Author Topic: Dumb RGB Controller  (Read 5670 times)

Offline TexasStingray

  • Coop Manager
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 791
Dumb RGB Controller
« on: May 09, 2012, »
First I believe JR has something in the works for these, but I thought I would share what I have do. I created an Dumb RGB Controller, picture attached. It's really not that hard to figure out how these things work. Doing this really make me appreciate what RJ has done for everyone. It took me several hours designing this thing and a couple of trial and errors, including burning up a couple of 7805's, 1 ST485BN, an ATMEGA328P-PU (Arduino), 2 prototype boards, and a couple of other components. But it's a good feeling when it all comes together.

RJ, RJ's Dad, & all the coop managers my hats off to you for all you do.

Thanks
Scott
Scott Wanner
TX

Watch my videos
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Offline dpitts

  • Restrictive
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 466
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #1 on: May 09, 2012, »
Nice job. How much current per channel will it support? What is the voltage range.

Offline MrChristmas2000

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1115
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #2 on: May 09, 2012, »
That definitely meets the specs of being a simple design. Cost is probably less than a current SSC.

Every design requires that you blow up at least 1 chip.  >:D

Looks good.  8)

Offline TexasStingray

  • Coop Manager
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 791
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #3 on: May 09, 2012, »
I Cannot tell a lie, I used the MR16 to develop it, So it should handle the same current as each of the MR16 Channels. I Think the MR16 is like 1 amp per channel. I have a 15 meter RGB Flex Strip running on it with all channels maxed at 255 to see how it performs, everything is cool to the tough. as a matter of fact the LED's on the flex strip are warmer then the 7805 or the 530's. It's actually a little more then a SSC because you need 3 IRL530 and 1 7805 where the SSC only use 1 7805 and 1 1117 both under a buck each where the IRL530 are a $1.30 each.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2012, by TexasStingray »
Scott Wanner
TX

Watch my videos
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Offline Steve Gase

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2915
    • WinterLightShow in Georgetown, TX
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #4 on: May 09, 2012, »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Cost is probably less than a current SSC.

SSC-type pricing is not bad, but one might hope for better...  of course once you get under $10 its harder to squeeze out much more in savings.


Comparisons for smart string controllers:

Lynx  128 channel SSC ($8-$10)
Ray Wu's 512 channel decoder ($58)

Comparisons for dumb string controllers:

Lynx Mr-16 16-channel ($37)
Ray Wu's 27-channel controller ($60)
Ray Wu's 3-channel controller ($7.50-$10.00)
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login  |  110K channels, 50K lights  |  Nutcracker, Falcon, DLA, HolidayCoro

Offline TexasStingray

  • Coop Manager
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 791
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #5 on: May 09, 2012, »
Also the SSC includes the pigtail.

Sometimes just being able to fix things yourself is worth the extra 1 or 2 bucks.

anyways it was a fun project and my first Arduino Project.
Scott Wanner
TX

Watch my videos
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Offline MrChristmas2000

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1115
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #6 on: May 09, 2012, »
Don't forget to add in the cost of the hub / 16 whether active or passive.

It's not allways the cost of the driving hardware but the cost of the lights as well. The dumb strings a considerably cheaper (yes I know they do less) but for some needs they work just as good.

Who knows if RJ likes the design and product he might do the same thing as happened with the servo controller project. Just sayin.

Offline mykroft

  • Restrictive
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 424
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #7 on: May 09, 2012, »
so are you controlling this via pixelnet - 1 RGB channel?

Myk

Offline TexasStingray

  • Coop Manager
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 791
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #8 on: May 09, 2012, »
It DMX but im sure it could pixelnet.
Scott Wanner
TX

Watch my videos
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Offline chrisatpsu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3729
  • ahhh, yes... my new blink-i-nator 3000!!!
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #9 on: May 09, 2012, »
mine came out to be about $4.50 to make
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


disclaimer, i didn't make a pcb.
To rule the entire tri-state area!  What's that? Perry the Platypus!!!

Offline rm357

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1282
  • 31088
Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #10 on: May 09, 2012, »
Don't forget the coop savings. Your cost was at a qty of 1. If you order parts for 100 or more, you might trim 10 or 20 percent.

RM
Robert
Warner Robins, Georgia, USA

Offline TexasStingray

  • Coop Manager
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 791
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #11 on: May 10, 2012, »
Price for mine for as is, (could work with a few less components but would not be as cool) for 1 was 12.36 + TAX + PCB + (SHIPPING = $0 LOCAL PICKUP but time and gas we won't count) price for mouser 100 is like $773.50 + TAX. With out the extra components would save .40 at 100. But I think the killer would be the PCB.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2012, by TexasStingray »
Scott Wanner
TX

Watch my videos
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Offline MrChristmas2000

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1115
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #12 on: May 10, 2012, »
Wow it cost more to build 100 than one.  :o

Offline TexasStingray

  • Coop Manager
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 791
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #13 on: May 10, 2012, »
wrong,100 is 7.74 each.
Scott Wanner
TX

Watch my videos
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Offline MrChristmas2000

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1115
Re: Dumb RGB Controller
« Reply #14 on: May 10, 2012, »
Whew. . . That's much better. LOL