Great input on this. Just so you’re aware those aren’t stripes of carbon fiber on the prototipo deck, it’s a full layer with a single wood veneer stripe down the center.
I mention this because it means the deck is consistent in RF transparency (or lack thereof) rather than the center having better transparency than outer edges.
I was worried that might be the case from the cross section of the veneers. I wonder if the antenna orientation plays a part as well.
My initial receiver orientation was vertical, stuck to the enclosures wall.
In the 2nd location it’s horizontal, on top of a P group.
I also don’t want to discount the fact that my foot and leg were nearly always over the receiver in the first location.
Regardless, I’d say that’s indicative of a potential problem with this particular enclosure.
I’ve found the prototipo enclosure to be one of the most difficult to get signal through, but the remotes I’ve tested have worked. I have had issues with a trace-antenna Metr Pro, but BT can be trickier with link budget.
I’ll be testing my wand on this exact deck/enclosure as well and will report back. We’ve got a week of sunshine coming up! Wooo!
Newer VESC firmware has new parameters in configuration: si_battery_type, si_battery_cells, si_battery_ah. Most likely VESC uses those values to calculate percentage and sends to WAND. Please check you specify those correctly. You can use VESC Tool or Metr App Expert tab.
Ha! I’m likewise risking fate currently as I’m riding around on a Prototipo build + a Kaly deck w/ metal enclosures hah. The metal Kaly enclosures made me want to mount my receiver(s) externally but so far it’s actually tested just fine internally mounted. Have only tested OSRR receivers in it so far though.
Have you set the battery parameters (S count and capacity) on the vesc the WAND is connected to?
The carbon fiber enclosure probably does have an impact on link budget, as does the metal casing of the Wand.
Then it’s always a tradeoff. Do our clients prefer a CF enclosure (that makes their electronics virtually bombproof) with a plastic remote or a metal remote with a plastic enclosure. I have my idea on this.
NanoV2 and VX1 have been our remotes of choice simply because connection is solid. No bells and whistles but I do consider a strong signal to always be a good thing. The most important thing, in fact.
@Trampa I have had the wand for awhile now. Wood deck, abs enclosure. Today I lost signal just from shielding the LCD with my hand so I could read it in the sun. I got off and am able to replicate complete signal loss to the board just by putting my hand around the LCD end. Thoughts on this? Thank you
CF is actually very brittle. Not a good material for impact safety. The Wand has a totally radio transparent bottom and the transmitter sits 0.7 mm above the very surface of that part. Even if you other remotes work themselves through the CF, its no good design Choice to put a receiver inside a Faraday cage.
LaCroix should consider to have a window for radio receives. They could have a small portion in the deck without CF and mill a indentation for the receiver in exact that spot. Also Telemetry would benefit from that.
I like the idea of having a antenna port you can seal on the enclosure and have RX top mounted.
Your hand is pretty good in signal shielding.
This is why the transceiver sits so far to the front, away from the hand. I have a prototype made from plastic, receiver very close to the hand, no display. This remote turned out to be less reliable since the hand itself is good in shielding signals.
As @Pedrodemio pointed out, he can shield his GT2B with his body.
However, I do take my hand to shade the display, but I don’t wrap it around the front.
I place it above the display to create max shade. This doesn’t affect the signal.
Darn watery flesh… Blocking my radio signals.
Tests on how much signal blocking your hand can do would be interesting with the most common remotes.
Would need some kind of radio nerd to measure all those different signals and their strengths.
A lot! Water is pretty good in shielding signals.
That’s why you can’t easily control a RC Submarine under water.
I’m sorry I know I’ll probably get backlash for this but this is completely unacceptable. I’ve dragged the hoyt remote across the pavement and it works perfectly. If a remote fails to hold connection with stuff like this, it’s utterly useless (and incredibly dangerous) in my opinion.
What does that have to do with the signal?
Lots of opinions from people that have not even held the remote in their hands.
I would suggest people to wait for further testing and not jump the gun on this.
There are people in the thread actually qualified to voice an opinion @DerelictRobot @Deodand and they are far more restrained than some of you guys.
I’m just saying if people can get remotes that durable, there’s no excuse for trampas remote being such hot garbage
No, you are accusing a product without having any first hand experience with it or data to back it up.
