles out?

 

I'd be more than happy to use a scorpius controller wirelessly if I could somehow interface it with a 6 car PB.

From a cost perspective it's basically the same price as a slot.it digital controller but includes wireless functionality, that's the most import thing I think most of us would be looking for, it's the holy grail for SSD in the next 12 months if you ask me, no more running back to driver stations when a car de-slots, you can simply take your controller with you and off you go, I think everyone is more than aware of the benefits.....

I think one of the biggest issues at this point in time is that the vast majority of SSD users have already spent vast amounts on the PB and the various upgrades (PB-Pro, S-H and perhaps Pit-Pro) and god knows how many digital chips.

To me I'd be looking at a wireless interface that could plug into the PB controller ports which would act as the wireless receiver, the controller would be the wireless sender. I'll keep an eye on upcoming events to see what happens in the next 6-12 months. I fully understand you've done all the leg work Rick and come up with an amazing product, I think it needs someone from the SSD community to run with the wireless functionality and hopefully deliver a product that can be used with a host of different controllers.

Cheers

Mark

 

QUOTE (MrFlippant @ 17 May 2009, 13:02) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I really would love to hear more about this idea. You've been very circumspect in regards to it. Are you wanting to keep it close to your vest until everything settles out?
Lets just wait for the controller to be released then we can discuss a plan.

 

Good point. With all the Scorpius talk, I keep forgetting it's a few months off from being in full production.
As such, my friend and I will continue our talks and see what happens.

 

Just spoke to John, we seem to think going by controller ports is the cheapest and easiest option, but ultimately it needs to be tested before commiting. Power for the interface could loop off the double power input on the PB. It is better done with one wireless chipset per channel (around $5 each to buy) but could be done with one wireless chipset for all 6 channels but there may compromises. Based on the time factor doing internal surgery to the PB the plug n play option (6 sets of leads, one set per controller port) seems the best one at the moment although admittedly not a pretty one. It could be hardwired inside as well to tidy it up, multi core cable from interface directly into PB. This would look good but obviously be more work. You could also run standard controllers alongside wireless controllers.

 

I should have said hardwired to the controller ports (inside PB)

 

I've already done this with my 2-lane analog layout using rather cheap "toy" 7.2V proportional R/C car guts & pistol-style controllers.

The guts (board) of the car is placed under the table and I use a lab-style variable power supply to power the board, and drive the lanes through the board's motor-driver FET circuitry. (I removed the reverse circuitry, and I'm planning to set-up a brake "short" in its place...)

I've run up to 13V with no issues yet, and although you can get noise and crosstalk on the super-cheapo 27MHz transmitters, it does work quite well, a huge improvement over wired controllers.

My next implementation will use "hobby" grade R/C which should eliminate interference and allow for smoother (finer) response.

In SSD, it would be pretty simple to hack a servo into an existing controller and move the wiper in exactly the same manner as your finger. A second servo (or R/C switch) could trigger the button function(s).

Even in a mechanical system, lag would not be an issue as you're dealing with a 20ms frame rate with the R/C and most micro servos have around a 0.1s/60 degrees transit time. I doubt you can move your finger from min to max on the hand throttle in much under 0.1s

The extra cool feature would be that lane change would be commanded by the pistol wheel (either direction), which would be far more comfortable, and intuitive, than a button.

I'll probably be working on this in the fall, and I'll post my findings then, but basically, it's a simple mechanical system with no electrical "skill" needed.