A new member and an idea about CB Problems

[Questions]

While I have been following these boards for quite a while, I am now a member with Lamonster's help! and I must say, compared to several other dedicated boards you folks ROCK!
Due to economic drama, I have not been able to purchase a Spyder yet but there will be a RT in my future! My current ride is my 2000 Honda GL1500 Gold Wing SE.
Now to the topic of my post....

Many of the RT owners have had problems with their OEM CB radios transmitting several seconds if not more after the "key" has been released.
Preventing reception from other CB radios.
I might have a theory as to what is causing this problem. Most electronic circuits use a component called a capacitor to provide power for the circuit to perform it's task. A capacitor is like a mini battery with a limited potential to power a circuit. If the capacitor is too small it cannot provide enough power for the circuit to perform it's task. If the capacitor is to large it will continue to power the circuit for a longer period of time than wanted. Where am I going with this?
If anyone can provide me with the schematics for the CB radio so that I might build a proto board to test this concept with different sized capacitors, I might a solution here!

BTW My Mother calls me Michael, my friends call me Moezie

 

[SpyderAnn01]

:welcome: and I hope that the economy gets better so you can buy a Spyder.

 

[clueless]

problem actually solved by BRP replacing the display with 2011 display.

but thanks for offering to help. :doorag:

 

[SpyderWolf]

:welcome:

I hope your economic drama goes away soon and you can find your way to becoming a fellow owner. :thumbup:

 

[Lamonster]

:welcome:
Hope your RT is in the near future. :doorag:

 

[Trickie Dick]

:welcome: It's great to have another knowledgeable member on the forum:chat:

 

[NancysToy]

:welcome:

 

[Phil]

Moezie -
Like others- we hope to see you with your ryde some day!!:2thumbs:

I do understand what you say about the capacitor. I'm one of the electrical geeks here (not much good with wrenches). As Clueless said, BRP has solved it by (interestingly) by having those with problems change out the Gauge Cluster for the 2011 version.

Since all Spyder controls are digital, and a lot of that seems to run through and around the cluster, my guess is that they found that the digital unkey word was not given a high enough priority on the communication bus. If it were descrete hard wire keying of the CB, I can see that a cap might be contributing to the issue. In a digital control world, all the rules change .

 

[SteveMac]

:shocked::hun:

:roflblack:

...I do understand what you say about the capacitor. I'm one of the electrical geeks here (not much good with wrenches). As Clueless said, BRP has solved it by (interestingly) by having those with problems change out the Gauge Cluster for the 2011 version.

Since all Spyder controls are digital, and a lot of that seems to run through and around the cluster, my guess is that they found that the digital unkey word was not given a high enough priority on the communication bus. If it were descrete hard wire keying of the CB, I can see that a cap might be contributing to the issue. In a digital control world, all the rules change .

 

[ThreeWheels]

Moezie -
Like others- we hope to see you with your ryde some day!!:2thumbs:

I do understand what you say about the capacitor. I'm one of the electrical geeks here (not much good with wrenches). As Clueless said, BRP has solved it by (interestingly) by having those with problems change out the Gauge Cluster for the 2011 version.

Since all Spyder controls are digital, and a lot of that seems to run through and around the cluster, my guess is that they found that the digital unkey word was not given a high enough priority on the communication bus. If it were descrete hard wire keying of the CB, I can see that a cap might be contributing to the issue. In a digital control world, all the rules change .

Absolutely correct !!.

But one thing I don't understand. Why did we have to change out the cluster and lose our mileage ? I was headed to 14K, now I'm down to 750 miles.

What required a hardware change? Why couldn't the priorities have been changed through a firmware update ?

We may never know the answer, sort of an Area 51 kind of thing.

 

[fastfraser]

:welcome: Thanks for your theory .

 

[NancysToy]

Absolutely correct !!.

But one thing I don't understand. Why did we have to change out the cluster and lose our mileage ? I was headed to 14K, now I'm down to 750 miles.

What required a hardware change? Why couldn't the priorities have been changed through a firmware update ?

We may never know the answer, sort of an Area 51 kind of thing.

That is what continues to confuse me. I can see having to change out the cluster for a mechanical or functional electronic problem like a sticking tach or erratic odometer, but not for a programming update.

 

[clueless]

funny one ... CB includes cluster if you order the 2010 version...

but I did notice the CB did have a higher priority over the IPOD. when releasing the PTT button it stopped TX quickly but the IPOD sound takes about 1 second to 2 sec longer to come back.

 

[NancysToy]

I don't think it was just a programming change.

I might be wrong here but I don't believe that any of the user controls have priority over any other.

What I believe they did was directed the PTT button to a hardwired interrupt and by-passed the bus. If I understand how the system works, and this is only an educated guess, it's the only way to overcome the delay.

So, if I order a new CB package from my dealer does it come with a shiny new cluster?

Wouldn't that require a new multi-function control (added wire pair)?

 

[Bob Denman]

:hun: Well I was able to change the light bulb out on the back porch yesterday and I didn't even fall off the ladder!!! :roflblack: :roflblack:
Do you think I'm kidding??
(All the electro-mechanical aptitude of a hamster!:shocked


Moezie, Welcome to the party! :2thumbs:

 

[ARtraveler]

What's a light bulb? :roflblack::roflblack:

:welcome:

 

[NancysToy]

They could do it without another set of wires.

The wiring in the cluster could have been changed to include a hardware decode of the multifunction switch.

The PTT request could be intercepted before it is placed on the bus in the cluster and then instantly serviced rather than waiting until the system decoded it.

Just how they instantly service it is probably with something called an interrupt.

OK, that makes more sense now...and it would explain why a new cluster instead of just a firmware update would be needed.

 

[Marker]

:welcome:

 

[Questions]

hey I am new here! And not up to full speed!!!

Just thought I might offer some thoughts about a possible reason an/or cause of the transmit problem since I am but one member of a local firm that specializes in AV technologies. We use time delay circuits for both visual and audio applications and some of the symptoms described were much like the effects we create!
As to the economic drama, heck, rain happens, hear what I'm say'n, it's all good! I look at it this way ... every day I wake up and do not taste dirt! I have another day to offer thanks for!
And besides at least for now, I still have my Winghyea::clap::thumbup:
May the road rise to meet you and your journey be fair
Moezie

 

[Phil]

This went off my radar for awhile... sorry....
What Roger said!

Again, we're armchair electrical dudes so your mileage may vary, professional driver on a closed course.hyea:

From what Clueless sees, and what Roger describes, it makes sense. Here's a bit of a 101 on this stuff.....

Computers of all sorts work on a thing called 'interrupts'. MOST computer processors of the caliber in vehicles, cell phones, TVs, etc. can only do one thing at a time. Even a lot of PCs are this way. Granted, they do them so fast that it appears they do tons of things at one time, but if you slow time way down, you'll see--- that one thing is done (like monitor one thing on the engine) then another (like check the throttle) then another (like check the status of the CB PTT to see if it is pressed or not). You can see the effect on a PC if you have it doing something that takes lots of computer uuuummmmph (like a huge spreadsheet calculation) and try to open another item. The computer is told to 'poll' every input on a regular basis. This might be as often as say every millisecond (1/1000 of a second) for each input. Inputs are the wheel sensors, VSS, DPS, PTT... you get the idea. SOME devices are very important and thus they are polled more than once in each cycle through all devices. As a designer you get to the point that EVERYTHING can't have a high priority so some things have to be polled at a slower rate. The volume control is an example of a low priority, as well as the iPod control (as Clueless noted).

So.... our guess is that initially the designers may have had the polling of the PTT status button on a low priority and that may have caused the delay in the PTT getting released. Again, we're guessing here, but like Roger says, it's an educated guess. THEN, I agree with Roger, likely they moved the PTT on the main bus that handles the big deal items, and put it on another bus to allow it to move up on the polling priority.

HERE's the BIG guess.... changing the cluster had something to do with moving the PTT to another bus. I guess you call that the lesser of two evils.

Taaaaahhhh Daaaaahhhh. But.... this could ll be rubbish :sour: