Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Wireless technology - Bluetooth, Blackberry , blueberry, strawberry , Holle Berry? — Parallax Forums

Wireless technology - Bluetooth, Blackberry , blueberry, strawberry , Holle Berry?

vaclav_salvaclav_sal Posts: 451
edited 2011-05-07 15:48 in General Discussion
I want to build a remote accessible / controlled device with all the bells and whistles, for short – cool.
What would be the most common off the shelf wireless technology to utilize?
The preliminary spec – real time video of reasonable frame rate and resolution ( no video processing reqiured and no HDTV!),
independent ( not dependent!) on Internet wireless technology of any kind,
unlimited number of control channels ( or at least 16 channels) ,
absolutely guaranteed range of 1 mile...
... and controlled by BS2e
Vaclav

Comments

  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2011-05-02 20:50
    You only want the earth and the moon and stars. You probably want it cheap too.

    There are lots of kind of video these days. Are you talking about analog? If digital, what variety? What kind of control channels?

    Absolutely guaranteed range of 1 mile ... What kind of conditions? What kind of weather? What's in the way (is it open space?)

    Controlled by a BS2e ... for what? What kind of control?

    You may want some kind of multiband solution, maybe one off-the-shelf unit for video (NTSC or PAL) transmission and reception and other off-the-shelf unit for the control, say an xBee Pro with an external antenna.
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2011-05-02 20:54
    Here's one webstore with video transmitters of a suitable range. Remember that you need a really good antenna to get the kind of range you want. Also keep in mind that WiFi, Bluetooth, and xBee all use the 2.4GHz band. You probably want to use a different band for the video.
  • vaclav_salvaclav_sal Posts: 451
    edited 2011-05-02 22:18
    Thanks Mike,
    I need to work on real spec. Looks like 2.4GHz ISM is getting too crowded.
    There is plenty of off-the-shelf hardware for 433 MHz, but the range is too short ( 100 meters).
    I may opt to modify this hardware for higher frequency (smaller antenna) and longer range.
    I need to study Bluetooth technology - it looks promissing.
    But it is a start.
    Vaclav
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2011-05-03 07:24
    Bluetooth is really not designed for the kind of range you want. It's designed to replace wiring for things like mice and keyboards at ranges up to 30 meters at best.

    Unless you've got a lot of experience at building microwave equipment from scratch, I'd advise against attempting to modify existing hardware for other frequencies. It's not trivial. Signal losses tend to be very high without a great deal of care and dimensions of structures and wiring tend to be critical for performance.

    I don't know where you're located, but licensure is also an issue. If you have an amateur radio license, there are all sorts of frequency bands between 433MHz and 2.4GHz that you have access to and at power levels where you can get reliable transmission at the range you're talking about. If not, you can get in trouble.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2011-05-03 07:30
    Even with an amateur radio license, one is generally required to communicate with another amateur radio station, not a receiver situated at a remote location, IIRC.
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2011-05-03 08:02
    Usually that's true, but there are provisions in the US Amateur Radio regulations for telemetry and radio control of models, among other things. You'd have to carefully read the appropriate national regulations for details.
  • vaclav_salvaclav_sal Posts: 451
    edited 2011-05-03 10:22
    I do own a US permit to experiment on ham radio frequencies, however, since I would like to have this project adaptable to non licensed frequencies , likes ISM, I originally asked for "common off the shelf" technology.
    Reason I am interested in Bluetooth - I like the protocol ability to frequency hop ( just an interesting concept – not sure how practical in my project). And down the line I would like to explore Bluetooth ability to pass the data from one device to another - tandem like - not directly between two end points. I am still learning about Bluetooth and have no idea what is the correct technical term – something about micro cells, not sure.

    I am sure using the Bluetooth protocol would be OK on ham band as long as other licensing rules are followed.

    Last time I looked in US FCC Part 97 using remote control on ham bands have some specific rules - such as there is no requirement to identify the transmitter while transmitting remote control data and coding is allowed.

    It is verboten to transmit coded messages by US hams, of course Morse code is an exception!

    Vaclav
  • Peter KG6LSEPeter KG6LSE Posts: 1,383
    edited 2011-05-03 11:26
    If I was you I would use 900M ISM . Very few Hams are on 900 unlike 440 , so you can use a ISM device with less chance of interference .

    I am NOT a fan of those data modues I see on 433 that is smack dab in the middle of a active ham band . 315 and 900 are a way better choice for everyones sake .

    Ok here is s issue with BT . as of now I have NOT seen any hams using it aa a link . But be aware some newer HTs and Mobile rigs have BT as a wireless hand mic . so its legal in that sense But as a primary comincations path you may have issues...

    and If you do use it Il bet you will have to ID some how . Call the FCC .....
    I have yet to see a standard way to use a ID function like there is on a WiFi AP as SSID on BT ..

    Peter KG6LSE
  • vaclav_salvaclav_sal Posts: 451
    edited 2011-05-04 11:50
    Thanks Peter,
    you got valid points, however, I do not want to spent my time being on hold with any government agency, including FCC.
    I think the ISM frequency usage and rules are pretty clear.
    As far as these data modules being in middle of ham band I think their power output should not present a thread to any ham traffic.
    Besides, nowadays if your signal is not "10 over nine" “full quieting” nobody will talk to you anyway.

    Just to get back to subject - do you know what is a highest ISM frequency in general commercial use?
    I found some stuff in 2 GHz ISM.
    Eventually I would like to do some video processing and I think the challenge will be to find or convince the processor to keep up with the data.

    Vaclav AA7EJ
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2011-05-04 11:58
    It's going to be difficult to get the range you require at higher frequencies, unless you use expensive equipment and antennas.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2011-05-06 10:37
    I'm in the UK, and communication with remote devices here is very restricted. I think it's the case in most countries.
  • KaosKiddKaosKidd Posts: 296
    edited 2011-05-06 10:48
    I've seen someone increase the distance of a blue-tooth transceiver to over 500 meters. The accomplished this by reworking the finals in both sides to include what is basically an linear amplifier. Not quite the range you are asking for, but it might be worth investigating.
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2011-05-06 10:57
    In the US (and most other jurisdictions), it's illegal to rework approved commercial devices. If they cause interference, the FCC can seize them. Normally, they just tell you to stop using them ... immediately.
  • vaclav_salvaclav_sal Posts: 451
    edited 2011-05-06 10:58
    KK
    assuming you are talking about no need for ID I think you are "picking" on the wrong guy . I think Leon is suggesting "5 over 5 over 5" stacked Yagis on 300 foot tower!
    Just kidding, Leon.

    Back to subject - I think one could implement Bluetooth piconet to pass the message over longer distance. Of course the message delivery time need to be taken into account then.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 7,620
    edited 2011-05-06 11:00
    And 1 kW. ;)
  • vaclav_salvaclav_sal Posts: 451
    edited 2011-05-06 11:06
    Leon, are you "reffering" to "ugly american KW ", "russian 200W" or "italian KW's"?
    QRP here ( 100W)
  • KaosKiddKaosKidd Posts: 296
    edited 2011-05-06 11:06
    Woops....
    My sorries...

    Somewhat off topic, but not that far (re:Transcievers and HAM stuff):
    My name has finally appeared in the FCC lookup table yesterday; I've only been waiting since saturday at the local hamfest!
    http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/license.jsp?licKey=3286902
    I'm currently working on my hardware purchased / setup...

    KK
  • KaosKiddKaosKidd Posts: 296
    edited 2011-05-06 11:10
    vaclav_sal wrote: »
    KK
    assuming you are talking about no need for ID I think you are "picking" on the wrong guy . I think Leon is suggesting "5 over 5 over 5" stacked Yagis on 300 foot tower!
    Just kidding, Leon.

    Back to subject - I think one could implement Bluetooth piconet to pass the message over longer distance. Of course the message delivery time need to be taken into account then.

    I believe your right. I'm corrious now about it...
    KK
  • vaclav_salvaclav_sal Posts: 451
    edited 2011-05-06 11:12
    KK,
    please send me more info on this Bluetooth LA. I hate to reinvent the wheel.
    Would be nice if I could modify my CB radio to do that.(!)
    Vaclav
  • vaclav_salvaclav_sal Posts: 451
    edited 2011-05-06 11:37
    KK,
    never mid , here is one candidate http://www.sena.com/products/industrial_bluetooth/esd1000.php
    And Leon was right - it only takes an "optional antenna" to get 1000 meters range. But I am from Missouri!

    Wonder what would "5 x 5 x 5 " Yagi do.
    Is there a stamp for DXCC using Bluetooth?


    Per spec - this has an " UART interface ". I assume that means serial *RS232" protocol.
    That would easy to control but possible speed bottleneck. I'll keep reading the spec...
  • KaosKiddKaosKidd Posts: 296
    edited 2011-05-06 11:41
    vaclav_sal wrote: »
    KK,
    please send me more info on this Bluetooth LA. I hate to reinvent the wheel.
    Would be nice if I could modify my CB radio to do that.(!)
    Vaclav


    One of my favorite sites!

    Now this chap only changes the antenna. I can't find the one on about the amplifier, in in any case, this is a "ya got to do both sides" type deal... There's some basic math in the first or second page. Also they state the operating freq, which could be helpful in making the amp. There are also a number of BT amps out on the open market.

    KK
  • sofiadragon1979sofiadragon1979 Posts: 3
    edited 2011-05-07 10:16
    What would be recomended for communication between two HPV's (human powered vehicles) they will be about the same distance apart as two bicycles would be & I wanted a range about 4-5 times that just in case we get seperated by a short distance & we can't see each other, for longer distances we're gonna be using cellphones so no worries there. But to be specific I'm looking for an idea that will be outside of the FCC's rule so we won't need a HAM lisence.
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2011-05-07 10:25
    sofiadragon1979,
    That's what Citizens' Band and Family Radio Service walkie talkies were designed for. In the US, there's nothing "outside of the FCC's rule". Even Part 15 (unlicensed low power) stuff have rules that have to be obeyed.
  • sofiadragon1979sofiadragon1979 Posts: 3
    edited 2011-05-07 15:48
    What I'm refering to by outside the FCC's rules are as I stated is that I'm looking to make something that doesn't need to be operated w/ a HAM liscence.
Sign In or Register to comment.