|||
Not Registered
Go AD FREE & get your membership medal
BRONZE
Less Ads
SILVER
GOLD
Ad Free
Cancel
Anytime
Β£2.50
Β£4.50
Β£6.50
Subscribe
Go AD FREE & get your membership medal
BRONZE
Less Ads
SILVER
GOLD
Ad Free
For A Whole Year!
Β£25
Β£45
Β£65
Donate
You Will Be Helping Towards:

  • Domain Fees
  • Security Certificates
  • iOS & Android App Fees
  • Website Hosting
  • Fast Servers
  • Data Backups
  • Upkeep & Maintenance
  • Administration Costs

    Without your support the website wouldn't be what it is today.

    Please consider donating towards these fees to help keep us afloat.

    Read more

    All donations are securely managed through PayPal.

    Many thanks for your kind support
  • Join Us On Social Media!
    Download The App!

    Login To
    Remove Ads
    Login To
    Remove Ads

    Model Boats Website
    Model Boats Website
    Home
    Forum
    Build Blogs
    Media Gallery
    Boat Clubs & Lakes
    Events
    Boat Harbour
    How-To Articles
    Plans & Docs
    Useful Links
    Tug Dual ESC Electronics
    16 Posts Β· 5 Followers Β· 8 Photos Β· 15 Likes
    Began 4 years ago by
    Petty Officer 1st Class
    United Kingdom
    Follow This Thread
    Not currently following
    > Click to follow
    Latest Post 4 years ago by
    Petty Officer 1st Class
    United Kingdom
    Oldest posts shown first   (Show Newest First) (Print Booklet)
    πŸ“ Tug Dual ESC Electronics
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 8 Views · 3 Likes · 4 Comments
    Flag
    πŸ’¬ Add Comment
    A home built upgrade as a mixer equivalent.
    Illustrates what can be done with basic parts.
    No commercial part will do this job.
    The build allows proportional motor control to assist the rudders on the tug, which is otherwise impossible to position in high winds or in reverse. No extra controller is needed, neither is the existing PCB modified in any way.
    The pictures show the scratchbuilt board under a final test prior to attempting to fit the board into the Southampton tug.
    The waveform is one of many. The yellow would be a half speed motor, but the alteration is the rudder setting modifying the motor speed. The red is the timing pulse for the rudder circuitry.
    The mod has no effect until the rudder is moved to at least40% deflection in reverse and 60% in forward. In forward, the faster you go, the less effect the mod has, a bit like power steering in a car.
    When stopped, with no throttle, just adjusting the rudder drives both motors gently, up to 40% speed, in opposite sense to turn on the spot.
    All figures are adjustable, set by component values.
    That's the theory anyhow!
    I'm now going to try to remove the deck...

    πŸ’¬ Re: Tug Dual ESC Electronics
    4 years ago by πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ RNinMunich ( Fleet Admiral)
    ✧ 6 Views · 0 Likes
    Flag
    "Still learning to try and keep it simple...."
    I recognise the problem SCπŸ€”
    Good luckπŸ‘
    Cheers, Doug 😎
    Login To
    Remove Ads

    πŸ’¬ Re: Tug Dual ESC Electronics
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 9 Views · 2 Likes
    Flag
    Agree with this. I did try and pick up the motor servo but it does not exist. I had the official circuit diagram too. Hence this build, having to start again from the motor outputs.

    I did put up a block diagram originally on the Electronize forum, but will repeat it on the build blog shortly, tidied up with comments. So I made a decision to deal with the inputs first as I intended the blog to teach a little electronics, as requested by 2 followers. This is a problem with threads, early comments, questions and answers get forgotten.

    I could have just derived a circuit to recreate the motor servo signal from the motor signals, then bought bits to do the job. However, this boat version has a huge dead band and minimum motor speed is just under 25%, which is not really slow.

    I think using the motor outputs makes this design relevant to all of these tugs and variants, as the interfaces are common to all.

    If I commercialised it as a kit of a built PCB with connectors for most of the hook up, the parts cost in 100 quantities would be about 10 pounds including PCB. On normal commercial markups that would be nearly 100 retail or much less than 30 if made and sold from China....Bionic Bill has a working FM radio costing just a pound or so.
    Not too bad but as you say, not really commercial. On the other hand it has only cost me much less than 20 pounds including replacing 2 blown up bridges that used badly chosen components.
    I worked in precision and expensive design high end electronics for 40 years. Still learning to try and keep it simple....
    πŸ’¬ Re: Tug Dual ESC Electronics
    4 years ago by πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ RNinMunich ( Fleet Admiral)
    ✧ 8 Views · 2 Likes
    Flag
    "No commercial part will do this job."
    "If you can buy a mixer that picks up the forward and back H bridge signals currently on the motor, as I have to do for this device, then yes I'm reinventing the wheel."
    SC,
    I'm not in the least surprised.
    I really don't think that any commercial concern would have the slightest interest in developing and producing a product to do 'this job' in this manner.
    It would hardly repay them for their investment.
    How many Southampton / Richardson (same model just different name) are there out there?
    THAT would be their MAXIMUM market potential. Less those skippers that are quite happy with how the bog standard model performs. Hardly profitableπŸ€”
    Don't let my sober commercial considerations discourage you though.
    More power to your soldering iron for tinkering about to see what's possibleπŸ‘

    A few years ago I assisted a fellow member to decipher a Richardson circuit board in order to pick off the switching signals so that he could augment the lighting circuits on his model.
    With a little more research, experimentation and a half decent scope I'm sure it would have also been possible to find the throttle and rudder servo outputs and the driving PWM outputs from the RX. For the throttle for instance it would be easy enough to work back from the output FETs. The rudder servo control signals can't be that difficult to trace back either.

    A word to the wise:πŸ˜‰
    If this thread is intended to be a tutorial for members (not sure how many actually have a Southampton /Richardson model) it would be helpful to structure it a bit.πŸ˜‰
    A few tips from one who spent decades writing system descriptions to explain what they have been designed to achieve, the end user objectives they meet (for the Admiral) and how they work (for the navy engineers and operating personnel).
    E.g. first set out the objectives, and illustrate with a block diagram and a flow diagram; IF THIS THEN THAT; IF NOT THEN THIS etc.
    Then step by step describe how each of the blocks can/could be realised, with circuit diagrams and component lists. And a description of what each block does, how and WHY.
    At the practical level; diagrams and component layouts of the strip board layouts and wiring diagrams showing any alterations within the model so that readers can duplicate them, even if they don't quite understand what the individual components do.

    "Question re a build by Alan Blond. Commercially available?.
    This was shown as a veroboard build. I don't known if/ how it was marketed. "
    Alan Bond's site (and similar) is not commercially oriented. They are purely 'How To' sites to swap ideas and pass on info and experience to interested and imaginative model builders.
    Cheers, Doug 😎
    πŸ’¬ Re: Tug Dual ESC Electronics
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ G6SWJ ( Midshipman)
    ✧ 8 Views · 2 Likes
    Flag
    Looks a great project.

    You say no commercial part will do this job - is the functionality not similar to Alan Bond's Rudder Mixer


    https://www.technobotsonline.com/rudder-mixer-by-alan-bond.html
    Login To
    Remove Ads

    πŸ“ Alternatives suggested by G6SWJ
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 7 Views · 1 Like · 1 Comment
    Flag
    πŸ’¬ Add Comment
    Question re a build by Alan Blond. Commercially available?.
    This was shown as a veroboard build. I don't known if/ how it was marketed. The info clearly says it picks up the receiver signal, which is probably the 1-2 msec pulses for servos. That's a fairly standard Arduino function and no mystery to those skilled in that art.
    I said in an earlier post that a standard mixer that uses the receiver 1-2 msec signal cannot be used in the tug because it uses a proprietary PCB. As far as I can see from the official circuit that signal does not exist on any line that can be picked off. There is a PWM that goes to the smoker that is a function of throttle but could be anything and no direction info. You do get the rudder servo signal. I'll be explaining the logic of mixing these. The guys who make the commercial items delight in telling of million options.
    If you can buy a mixer that picks up the forward and back H bridge signals currently on the motor, as I have to do for this device, then yes I'm reinventing the wheel.
    Save me!

    πŸ’¬ Re: Alternatives suggested by G6SWJ
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ G6SWJ ( Midshipman)
    ✧ 9 Views · 3 Likes
    Flag
    I may not have picked up on the fine detail of what you are working with/ trying to achieve so maybe this is a red herring - I may have misunderstood - I picked up that that yoo were scrapping the original "electrickery" and staring again...

    Alan Bond is a well known modeller (Aircraft and Boats)

    This is his website


    http://www.forge-electronics.co.uk/index.php/boats
    http://www.forge-electronics.co.uk/index.php/boats/rudder-mixer
    πŸ“ Software vs hardware
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 8 Views · 2 Likes · 2 Comments
    Flag
    πŸ’¬ Add Comment
    I don't want to get into rivalry with the Arduino project. This blog runs in parallel, for those who feel more comfortable with a few logic chips. For any system, once you have the input signals digitised, software is a good choice for processing. But it seems to me that the processors do not escape needing a lot of hardware for model boats, albeit that some of it comes on a board that you buy.
    You have to make serial pins into parallel outputs and at the end point, every device needs a pin, and wire, if not a buffer as well, even sometimes for a LED. The end difference in size can be very small.
    My personal problem is thinking through and debugging the original logic.
    Both methods have the same issue. RIRO.
    Rubbish In Rubbish Out!
    The build I have just done uses 5 simple logic chips, but the thinking behind this was difficult. However, I could see what was going on in real time, glitches and all, so fault finding wasn't too bad. If your programming logic is wrong, then the builder faces the problem of deciding between a circuit malfunction and his her own error. That's partly why programmers beg borrow and use previous work.
    My experience at work was that testers with probes caused more problems than they fixed.
    But testing can be essential.
    A 7 day unsolved software problem was once fixed by me in 5 minutes by prodding with a scope when the 32 channel(!) logic analyser maintained that all was well. And it was a hardware fault.
    There's space for both methods to work together, choice often depends on your comfort zone.
    Getting back to this ESC build, what you see, barring connectors, is the complete device with 2 H bridges capable of 5A included. The ICs are on top and the surface mount parts and wiring under. It took 2 days to build and another day to fix after I got too ambitious and took a jump too far, causing damage due to a build error. I will be adding motor suppression on the motors themselves.
    This build isnot an economy in time, but a necessity to make the boat work as I feel it should. And for me it's funπŸ˜†

    πŸ’¬ Re: Software vs hardware
    4 years ago by πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ RNinMunich ( Fleet Admiral)
    ✧ 7 Views · 1 Like
    Flag
    Well said Jonathan πŸ‘
    😎
    πŸ’¬ Re: Software vs hardware
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ G6SWJ ( Midshipman)
    ✧ 8 Views · 2 Likes
    Flag
    Well SeamanCook you have confused me!

    I am really not sure what you mean by rivalry or what my post about Alan Bond's mixer & your ESC project has to do with Arduino in any way shape or form.

    If there is any rivalry it's in your head not mine.

    You raised a point about "a lot of hardware" I want to set the record straight - the image below if a fully functioning Bare Bones Arduino - as you will see not a lot of hardware hanging off the chip.

    I wish you well with your ESC project

    Jonathan
    πŸ“ History and progress
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 7 Views · 1 Like · 2 Comments
    Flag
    πŸ’¬ Add Comment
    Just to be clear.... this blog carries on from the Electronize thread and also from Southampton Tug/ smoke generators. A few folk would like an introduction to Electronics and this ESC project will hopefully serve as a foundation for that.
    Please go through the last few weeks of those if you want to know where I started out from.
    As of now, I have the deck off the boat. The tips given to me elsewhere on this were useful. You remove all davits to get at some buried screws; two smaller davits at the back seem to be glued in and needed a gentle levering.
    Looking at the motors gave a scare as it looked as if they were in series!
    My mistake though. Phew!
    I can see no reason for this boat to lean to the right in the water, but balancing it on the keel it clearly tips quite heavily. The rudder servo must weigh a ton, it's on the right. Sorry- starboard.
    That leads to a decision, to move the battery to the back under the rear hatch, and opposite the servo so as to help the balance. It also means that the battery and a new ON switch can be accessed without removing the rather fragile deckhouse under which the wiring was quite tight. Several wires pass through this , sealed with a glue gun rather haphazardly.
    The wires are of course too short so this is the next thing to sort out

    πŸ’¬ Re: History and progress
    4 years ago by πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ RNinMunich ( Fleet Admiral)
    ✧ 7 Views · 1 Like
    Flag
    Hi Rick,
    Do you have the Southampton or Richardson tug model then?
    This rather complex mod is only relevant to and specific to those models due to the proprietary combined electronics module that they use.
    It is not an ESC design for universal application.
    And yes, you would need to do a fair bit of neat soldering.
    Cheers, Doug 😎
    πŸ’¬ Re: History and progress
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Newby7 ( Fleet Admiral)
    ✧ 8 Views · 2 Likes
    Flag
    Is it possible to give a parts break down and cost of the ESC.
    As someone not great at electronics would I be able to build and do I need to solder well .
    Rick
    πŸ“ Newb7 query
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 7 Views · 1 Like · 1 Comment
    Flag
    πŸ’¬ Add Comment
    The plan (and nothing goes to plan) is to break up the circuit into 4 or 5 parts and explain the electronics, thinking, testing and pitfalls of each one. Building it is one thing, sorting any problems in a safe and systematic fashion is another! I learned long ago to design the test method before the circuit is built.
    An objective is to show how a person with basic test gear - a cheap DMM costing 4 pounds - can check out functionality.
    Bear in mind that this build is applicable to the Southampton Tug and similar boats using the same basic parts. I detailed the options previously. You can spend your way to the same solution but it will cost a fair bit. Other boats which have all servo signals available can get the same functionality commercially for about 50 pounds. You need a mixer, a Y servo connector and 2 ESCs. And you learn very little.
    A scratch build with legged components is getting difficult. The reason is progress. I can buy the IC chips in surface mount types for around 20 p each, in 10 s. Double that for ones. But the legged versions on E bay will be 2 pounds each. Some are still sold but the range is decreasing. I can handle such SMD ICs but it needs a small soldering iron, a steady hand and a decent magnifying glass. SMD passive components cost a penny or two each but you have to buy in 10 s 50s and 100s. They easily fit on veroboard, the 0805 size is easy to handle and the smaller 0603 are OK with decent tweezers to hold them.
    For that reason I did the design to minimise the different numbers of components. So for instance you buy 10K resistors. Two in series gives 20K and 2 in parallel gives 5K. As many values needed are not critical, a few values go a long way. Most SMD boards use this method because the machines only handle a limited number of values.
    I used SMD components on the wiring side because a lot can be squeezed in. But legged components are perfectly feasible. A big help to this would be a PCB, which would reduce the time and risk considerably. For that we really need to order at least 10 to make costs sensible. More folk would need to join in.
    I hope I answered the real question!

    πŸ’¬ Re: Newb7 query
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Newby7 ( Fleet Admiral)
    ✧ 8 Views · 2 Likes
    Flag
    Thank you I have read this post but will keep reading it often to get a better grasp of the terms used and components needed.
    Again thank you
    πŸ“ Progress with installation and H bridge as a smoker.
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 7 Views · 2 Likes
    Flag
    πŸ’¬ Add Comment
    Nothing goes to plan. The photos will follow. I installed the board; it ran for a while, and when I applied the power for the third time, I got the dreaded grey smoke. That sort of thing is a nightmare because one does not know why the fault happened. It was working and I didn't touch anything sir.
    You have to guess, unless you are certain of having made a mistake. I don't believe in failures due to bad luck. So I made some improvements which I will detail later, and also added a switch so as to turn things on with all inputs active and set. I learned a few things about low current H bridges.
    Simple Sailor reminded me earlier about logic level MOSFETs. I was tempted and I fell. But it turns out that all the usual precautions on H bridges are required. You don't really save anything, because logic chips do not have enough Oomph to drive the FETs at a reasonable speed. You really have to add a buffer amplifier. And most switching circuits have a tendency to self destruction which must be resisted. I discerned a design rule to share.
    If designing an H bridge with only one drive point on each side, the sum of the Vgs of the top and bottom FET when conducting the nominal load current must be less than the rail voltage. That is generally true for logic level FETs with single battery cell devices, but for 2 cells, or anything above 5V or so, a single point drive of an H bridge with logic level devices is liable to have problems, grey smoke being one of them. You should really use the old, bigger higher Vgs rated devices. Especially when you're a modeller rather than a speed merchant.
    You have to drive the top and bottom transistors of one 'leg" of an H bridge so that there is a "dead band" when both are nominally off, or at least nearly off. This goes against nature and what FETs want to do, which is to both stay on together in an embrace to destruction. Normally, that means a driver chip is required but I am far too mean for those and found a workaround. I think a 3 cell 12V device would certainly need a driver chip, which all add their own problems, especially as many do not handle flat out full speed. At a future point I will cover H bridges and their foibles and differences. At no time may any transistor gate be uncontrolled, especially at turn on. The normal ESC is a bargain....
    Surprisingly, I rethought my ideas on old fashioned Bipolar devices, and provided the current is no more than 5A they probably work out cheaper and simpler than MOSFETs especially at higher voltages. And low voltages below 2V is possible, where a MOSFET will start to struggle. They can be made more tolerant of abuse and the driving of them is actually quite easy.
    Anyway, after a few hours soldering and retest....
    Success! At least until it goes in the water. I added some LEDs which tell me if a prop is going forward or back, and the brightness indicates the speed. The circuit seems to be behaving properly; all functions work. Whether its all in the right direction only a trip to some water will tell. And to some extent, its a matter of preference or even practicalities.
    I examined the Tug electronics and it's a little more non standard than I expected.
    The rudder servo pulse is 1to 2 msec, but occurs at a rate of about 8.6 msec, over twice as fast as usual. Servos don't care about this but I do; cue some value changes to readjust gain.
    The motor throttle pulses also come at every 8.6 msec. Full speed is seen, but the minimum starts at 2 msec or just under 1/4 speed. I feel that is excessive for a Tug. In time I will add an adjustment for that. When throttle is stopped and I move the rudders, as designed the motors turn in opposite directions for a spot turn. I can make the motors turn very slowly indeed, albeit in air. So it looks like the 2 msec they have used corresponds to a maximum servo pulse.
    Provided it works OK in the water I will start to document the circuit in sections and use each section to illustrate the use of common and inexpensive electronic parts.
    This has ended at a slightly higher cost than originally envisaged, but still very light for the functionality. It's the bits at the edges that cost.... I have realised from other blogs that every expert among us accumulates numbers of small tools, methods and knick knacks that help us to practise our expertise. When you come to help someone else get started, the real cost suddenly stares you in the eye. What is cheap and easy for me turns into something expensive for another to duplicate because of such start up costs.

    πŸ“ Obeying the Fleet Admiral
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 19 Views · 1 Like
    Flag
    πŸ’¬ Add Comment
    You must always have a fuse he said. But I wanted a switch. So I made a pair of wires with a connector that would normally be joined by a switch. But I fit a fuse into the connector and the fuse acts as the switch. Job done sir.

    πŸ“ In the boat
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 19 Views · 1 Like
    Flag
    πŸ’¬ Add Comment
    A couple of photos here showing the bits in the boat. The circuit board could be half the size or less on a proper PCB but a first hand built prototype needs spare space.

    The next visit is to the bath or a pond. I think everything is going the right way but my mechanical and spacial ability is zilch.

    Still considering how to present this build as an educational series and whether to throw away and replace the output stages as I am not 100% happy with the devices used. And I have used the spares....

    πŸ“ Output stages
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 18 Views · 0 Likes
    Flag
    πŸ’¬ Add Comment
    As I said, I was not happy with the parts I bought for the output stage and sure enough for no apparent reason one device has developed a slight fault just as I got the deck back on. Unusually, not complete destruction. But typical of a small over voltage spike. At a 12V rating these devices were marginal on my normal design rules so I pay the price and scrap them.
    So that output stage is coming out and getting replaced. I need a few days to buy in the proper bits but a temporary set of a silly big size will go in tomorrow. That's another thing down to experience....

    πŸ“ No apparent reason for fail
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 18 Views · 0 Likes · 4 Comments
    Flag
    πŸ’¬ Add Comment
    Well I said in a recent post that in my experience more damage was caused by testing than the testers fixed in the first place. My "no apparent reason" for a fail was possibly the testing itself. After the damage was removed, on initial retest I put my high impedance scope probe onto a power supply pin and saw a flash. Impossible! But true. Now scope probes regularly go open circuit in their wire. But in over forty years I have never ever had one go short circuit.
    There a first time for everything. So testing probably shorted a wire out and the rest becomes history. But probably a good thing as I was mistrustful of the circuit anyway. Fix underway.

    πŸ’¬ Re: No apparent reason for fail
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 21 Views · 1 Like
    Flag
    I think the educational bit will start when I have learned a little more....
    Login To
    Remove Ads

    πŸ’¬ Re: No apparent reason for fail
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Newby7 ( Fleet Admiral)
    ✧ 18 Views · 0 Likes
    Flag
    The unfortunate part is you didn't get a picture with the flash.
    Rick
    πŸ’¬ Re: No apparent reason for fail
    4 years ago by πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Gone Gone Gone ( Petty Officer 1st Class)
    ✧ 21 Views · 1 Like
    Flag
    We have a UK warning of "Don't try this at home". I always prefer to learn from the mistakes of others. But in everything where you part invent, cut and shape bits, it's amazing how you measure three time, cut once and curse when it doesn't fit.! We learn, get up and plod on....accepting that when it goes wrong its usually from a direction we never expected.
    πŸ’¬ Re: No apparent reason for fail
    4 years ago by πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ RNinMunich ( Fleet Admiral)
    ✧ 18 Views · 0 Likes
    Flag
    A most curious 'educational series' SC!
    Under the title of 'Don't try this because...' perhaps?
    Doug 😎
    Show 6 More Posts


    About This Website
    Terms of Service
    Privacy Policy