The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
Subject: Re: Remote Control - Any Idea?
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 08:33:21 -0600
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
It seems to be the best way of doing what I want to do.
I thought about doing what Ian suggested in his reply - placing a sort of
LED extensions in front of each VCR. If I have 4 "master" remotes with 5
LED extensions each, I will be able to control 4 groups of 5 VCR's
independently of other groups.
However, I thought that would require me to do a superb job "covering" each
LED to make sure the signal from each LED only affects the designated VCR,
not the nearby ones. When I tried to control one VCR with a regular remote
by literally sticking the remote's front side (where the LED is) on to the
front panel of the VCR (where the receptor is), the nearby VCR's still
received the signal undesirably.
I didn't want to have a bulky casing on the LED, either - since the infrared
receiver is located right under where a tape is loaded in and out, a such
casing will certainly get in the way.
Now, maybe I can forget about the covering the LED all together, and simply
let all the LED's constantly "swamp" the VCR's right in front of them when
they are in idle state (not emitting any meaningful signals). When I want
to operate on a certain group of VCR's, I can let their controller LED's
send out a meaningful signal while the rest of the VCR's controller LED are
still emitting "swamping" beam.
Hmm... this idea (a combination of multi LED and swamping) should work.
There's one thing I'm a little concerned though. When those jamming (or
swamping) LED's are emitting some infrared lights, wouldn't there be a
chance that those jammed VCR's would recognize the swamping lights (or
swamping light plus signals from adjacent LED's) as a meaningful signal of
its own? Or, would it always be ignored since such lights would be so much
off from the valid patterns?
Thank you so much all of you who kindly replied to my post. Maybe I
should've sent a thank you e-mail to every one of you, but since you guys
are probably receiving a ton of SPAM's everyday already (and since I'm too
lazy :), I would just say it here.
Have a nice day.
Keith Wootten wrote in message
> In message , Ian
> >> You could probably do it more simply by having 20 (or whatever) IR LEDs
> >> adjacent to - but not obscuring - each VCR IR receiver. When on, they
> >> would swamp the adjacent IR receiver such that it would ignore the
> >> remote. Connect series visible LEDs to show which VCRs are 'blinded'.
> >You want to do something like "jamming" IR receivers or have I got it
> That's right. A simple DC energised IR LED in close proximity to the
> receiver will 'dazzle' its photo diode and swamp any real signal.
> 'Jamming' (which the OP suggested) maybe tends to imply something a
> little more sophisticated.
> I suspect a small filament lamp would work too.
> Keith Wootten
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup