RC Deck - Performance Power Supply With Radio Control

[gyenesvi]

Can you summarize what the final setup ended up being? There were a bunch of options in the beginning, and I'm not sure which ones won..

Is the battery inside or outside in this one? If it's inside, how is it charged?

What ports will it have? On the prototype cases, I see two PF ports, but what's that in the corner? A PU port? Or a battery plug? Also, are there two GeekServo outputs included?

Are the two PF ports driven in sync?

If there is a PU port, how is it driven? I guess it's not usable for steering, right?

What's the channel mapping between the receiver and the ports? I guess drive channel is for the PF ports, and the steering is for a GeekServo output, and the two position channel for another GeekServo?

[NoEXIST]

1 hour ago, gyenesvi said:

Can you summarize what the final setup ended up being?

Thanks for your question! 

For now there will be 2 setups, with built in receiver and external receiver. Battery is external for both setups. As I'm not going (at least in the beginning) to start "mass production", there's a room to change something in every individual deck.

Ports and mapping for version with built in receiver:

Still the same, 4 channels and 5 ports.

PF ports (CH2) - synchronized ports for throttle

2x 3pin JR outputs (CH1 and CH3) - one of them is channel 1 for steering and the second is channel 3 for another geekservo or maybe lights (on/off button)

PU port (CH4) - channel for secondary functions, it's forward/off/backward (all the motors might behave as PU M motor)

Ports and mapping for version with external receiver:

It will look almost the same in terms of ports, but JR outputs will be used for connecting CH2 and CH4 with receiver. Geekservos for other channels will be connected directly to a receiver.

PF ports (CH2) - synchronized ports for throttle

PU port (CH4) - channel for secondary functions, it's forward/off/backward

This one is still under development, but the price I said before might be quite accurate.

 

I will upload short video showing deck overall and explaining ports configuration 

[Krxlion]

9 hours ago, NoEXIST said:

Thanks for your question! 

For now there will be 2 setups, with built in receiver and external receiver. Battery is external for both setups. As I'm not going (at least in the beginning) to start "mass production", there's a room to change something in every individual deck.

Ports and mapping for version with built in receiver:

Still the same, 4 channels and 5 ports.

PF ports (CH2) - synchronized ports for throttle

2x 3pin JR outputs (CH1 and CH3) - one of them is channel 1 for steering and the second is channel 3 for another geekservo or maybe lights (on/off button)

PU port (CH4) - channel for secondary functions, it's forward/off/backward (all the motors might behave as PU M motor)

Ports and mapping for version with external receiver:

It will look almost the same in terms of ports, but JR outputs will be used for connecting CH2 and CH4 with receiver. Geekservos for other channels will be connected directly to a receiver.

PF ports (CH2) - synchronized ports for throttle

PU port (CH4) - channel for secondary functions, it's forward/off/backward

This one is still under development, but the price I said before might be quite accurate.

 

I will upload short video showing deck overall and explaining ports configuration 

Thank you @NoEXIST for your input. I will wait for your video as I am curious how all of that will work. Please take your time with the video, as newbies in the topic may not understand everything. Presenting all of should be as user-friendly as possible is a core, at least from my point of view. :)

[NoEXIST]

I got 2 videos today!

 

 

 

[oracid]

Very good work !

May we see the inside ?

Is it not possible to put a smaller battery inside the box ?

[FriedlS]

Awesome!!

[NoEXIST]

6 minutes ago, oracid said:

Very good work !

May we see the inside ?

Is it not possible to put a smaller battery inside the box ?

I think I can show the inside when I'll get PCB's for it, so it will look nicer:) (actually not really possible to see something inside right now)

Batteries can be possible but not any time soon... If I will be able to make fully custom PCB with all components used in in ESC's there will be much more room for these features. In conclusion, it is not possible now, but I'll try to work for it!

[Krxlion]

I am really proud of your effort NoEXIST. I just want to put more suggestions If I may:
1. 3D design and print case for the battery that fits Lego Technic system.
2. In your video presenting RCDeck, in the beginning you are showing: Transmitter, RCDeck, battery and... Battery buzzer. What is that thing, is it required and what it does?
3.(not a suggestion, but more of observation) I could see that in your video my observations about DumboRC are confirmed. I have two sets of those transmitters and receivers(with gyro) and I cannot as well fully rotate 90 degree +/- with geek-servos. Only about 80 degree and this is something with that setup.
4. It would be nice to mention in the video what are the dimensions of RCDeck in studs. :)

[NoEXIST]

15 minutes ago, Krxlion said:

I am really proud of your effort NoEXIST. I just want to put more suggestions If I may:
1. 3D design and print case for the battery that fits Lego Technic system.
2. In your video presenting RCDeck, in the beginning you are showing: Transmitter, RCDeck, battery and... Battery buzzer. What is that thing, is it required and what it does?
3.(not a suggestion, but more of observation) I could see that in your video my observations about DumboRC are confirmed. I have two sets of those transmitters and receivers(with gyro) and I cannot as well fully rotate 90 degree +/- with geek-servos. Only about 80 degree and this is something with that setup.
4. It would be nice to mention in the video what are the dimensions of RCDeck in studs. :)

Thank you for your feedback!

1. I'm not sure it's that good idea as I'm not forcing anyone to use this exact battery. However this one is fitting Lego nicely.

2. Buzzer or voltmeter, it's connected to a balancing wire and inform you about discharge. It's better to have one than overdischarge your battery while playing.

3. I'm not sure right now and will check this at home. Steering channel were adjusted for the model it was in, maybe this is the reason. But I also noticed geekservo is turning a little bit less with the gyro on. (This exact RCDeck is with receiver without gyro by the way, so it may be adjustments)

4. Oh, you're right, completely forgot about that. Will be included in future videos and presentations! It's 7*4*3 (L*W*H)

 

[gyenesvi]

Looking good so far! That little car in the video has some serious power, having the 3s LiPo combined with Cada motors, must be really fun to play with!

On 3/10/2024 at 1:10 AM, NoEXIST said:

PU port (CH4) - channel for secondary functions, it's forward/off/backward (all the motors might behave as PU M motor)

Thanks for the detailed answers! About the configuration, one thing is a bit puzzling for me; the PU port does not really fit into the concept, mainly because it's not making use of the PU itself, so can only be used as a dumb motor, so it does not make too much sense. It would be much more useful to be able to add one more PF motor, including for example a Cada micro-motor. I am guessing you did this because there was not enough space for another PF port?

By the way, I don't quite get why you need to be able to reverse the PF port by flipping the connector itself. My transmitter can reverse all channels, and I am guessing that's a pretty basic setting, so all controllers would be able to do that (at least for the throttle, that you are handling here)? So omitting the flipping possibility could free up space for more ports, no?

Another thing that could be improved without hopefully any real change in the electronics is that all outputs of the receiver could be made accessible by the 3-pin connections for servos (at the same time as having them connected to PF ports). This way one could choose to use either servos or PF motors on the same channel. GeekServos actually also come in the same form factor as DC motors and as continuous rotation servos, so they could be used for things that don't need much torque, such as opening stuff. Also, it would be nice if one could use the 3-position switch that you now use for the PU port for a GeekServo, for a 3-position gearbox for example. Do you think that would be possible electronically?

All in all, I would imagine a really versatile configuration like this:

- 4x5 stud area for 4 PF ports, half studs for cables on both ends. 2 PF ports synchronized for the throttle, as now, and two more PF ports for channels 3 and 4. For example 3 could be useful for PF lights, and 4 for opening/closing stuff using Cada micro motor or M/L motor.

- The remaining 4x2 stud area would have the switch and the 4x 3-pin connectors for the 4 receiver channels directly.

What do you think?

Edited March 11 by gyenesvi

[Ryokeen]

2 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

By the way, I don't quite get why you need to be able to reverse the PF port by flipping the connector itself. My transmitter can reverse all channels, and I am guessing that's a pretty basic setting, so all controllers would be able to do that (at least for the throttle, that you are handling here)? So omitting the flipping possibility could free up space for more ports, no?

You might use 2 motors on one channel but need to reverse one of the motors, like if you have one motor left and one right.

2 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

Another thing that could be improved without hopefully any real change in the electronics is that all outputs of the receiver could be made accessible by the 3-pin connections for servos (at the same time as having them connected to PF ports). This way one could choose to use either servos or PF motors on the same channel. GeekServos actually also come in the same form factor as DC motors and as continuous rotation servos, so they could be used for things that don't need much torque, such as opening stuff. Also, it would be nice if one could use the 3-position switch that you now use for the PU port for a GeekServo, for a 3-position gearbox for example. Do you think that would be possible electronically?

My thoughts on this, there is a difference in powering a servo and a DC motor. A DC motor still needs an ESC that transforms the PWM signal into either voltage or a PWM signal for DC motors. A servo has the needed electronics (simple comperator for pwm input and servo position) on board, a dc motor does not.

@NoEXIST And very impressive work, a neat little box for rc cars and something that lego should have long done as a replacement for their weird RC thing they had.

[NoEXIST]

8 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

I am guessing you did this because there was not enough space for another PF port?

That's actually right. There's less space on cover of the deck than needed with current setup.

8 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

By the way, I don't quite get why you need to be able to reverse the PF port by flipping the connector itself. My transmitter can reverse all channels, and I am guessing that's a pretty basic setting, so all controllers would be able to do that (at least for the throttle, that you are handling here)? 

As @Ryokeen said, you do not always want to reverse the whole channel, the car I'm using for test uses this feature as well.

Also with this setup you can't really make 4 pf ports anyways. Pins that are used for pf ports are going straight down, in case of having 4 ports, contacts have to go through the ESC placed on one of the sides of the deck.

8 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

Another thing that could be improved without hopefully any real change in the electronics is that all outputs of the receiver could be made accessible by the 3-pin connections for servos (at the same time as having them connected to PF ports).

And here is the lastest problem, you can't make something suitable for everyone. For this purpose I would just rather choose external receiver. In this case you'll have more wires, but more flexibility with the cannel management.

6 hours ago, Ryokeen said:

And very impressive work, a neat little box for rc cars and something that lego should have long done as a replacement for their weird RC thing they had.

Thanks for your kind words:)

[gyenesvi]

7 hours ago, Ryokeen said:

You might use 2 motors on one channel but need to reverse one of the motors, like if you have one motor left and one right.

Indeed, that's true, I forgot about that case. I guess in RC cars, this does not really happen, so enough to reverse on the transmitter..

7 hours ago, Ryokeen said:

My thoughts on this, there is a difference in powering a servo and a DC motor. A DC motor still needs an ESC that transforms the PWM signal into either voltage or a PWM signal for DC motors. A servo has the needed electronics (simple comperator for pwm input and servo position) on board, a dc motor does not.

That is indeed true for the DC motor, but what I meant is that as far as I understand the speed servo version of GeekServo does not require an ESC, works directly from the receiver like a regular servo. But correct me if I am wrong and you have experience!

However, now that I think about it, to make those outputs available for PF/PU motors, it needs another ESC for those. So that mean that the PU port must have an ESC already in there, right?

1 hour ago, NoEXIST said:

That's actually right. There's less space on cover of the deck than needed with current setup.

Yeah, that's actually an inconvenience about the PF port, takes much area..

1 hour ago, NoEXIST said:

As @Ryokeen said, you do not always want to reverse the whole channel, the car I'm using for test uses this feature as well.

Forgot about that, I did use that setup very rarely too.. But not so common I guess.

1 hour ago, NoEXIST said:

Also with this setup you can't really make 4 pf ports anyways. Pins that are used for pf ports are going straight down, in case of having 4 ports, contacts have to go through the ESC placed on one of the sides of the deck.

I see.

1 hour ago, NoEXIST said:

And here is the lastest problem, you can't make something suitable for everyone.

True, that's why I always keep thinking of the most flexible solution :)

1 hour ago, NoEXIST said:

For this purpose I would just rather choose external receiver. In this case you'll have more wires, but more flexibility with the cannel management.

Sure, that could be done for extra servos connected, but for extra PF ports it kind of defeats the purpose I guess.

It's great having this discussion, it shows how complex the topic is and maybe why TLG did not venture in this direction..

[NoEXIST]

54 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

It's great having this discussion, it shows how complex the topic is and maybe why TLG did not venture in this direction..

I'm sure they choose Bluetooth and app to control their models because it doesn't need any changes in hardware to build something completely different. In this case with rc we're still with cars, and rc cars usually have 1 motor for throttle and one servo. Other things are additional and are done similarly. Let's say we're making better PF system:)

Most flexible way to do that in my opinion is just having rc components packed in Lego compatible boxes separately. Like 4*3*2 box with receiver, similar box with ESC and maybe PF connectors on top. But in this case we're not really user-friendly. It's still tons of wires, but a little bit easier to connect components to the chassis.

1 hour ago, gyenesvi said:

Sure, that could be done for extra servos connected, but for extra PF ports it kind of defeats the purpose I guess.

In this option deck is becoming just an ESC box with Lego compatible connectors which is also nice, but it's a different product with a little different using scenario 

[oracid]

2 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

I meant is that as far as I understand the speed servo version of GeekServo does not require an ESC, works directly from the receiver like a regular servo.

Please note, the gray GeekServo are servos that can be used in 180° or 360° (see my video).
The green GeekServos, with 3 wires, are continuously rotating. So usable with servo command.
The red or blue GeekServos are simple motors with 2 wires. They cannot be used with servos command.

Note that green Geekservos are far from having the power and speed of radio-controlled car motors. They are more intended for robotics.

I can see that depending on a preference for servos or motors, we are more interested in the RC world or robotics.
For me who is interested in robotics, I use Arduino with which I can do everything I like, but I frequently make a 4 wheels with 2x2 PF motors, (PU motors do not interest me), and in this case I may be interested in ordering 2 (or more) servos.

[gyenesvi]

6 hours ago, oracid said:

The green GeekServos, with 3 wires, are continuously rotating. So usable with servo command.

Thanks for confirming that, this is what I was thinking.

6 hours ago, oracid said:

Note that green Geekservos are far from having the power and speed of radio-controlled car motors. They are more intended for robotics.

Of course I guesses that from the size, but I think they could still be useful for operating certain mechanisms, like deploying/retracting spoiler, opening/closing headlights, wing doors, etc. Maybe even a small winch that would work but not powerful enough to pull.

8 hours ago, NoEXIST said:

I'm sure they choose Bluetooth and app to control their models because it doesn't need any changes in hardware to build something completely different. In this case with rc we're still with cars, and rc cars usually have 1 motor for throttle and one servo. Other things are additional and are done similarly. Let's say we're making better PF system:)

Sure, agreed :)

8 hours ago, NoEXIST said:

Most flexible way to do that in my opinion is just having rc components packed in Lego compatible boxes separately. Like 4*3*2 box with receiver, similar box with ESC and maybe PF connectors on top. But in this case we're not really user-friendly. It's still tons of wires, but a little bit easier to connect components to the chassis.

In this option deck is becoming just an ESC box with Lego compatible connectors which is also nice, but it's a different product with a little different using scenario 

True, but I think it's not that simple, because if you separate the receiver from the ESC, then you have the problem of powering the receiver, which is usually coming from the BEC on the ESC, so there's a two way dependency there, because at the same time the ESC then gets its control signal from the receiver. Or you need a separate BEC for the receiver, or a (more expensive) ESC that can work with higher voltages, up to 3s LiPo, that could simplify the system wiring. So I think it's a good idea to keep the two together as a minimal product. It would essentially be an RC replacement for the PF IR receiver or for an SBrick (like the RCbrick was). If you think about it from that perspective, a simple logical product would be something that has an input from the battery and 4 PF ports probably powered by two dual output motor controllers, just like the one that the IR receiver has (and probably the Sbrick has two of them). There would be two shortcomings with that:

1) Such simple motor controllers can't handle enough power for (multiple) buggy motors -> hence the need for a proper ESC for at least two outputs

2) GeekServos cannot be utilized, which have great potential in case of an RC receiver being present -> hence the need to allow the outputs of the receiver to be used directly for GeekServos

Well, this is how I arrived at the concept I described above.

BTW, are you using a second ESC for the PU output currently? Or just something more of a light-weight motor controller?

[NoEXIST]

@gyenesvi I would say right now RCDeck is very similar to RC brick (even dimensions are similar) difference is that mine now has 2 additional channels. Actually want to say that I'm happy even with 2 channels as RC brick was, but why not to add 2 more channel if it's possible?

Yes, PU port uses another ESC, actually if you have PU/PF adapter you can power another buggy motor:) 

Edited March 12 by NoEXIST

[gyenesvi]

1 hour ago, NoEXIST said:

even dimensions are similar

Wasn't RCbrick 4x4 studs on the top? That's only a bit more than half the size of yours. But I'd guess that did not contain an ESC, just a dual motor controller.

1 hour ago, NoEXIST said:

Actually want to say that I'm happy even with 2 channels as RC brick was

True, that would also be a useful product :)

[NoEXIST]

1 hour ago, gyenesvi said:

Wasn't RCbrick 4x4 studs on the top

4*5*6 to be accurate, asked my friend about dimensions few days ago:) both are 4 stud wide, but pne of them is 5 studs long and the other 7, but height is the opposite, 6 vs 3

[gyenesvi]

2 hours ago, NoEXIST said:

4*5*6 to be accurate, asked my friend about dimensions few days ago:) both are 4 stud wide, but pne of them is 5 studs long and the other 7, but height is the opposite, 6 vs 3

Hmm, good to know, I thought that it's about 4x4x3 only. The 6 stud height sounds very big..

[NoEXIST]

6 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

Hmm, good to know, I thought that it's about 4x4x3 only. The 6 stud height sounds very big..

Recheck the info, I was a little bit mistaken. 4*5*5, it's lower

(photo by @osterum)

[gyenesvi]

3 hours ago, NoEXIST said:

Recheck the info, I was a little bit mistaken. 4*5*5, it's lower

To me on this photo the height (going sideways here) looks like 1 liftarm + 2 bricks, maybe 1 more plate, which is still less than 4 units in total, so that would make it 4x5x4 (excluding the PF connector of the motor).

[NoEXIST]

10 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

To me on this photo the height (going sideways here) looks like 1 liftarm + 2 bricks, maybe 1 more plate, which is still less than 4 units in total, so that would make it 4x5x4 (excluding the PF connector of the motor).

There it is

 

[wower]

Great product, when can I order it? :-)

Just one question, can I pair it with a "non pistol" remote?

Also, could you please provide a link to order suitable battery+charger please.

Thanks!

[NoEXIST]

12 hours ago, wower said:

Great product, when can I order it? :-)

Just one question, can I pair it with a "non pistol" remote?

Also, could you please provide a link to order suitable battery+charger please.

Thanks!

Thanks! I will let know there when the order for the first batch will be open so I can order all components in a proper quantity.

Non pistol remote can't be used with RCDeck with built in receiver. But as I mentioned before, in version with external receiver almost everything will be possible!

That's a battery I'm using: https://a.aliexpress.com/_EGuKP3J

(Next I'm going for something a bit bigger)

And this is charger that should work

https://a.aliexpress.com/_EyOJSc5

(But I got myself IMAX b6)