Motorising a 737 throttle.

[fordgt40]

For anyone wishing to motorise their throttles, I see that opencockpits have brought out a better and more robust dc motors card
Link here

http://www.opencockpits.com/catalog/...ard-p-263.html

[Flying_Fox]

Thank you David for pointing it out!

Right on time - I was just  going to order OC motor/servo cards.

Nick

[blueskydriver]

Just curious about a thought on this subject, what if you drill a small hole on one or both throttle handles just behind the top and facing forward. Then, you place an optic day/night sensor in one or both; therefore, when you place your hand and fingers around the throttle, you would cover the optic sensor, which would be used trigger the clutch for manual mode. Removing your hand it goes back to auto, as well as you could program a timer on the optic to something like:

if x(optic covered)=time limit, then stay manual mode, else auto mode.

Not exact language there, but enough to make the point.

Otherwise, I thought of a heat sensor to measure small difference from hand on throttle to hand off, but that is slower. Also, thought of pressure sensitive/resistance device in/on throttle, so when you place your hand on it you could do the same programming and work the clutch.

Thus, no real buttons, but of course this would have to be done without physically affecting the handles too much. And, this would not be exact as the real thing with degree differences...

All just thoughts.

John

[XOrionFE]

For anyone wishing to motorise their throttles, I see that opencockpits have brought out a better and more robust dc motors card
Link here

http://www.opencockpits.com/catalog/...ard-p-263.html

Crap,  I had just bought their older one a month ago....

You would think they would warn someone in the shopping cart that a new model was pending....

Scott

[Flying_Fox]

You would think they would warn someone in the shopping cart that a new model was pending....

.. and be left with a pile of old ones... 

[fordgt40]

John

An interesting idea that would tell the system when manual intervention is being applied. It should be possible, using this, to save the a/t parameters or mode, revert to manual then re engage the a/t mode. There is no need to disconnect the clutch (there is no facility), rather just turn off the drive motor.

The only downside I can see is that it is standard practice for the hands  to "cover" the throttle levers at key times during take-off and landing. Could cause some fun if the opto sensor had too wide a beam

Good idea and many thanks - this forum has some real imaginative thinking outside the box!

David

[jackpilot]

I am , by all means, totally ignorant on motorization as my TQ is not (and will not be..)
But seems to me that if you use a clutch like Polyclutch , and a clutch being a clutch, it can be overridden beyond a certain force for manual op until you disconnect AT.
Please explain if I am wrong..
Jack

[fordgt40]

Jack

You are correct. The issue here is trying to tell the "system" that manual intervention is occurring. The system does not know if you are holding the lever and the clutch is slipping. Unless you can devise some very clever programming to calculate timescales for the lever to move where it is commanded under the A/T and then work out that it is being held - ditto released

David

[vidarf]

...or just press the A/T disconnect button and be done with it. Not ALL aspects _needs_ to be simulated...

[fordgt40]

...or just press the A/T disconnect button and be done with it. Not ALL aspects _needs_ to be simulated...

Yes, of course. 

[jackpilot]

The issue here is trying to tell the "system" that manual intervention is occurring. David

Just for my educ:
This is for a brief manual intervention? yes ?
If the system knows, it will not fight back and start where you left the lever when your intervention is over...is that right?
Or..?
I do not see the difference with diconnectint AT Intervening and reconnecting AT.
Feel I will learn smth here ...lol

[fordgt40]

Jack

By all means disconnect and reconnect the A/T

On the real 737 the plane, when in A/T mode, will respond to a manual setting, but when the handle is released it returns to the currently commanded A/T position.

FSX will not do this - although you can move the throttle levers away from a commanded A/T setting (the clutch slips) the actual commanded thrust will not change - unless you disconnect the A/T, in which case it will then follow the manual setting.

I think this now takes it full circle

David

[jackpilot]

makes sense,
I made my life simpler with my custom 737 
Thanks David

Sent from my PC from sunny Canada! lol

[Joe Lavery]

You're a better man than me Jack, I read this post and am still none the wiser....

I went the servo route and always disconnect the A/T if I want manual control, seems logical somehow.  And it saves burning out the servos!

Joe.

[fordgt40]

Joe

No argument against that . My experience was that servos did not give me the smoothness of lever movement, hence the use of dc motors and the "challenges" that they bring.

David

[Joe Lavery]

David, I have to agree. The servos are not as smooth in operation, in fact I bought an OC DC motor board and have the motors to go with it; but I just couldn't get to grips with SIOC.

So I took the easier yet more expensive Phidgets route. 

[XOrionFE]

David, I have to agree. The servos are not as smooth in operation, in fact I bought an OC DC motor board and have the motors to go with it; but I just couldn't get to grips with SIOC.

So I took the easier yet more expensive Phidgets route. 

So you have yours working with Phidgets motor controllers Joe?   What a ionics package do you use?   I woul like to hear more about your setup.

Scott

[Joe Lavery]

Scott I use PM, combined with the following:

Phidgets PhidgetAdvancedServo 8-Motor Board
Phidgets PhidgetInterfaceKit 8/8/8 Board
PhidgetMotorControl HC Board (this for driving the Trim Wheels)

The whole system is controlled by a program written by Diego called DVATX. It's freeware and works very well. I'm using 2 pretty hefty sail arm servos from Hitek and two DC motors from an ebay seller.
At the moment I'm in the middle of a TQ rebuild to encompass this kit, but I've had it all working quite nicely on the bench. The new TQ is more substantial than the one I built for the PC Pilot magazine article. I've taken a bit more time and structured it around a real TQ with some ideas from other builders, but of course not an all metal construction.

I've also been designing a set of clocks for the MIP, they don't have all the features of an original but they incorporate a standard 7 segment LED clock and a 7 Segment stop watch with lap time. I think that's all that's needed really. I've just finished the circuit board design but I'm not sure how many I'll build, it depends if anyone else is interested. They should be a around £100 each, which is about a third of others I've seen. They're designed using PIC chips which are very versatile, however it's taken me some time to get to grips with the programming. Luckily I have a friend who is a master, so I've been having a few lessons.
I'll post some pics when the boards arrive.
Cheers
Joe.

[blueskydriver]

Hi Joe,

Are the MIP clocks going to be all inclusive with the Bezel and buttons, or will they be an attachment unit that could/would attach to FDS MIP Clock Bezels (non FDS working clock unit). It'd be nice to have these mount up with the FDS Bezels because they're already correctly sized for the holes. It would be disappointing to get something that is slightly oversized.

Will you please post some pics of your work on the clocks. If they fit, I will be interested...

John

[fsaviator]

Joe,

I'm also interested in your clocks...  please keep me in mind.

Warren

[Joe Lavery]

Hi guys,
I have an Engravity MIP so I've based the clock on that. As I mentioned in my last post they do not function the same as a real clock, so they only have four buttons.
The clock part has 2 buttons, one for time set and the other to change the digits. The stop watch has 2 more buttons, one for start/stop, the other for lap time and reset. In which case the bezel will only have four button positions, not the usual seven as most MIPs show.

John, I am planning to include a bezel, but it will be based on the Engravity sizes because that's really the only reference I have to work with. It would be no more difficult to make a different size bezel (if I have the accurate sizes), but it would have to be a replacement because most come with button holes already cut out and they wouldn't line up with my buttons. 
Once I have a finished article I will post some pics. I originally intended just to make a set for myself, but when I showed the prototype to a few friends they immediately said "I want one". So it looks like it might be a production run. 
As I said the first circuit boards are on order, then once I know everything works OK I can look at the bezel arrangement. I've attached my circuit design for the display board, there is also a second board with the PIC chips and transistors to drive the LED displays. That sits below the display board, like a sandwich. 
This may not be the final version either, as I need to make sure everything lines up with the holes in my MIP. Yet again I can still change this to fit the FDS MIP if I can get the dimensions.
But naturally it's simply not worth doing for a single set, they would cost more than the price I'm charging. The circuit boards alone cost over £60.00 for a prototype set, So I'll have to see how many people are interested. I can get cheaper boards from China and Canada but once the UK VAT and money grabbing post office add their cut, it's the same price.

Incidentally if someone wants to send me the sizes of the FDS bezel and it's associated mounting holes, I can see how viable it would be to make two variants.
And finally Warren I will certainly keep you posted on my progress.

Joe.

[Sean]

Hi Joe

You can add me to your growing list. Put me down for 2 Engravity sized ones! 

Sean

[XOrionFE]

Thank you for the info on your TQ setup Joe.  I have downloaded and checked out DVATX in the past.  It may not work for me because my TQs are driven by motors instead of servos much like David's but I will look again.   Otherwise, I also have the open cockpits cards so I can also lean on David's skills to help with the SIOC code :-) .   One way or the other it will get done eventually.

As for your clocks, I would be very interested also in an FDS sized set.  Looking forward to seeing you finished prototype.    Maybe start a separate thread to gauge more interest as I am sure there are many many more that would like a set if they know about it.

Scott

[Joe Lavery]

Scott, It looks like there are  more people interested that I would have thought. So I think I'll wait until I have the prototype and post a new thread to gauge how many I'm going to need to build.
I certainly don't want to go the route I've seen many other go and take orders (and money) without having the product ready to ship. This only generates bad feeling and mistrust. 

My idea would be to make a batch and only then offer them to those on the list that are interested. That way it would only be a matter of waiting for the post to deliver them.

Cheers
Joe.

[jackpilot]

Nice way to proceed Joe.