[Text Responses] No words…just pictures delete words!

Zie dat je niet in het water rijdt eh…

1 Like

Haha jot… En anders verkoop je m toch maar gewoon weer eh…

1 Like

image

until it also breaks like you evolve… & then you sell it on “Marktplaats” like a good board without any damage. Is your board already sold?

And why are you using a fake name? You are the guy that spam Facebook group with how awesome your DIY board is and how easy it is to build. But you can’t drill 4 holes in your deck.

5 Likes

Don’t forget about the scamming part :roll_eyes:

3 Likes

If I were to guess, he is maintaining a mirror copy of all variables and paramters on the splitter by sending requests to VESC at regular interval. When either metr pro or DAVEga needs them, the splitter sends them that information.

When a device sends write command it forwards it to VESC, updates the splitter copy of parameters/variables and sends a suitable response back to the device.

2 Likes

Yeah, something like that would make sense. It’s obviously not possible to make a generic UART splitter that would work with any 3 devices so I guess it’s tailored to be used with the VESC.

I wonder how well it works with Metr’s TCP/IP bridging. That one allows some advanced stuff, including updating the VESC FW. I’m not sure how exactly that’s communicated to the VESC. I imagine that it could involve sending multiple messages. If the other device (DAVEga) jumps in while that’s in progress, that could very well brick the VESC.

@Ricco Is this something you have considered in the design? Will the splitter be safe to use for writing into the VESC?

1 Like

Perhaps there’s the implementation of priority read/write, where in the theoretical situation that you provided, the splitter would prioritise the signals from one of the UART device (the metr), and as such would prevent bricking?

1 Like

I’m just theorizing here. I don’t know the details of the VESC communication protocol. I only use a few of the read commands. I imagine a scenario like this can be problematic:

1
METR -> VESC: write X1
VESC -> METR: ack write X1

2
METR -> VESC: write X2
VESC -> METR: ack write X2

3
DAVEGA -> VESC: read Y
VESC -> DAVEGA: Y value

IMO, the splitter has no chance to do the synchronization such that the following cannot happen instead:

1
METR -> VESC: write X1
VESC -> METR: ack write X1

2
DAVEGA -> VESC: read Y
VESC -> DAVEGA: Y value

3
METR -> VESC: write X2
VESC -> METR: ack write X2

Unless the splitter understands all the details of the communication protocol, it wouldn’t know that after the write X1 the write X2 will follow, so it wouldn’t know that it should delay the interleaving DAVEGA read request.

2 Likes

I see what you mean. Unless there’s some clever metr control integrated, I don’t see how it can be done without Sacraficing the capabilities of one or both of the connected devices. (Like one can write to vesc, the other can’t).

But I would love to be proven wrong!

1 Like

The very simple way to do the splitter:

thread1:
  // parse commands from Metr Pro and DAVEga 
  // and put [command,source] into FIFO queue

thread2:
  loop:
    // take the next command from the queue
    // send it to VESC
    // wait for reply
    // send reply to [source]
3 Likes

Right. Makes sense. What I’m questioning is whether all request/response pairs are independent. Maybe there are two request/responses from Metr that must be consecutive and if a DAVEga request/response happens inbetween them it will cause trouble. Can that ever be a problem?

3 Likes

I can think of about three different ways to multiplex or otherwise split a UART off the top of my head. None of which are special enough to merit being a “secret” as these are all basic commodity technologies. Maybe don’t kill yourself too much here.

3 Likes

No matter how special or not the implementation is, it merits being kept a “secret” if some wants to keep what separates their product from others to themselves :wink:

1 Like

image

https://www.electric-skateboard.builders/t/no-words-just-pictures-delete-words-2/88821/1159?u=lrdesigns

Does this allow you to charge from a wide input voltage? If so that pretty smart. Or are you actuallying going to solar charge? Either way more details needed.

2 Likes

Yep. Most importantly it can step up/down based on voltage input dynamically. It’s intended for solar but that’s substituted with a battery input in this case.

Basically the thought is a mobile backpack charger. Any board with a BMS that can handle load sharing could “charge and ride” to extend range.

3 Likes

https://www.electric-skateboard.builders/t/no-words-just-pictures-delete-words-2/88821/1164?u=battosaii

Impact safety sensor? Does that mean that if i drop the remote while riding by accident or on purpose the board will brake on its own? Sounds a bit dangerous i hope this feature can be disabled. Maybe a demonstration video would qualm my fears.

How about ergonomics? It looks like a thin remote with no curves to hang onto. How does your hand feel after a 4 hour ride?

1 Like

https://www.electric-skateboard.builders/t/no-words-just-pictures-delete-words-2/88821/1164?u=mikenyc

@trampa what’s the IMU being used for?

USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION…I kid, I Kid :wink:

Shit sounds dangerous as hell.

" SAFETY & GESTURE Control: What is really exciting is the IMU unit inside this remote…The IMU knows the exact orientation of the WAND in space, whislt gathering acceleration values of all space axies at the same time. Benjamin has been able to code some really useful safety features & playful things. For instance, the remote will know when you have a crash & can therefore stop your board safely. It knows when it rests upside down on a surface, refusing to accidentally send a signal to the board. It knows when you pick it up & it knows when its resting in a steady state for a while, going to sleep after some minutes to save battery. This remote is even a water spirit level, helping you to align things perfectly."

1 Like

Gesture control. Now you have to jerk the remote off to get into “PRO” mode. I bet the screen flashes all white once you’re in it.

11 Likes

I like it. maybe someone can drop a review.

Compared to a HMP it has to be less impressive (in your pants pocket)

1 Like