TonyS

OK. So, on advice, I thought I'd build this up motor by motor. I connected one of the outboard motors power leads to a single battery and ensured that this had the red positive connected in the the ESC cable. I then tested this set up and, as we'd expect, the motor primed and functioned correctly. I then connected the motor next to it, one of the inboard fans, connecting the power leads from this and the first fan to the single battery, ensured the red positive was disconnected from this second ESC and guess what, only the inboard fan worked. Clearly the power from the first ESC (outboard fan) was making it to the Rx but no signal was getting back?

I've been at this thing again today. The manual makes no sense to me re slaving channels. The example given seems to suggest having the throttle channel as the master and the throttle channel as the slave which to me makes no sense at all. Appreciating this is just the example I've slaved Aux 2 to the Throttle and it still doesn't work! Anyone want to buy a partly completed Vulcan!!!! Seriously. I've swapped the Rx for a slightly larger one and one that offered another channel. I've provided the Rx with a separate power supply. I've tried to slave the Aux 2 to the throttle as best I can given the instructions don't make a lot of sense to me. Still I only get 2 motors running. I've also used my cheap and cheerful (and only) servo tester to see if I get anything from the speed controllers which I do, even if the signal is very broken up, on all four. The first diagram re the wiring is the correct one - for some reason I can't delete the original which showed the batteries connected to the wrong speed controllers.

Right everyone. I'm reliably informed that I need to 'stop messing about with my plane and get ready to go out' so, I'll sign off for now. Thank you everyone for the input. Lots to consider/try etc. May I wish you all a Happy New Year and maybe, just maybe, 2023 will finally see this Vulcan take to the skies and I won't have to satisfy myself with a trip to Wellsbourne airfield to see a real one (mind you, mine could taxi on two EDF's just like that one does 🙂 ) T

Great memory Nik, I can barely remember what I did this morning let alone what someone posted many years ago. Good point re the Rx power. Pointless trying to get redundancy this way.

So to Andy Joyce's point it may be that I need to provide some additional power to the Rx?

On this diagram is it right that only the white data wire is connected from each speed controller?

No such thing as silly at this stage. Got to be worth a try. I have had the outward EDFs working but who knows....

Latest attempt.....

So I've just connected the negatives and still nothing?

Andy, it's via the power wire from the ESC

Thanks Frank, I have put a signal booster in the circuit between the 4 in 1 and the Rx. The retracts work well - and they are quite chunky, so I'd be surprised if there was insufficient signal to power 4 ESCs but then, what do I know.... I've just connected all the negative leads from the batteries however I still only get the two inboard fans powering up. I'm using a Spectrum AR500 Rx which is small but there are spare channels. I'm not sure how to slave a separate channel to the throttle though?

There's no sep. BEC supply -

That may well be the issue........ The negatives aren't interconnected!

Yes, a mistype. Oops!

Yes, apologies, the power is what's disconnected.

So, here goes... The, ahem, wiring diagram

I've been trying to build a 4 EDF model Vulcan for the best part of 5 years now, maybe longer. It took shape quickly but came to a screeching halt when I got to wiring it up and has sat on my workbench ever since. Every so often I pluck up enough enthusiasm to 'give it another go' and so, here I am. Basically the problem is this. No matter how I wire the system I can only ever get two fans to work. The set up was meant to build in some redundancy, one battery powers the two inboard fans, the other the two outboard fans. I did this such that if one battery gave up the model would still have two motors. Anyway, the set-up is as follows: The four speed controllers have four plugs each with a positive, negative and data wire. I have disconnected the orange data from three of these. So the four plugs then go into a 4 in 1 connector which then connects to the throttle port in the receiver. The power cables from the outboard EDF speed controllers (red and black) connect into a 2 into 1 and then into one battery, the inboards do the same into the other battery. I switch on my Tx (a Spectrum DX7) and then connect the two batteries. The two inboard motors then bleep and respond to throttle inputs from the Tx. The outboards EDFs are dead. I've just tried changing the battery set-up so that in place of the 2x 4S batteries I have 2x 2S batteries in series and all 4 of the motors then connect together. I did this in case the problem was connecting first one battery (which then primed 2 speed controllers) then connecting a second but at this stage the second pair of speed controllers wouldn't be recognised. Same outcome - 2 EDFs working, two EDFs dead. If I mess around I can get the 2 outboard EDFs to work and then the two inboard EDFs are dead. If anyone can provide any pointers as to what I could try next I'd be immensely grateful. I did by the way post about this (about 4 or 5 years ago I think though I've lost track of time). Thanks

Posted by Gary Manuel on 12/10/2020 12:19:38: It's a shame we predominantly right handed Brits chose to drive on the left because I find that changing gear etc with my right hand whilst driving abroad makes it much easier than fumbling with my left hand back home. Edited By Gary Manuel on 12/10/2020 12:41:31 True, and it's not just gear shifting. It's more and more the case that cars are turning to control knobs and switches, touch pads and touch screens in the centre console that require a significant degree of dexterity that right handers find difficult to use with the left hand. This means that they're more distracted when trying to use them.

Posted by Shaunie on 12/10/2020 00:31:04: Gonna weigh in with my tuppence worth here. Throughout my forty years in the electronics industry the gender of a connector has always been defined by the contacts themselves. Pins=male, sockets=female. Nothing stops you from defining the gender of the housing as male or female but essentially a plug has pin connectors and a socket has female connectors. Not perfect, as this discussion shows but it suffices for most situations. As for driving on the left, as far as I’m aware that is, when on horseback keeping to the left easily allowed ones sword to be brought to bear on the person coming the other way should his attentions not be honourable. Napoleon however was a lefty so on the continent he had everyone ride on the right so he got first dibs with his sword. Don’t think it occurred to him that he had disadvantaged his entire army for his own convenience. I’m a leftie too but I still think it was a bad idea though. Edited By Shaunie on 12/10/2020 00:33:07 I think the confusion for me came with thinking of everything as connectors within a housing. In the case of the XT60 / XT90 these aren't constructed like that, they are the connector itself. Anyway, enough's been said on this I think. As for the driving on the left/right, I heard a similar tale though the explanation I'd heard was that it was Louis XVI who decided that, as evidence that France was a civilized country there was no need to have your sword hand free when travelling and to demonstrate this he dictated that everyone should ride on the right. I also picked this up on the web and to be fair it sounds more likely: In the past, almost everybody travelled on the left side of the road because that was the most sensible option for feudal, violent societies. Since most people are right-handed, swordsmen preferred to keep to the left in order to have their right arm nearer to an opponent and their scabbard further from him. Moreover, it reduced the chance of the scabbard (worn on the left) hitting other people. Right-handed knights preferred to keep to the left in order to have their right arm nearer to an opponent Furthermore, a right-handed person finds it easier to mount a horse from the left side of the horse, and it would be very difficult to do otherwise if wearing a sword (which would be worn on the left). It is safer to mount and dismount towards the side of the road, rather than in the middle of traffic, so if one mounts on the left, then the horse should be ridden on the left side of the road. In the late 1700s, however, teamsters in France and the United States began hauling farm products in big wagons pulled by several pairs of horses. These wagons had no driver’s seat; instead the driver sat on the left rear horse, so he could keep his right arm free to lash the team. Since he was sitting on the left, he naturally wanted everybody to pass on the left so he could look down and make sure he kept clear of the oncoming wagon’s wheels. Therefore he kept to the right side of the road. In Russia, in 1709, the Danish envoy under Tsar Peter the Great noted the widespread custom for traffic in Russia to pass on the right, but it was only in 1752 that Empress Elizabeth (Elizaveta Petrovna) officially issued an edict for traffic to keep to the right. In addition, the French Revolution of 1789 gave a huge impetus to right-hand travel in Europe. The fact is, before the Revolution, the aristocracy travelled on the left of the road, forcing the peasantry over to the right, but after the storming of the Bastille and the subsequent events, aristocrats preferred to keep a low profile and joined the peasants on the right. An official keep-right rule was introduced in Paris in 1794, more or less parallel to Denmark, where driving on the right had been made compulsory in 1793.

Posted by Brian Cooper on 08/10/2020 10:04:16: Sigh............!! Brian, I'm curious. If you're tired of the debate why don't you just ignore it and go and find something more interesting? What's in the DNA that you feel you need to let us know you're bored?

Posted by Andy48 on 08/10/2020 09:11:56: You are expecting far too much. As in this case the terminology was set by convention many decades ago. Its just that, a convention, but quite simple and it works well. I wonder did you spend hours trying to understand why we drive on the left when you learned to drive, because there is no logical reason for that? Actually yes Andy I still do wonder why we drive on the left and some countries on the right. It's the way I'm wired I guess.

Posted by Phil Green on 07/10/2020 23:44:49: Posted by TonyS on 06/10/2020 16:02:04: When talking about connectors is it the internal elements that dictate whether it's male/female or is it whether it is the plug end (male) or the socket end (female) that dictates the male/female badge? Tony, you asked a question which several competent and qualified engineers have answered unanimously. Reminds me of the flat-earthers on Youtube! Cheers Phil Edited By Phil Green on 08/10/2020 01:21:07 Maybe it’s because it didn’t seem logical to me and discussing it would help my understanding. Perhaps the question might be flipped and you might ask how come it’s not been possible to convince me that there was a good reason a lot quicker. I’m naturally inquisitive and very logical in my thinking. I also dislike “ because that’s the way we’ve always done it” kinds of answers. I never accept the “because I’m qualified and therefore you should just shut up and accept what I’m saying “ response as that’s not the way to educate. There are lots of things in the world that I’ve thought made little sense until I’ve understood some of the rationale behind how they came about. I could probably name a few in my own field of expertise. I’d like to think I’d have the patience to aid someone’s understanding if they asked me rather than become defensive or irritated. by the way, f you’d like a membership form for the Flat Earth Society I still have a couple. 😉

Hi Andy, Apologies for the misquote. Please stop taking everything personally it distracts from the debate. I’ve never argued that all engineers are illiterate and certainly never questioned your command of the English language. Your explanation of the situation is very good. The only issue I would have is that pin or socket, both ends of an XT 60 or XT 90 are shrouded and indeed there are quite a few connectors that could be described as such. Anyway, it’s a moot point given that’s how it’s done and my opinion is somewhat irrelevant. (As for the getting annoyed - the convention in posts online is that capitalisation is akin to shouting. One doesn’t ordinarily shout in a polite debate unless one’s getting annoyed). Regards Tony

Posted by Andy48 on 07/10/2020 19:43:36: Firstly you seem to have ignored the flaws in your arguement, the Deans plug, where there is no shroud on one half of the connector so you have to go by the contacts, and the horrible EC5 type connector where the housing can have either male or female pins. Second, there is no way you can confuse the internal connectors, they are either male or female. Thirdly engineers are NOT used to wiring housings with different polarities and different male/female combinations. I really don't know where you plucked that gem of misinformation from. Things fitted to walls are sockets, and the polarity of the contacts is always the same. Indeed on completion of a wiring job this is one of the checks made. You can buy simple testers to check the polarity is correct. Fourthly there is standardisation, YOU GO BY THE CONTACT NOT THE CONNECTOR APPEARANCE. Fifthly, a connector is the whole component, whether it be an uninsulated contact or a bunch of contacts in some sort of housing. Wow Andy, cool your jets, you’ll give yourself a funny turn. my argument isn’t flawed. If there’s an obvious plug/ socket appearance to the housing it’s male or female and that all, It works as easily with a Deans as it does to an XT60 say. I’ll quote an earlier post by you “I've done a lot of safety critical design work using plugs / sockets of all shapes and sizes, including mixing of male and female pins within individual plugs and sockets” . I may be misinterpreting but how is that standardisation and my point is if all housing are wired the same - which would make sense given it would be helpful to know if you bought a battery say, with an XT60 then the positive and negative and males and females were always going to be in the same place then you could happily call the housing a male housing without having to ‘make sure’ by referring to the connectors inside. Surely, and this is the point, if everything is standard then the argument that you have to avoid confusion by referring to the internal connectors is unnecessary? As for “there is standardisation you go by the internal connectors” that doesn’t help if you want someone to pass you a part that has both a male and a female does it? I was confused by the terminology. Everyone seems to cheerfully (and far too casually IMHO) refer to housings as connectors. A male XT60 connector in my eyes refers to the well, XT60 bit. If someone had said a male XT60 housing then we’re all clear but to say a Male XT60 connector when they actually meant male connectors in a female XT60 housing IS confusing. Engineers may like to be pedantic about engineering stuff. I like to pedantic about the use of language. Surely we can have a debate and see each other’s points without getting all annoyed?

Posted by Andy48 on 07/10/2020 16:34:03: Posted by TonyS on 07/10/2020 16:14:47: Posted by Andy48 on 07/10/2020 15:42:28: There's a couple of good examples for starters. Take the first plug and socket, an EC2 the blue one. That is simply a housing, you can actually put the male pin in either housing. I believe the second one is the same too. If you take the Deans plug and socket, there is no housing shroud on either side, so you have to go by the contacts as you have done. Think of servo connectors, the male can go in either type of housing. I suppose I think of it this way... If I was in the workshop and I was asking someone to pass me a part I would say can you pass me a male EC5 connector or a male Deans connector or a male 4mm bullet etc etc. Now, with the XT connector I'd be saying a male XT60 that takes the female bullets or a female XT60 which just seems wrong.... Might seem wrong to you, but going by the connectors themselves is foolproof. Using your view there are numerous flaws as has been pointed out. I think that’s a stretch to say ‘numerous flaws’ - there’s only one and that relates potentially confusing the internal connections. If engineers are used to wiring housings with different polarities and different male/female combinations then I’m glad I’m not an engineer - seems to me that standardising the whole shebang would lead to much less confusion and far fewer risks of error. as for “going by the connectors” I suggest we should perhaps stop the practice of calling housings ‘connectors’ which is commonplace in everything I’ve read concerning RC model building. All that said, I will agree that I’m not going to change it so I just have to go along with it.