What are the options for wireless control of the robot/copter/etc?

Question

Do it yourself

I read what I found, porridge in my head, help me systematize.
We have a DIY toy, what control options do we have for it?
Have I written everything correctly?
1) Radio communication. As in store RU-toys.
Characterized by the number of channels. You can give either 0 or 1 to the channel, that is, it either lights up / spins or not. Usually there are not very many channels (2-5), so hanging something functional will not work. Maximum travel. It is impossible to drive/fly in the first person on the camera on board.
Do I understand correctly that if you need active feedback from the robot, first-person control and dozens of actions, then this option is not an option at all?
2) WiFi
You can control it from a laptop, phone, etc. Range - Wi-Fi range, you can make kilometers using a powerful directional antenna, and so - 50 meters.
You need to buy some kind of Wi-Fi board, program some kind of controller that will understand the received signal and take action in response.
3) Bluetooth - the same as Wi-Fi, but less distance.
4) Through the Internet. The robot receives a connection to the Internet via GPRS / 3G and the commands go from there.
Please tell us more about these options in terms of price, complexity of implementation, which one is better / worse, etc., if you plan a car that needs to travel far, perform a couple of actions like take it with your hand and turn it there and you need the ability to control through the camera.

Answer 1

1. Not 0 and 1 are given to the channel, but a data packet. And we must not forget also the sold synchronization of such packets (usually with the help of sending several bytes from , collected from values ​​A and 5).
The number of channels plays little role. The transmission is still on the same channel. It is important when on each channel there is a conflict with another device, then quickly change the channel. By the way, wifi has the same principle with channels.
The camera on board is determined not by the number of channels, not by the possibility of transmitting 1 or 0 (anyway, the picture is most often digital data), but by the transmission rate over the channel. Will the device have time to transmit the picture, accept and process the control command or not.
Here is the main catch: the shorter the wavelength, the more data we can transmit per unit of time. But at short wavelengths, the exchange range is usually lower. Therefore, another nuance pops up: the power of the transceiver. Or some specialized amplifier to it.
2. Wi-Fi does not always mean control from a laptop or smartphone. Very often they use a trick that works on the Wi-Fi frequency. But Wi-Fi itself is also a protocol - that is, an additional software package (which can also be executed in hardware). So about each device you need to read the documentation carefully.
3. Bluetooth is not Wi-Fi at all, but the principle is noticeably the same. The frequencies are the same. In terms of power, there are two classes: Class 1 - for a distance of 5/10 meters. Class 2 - for a distance of up to 30 meters.
4. GPRS, UMTS and others with it require appropriate software processing. Even more difficult than wifi, and even more so BT. Well, if you use a computer. And if not, then it's easier then to buy a Siemens with a modem on board and send commands via SMS.

Answer 2

Well, you don't need a lot of channels just to fly. For example,
ailerons -1 channel
elevator -1 channel
gas - 1 channel
rudder - 1 channel (some fly without it, using ailerons and elevator)
If you need video from the board, then this is usually a separate video channel at a different frequency. See how FPV models work.
In radio control in RC toys, it’s not just a logical 1 or a logical zero, as a rule, PWM is used there, i.e. not just burns / spins, but how it burns / spins.
Here is more detailed information about radio control equipment www.rcdesign.ru/articles/radio/tx_intro
And as for radio control with a larger number of channels, then, for example, there are domestic LRS systems: Expert LRS 2G - 12 channels, 7W or Rockwell Dualband FPV from 1slon - 16 channels.

Answer 3

We have a system with Xbee shield for arduino. Zigbee technology. Plus - low power consumption. The Internet broadcasts that Zigbee can have a very good range. We did not test further than the room (we have a type of smart home). By the way, I dug up an interesting link: www.bookasutp.ru/Chapter2_11_2.aspx

Answer 4

And why do you consider radio communication as a binary operation? After all, in fact, this is a full-fledged UART (although the speed is low). And you can send anything over it.
In any case, it’s enough to implement control over the eyes of a helicopter!
I bought myself something like this to play with . I want to check how realistic it is to use it for low-speed control over short distances. In any case, they write that it should work quite up to 100 meters in open visibility.
Wi-fi requires powerful hardware, or an "iron" module to which you will connect via SPI or I2C. In my opinion, this is overkill for this class of tasks. Although, of course, if you take the MK fatter, then it will be possible to control it from a laptop through the web face of the piece of iron itself (or even from a tablet, a quasi-control panel on the web face).
GPRS and others like them are expensive and impractical. SMS is also unreliable (who knows when this SMS will arrive?). But we have a plan to implement the communication of a pair of pieces of iron by SMS (somewhere up to five to ten minutes of delay is allowed + there will be a duplicating channel).
But the camera is yes, here you will definitely have to use some kind of wifi. But the range...
On the other hand, you can tie the radio control, and since. the speed will be low, you will have to transmit, say, 1 frame per second. On another radio channel - the actual control.
Radio relay communication channels have been known for a long time. In our village, the Internet used to work just like that ...
By the way, with my digital pieces of iron, I completely forgot about the good old analog television! There will be no problems with the video...