Pixel testing trouble

[Steve Gase]

I forgot some advice, but taybrynn mentions it...  Keep spares and test equipment on hand.  At least one spare of everything, and for strings, and sscs -- multiple.  At least one ssc  should be left with test firmware. 

The spares will let you get back up quickly, but will also provide a reliable test bed for troubleshooting and repair.

If this was easy your neighbor would do it...   but again, there are steps you can take, and unlike a $250 pre-built string from a vendor, you will be able to take it into your own hands to do all of the needed work yourself.

[MrChristmas2000]

The pixels are not exactly plug and play.

They do take some work to be sure you have working strings. Once you have accomplished a working string they seem to work fairly well.

You do get to be good a splicing though. The pixel strings are all hard wired together. I have found that making a cutting template out of a piece of old tie wrap helps keep my cutting consistent. The splicing method I have come to use is butt end splicing. That is accomplished by making a very tiny strip on each end of the wires, tint each end then tape them down on a hard surface butted end to end, then finally gently touching the solder iron to the center between the wires with a tiny amount of solder. That joint then flows together and then you slide a small piece of shrink wrap over the joint and seal it up. I bought a reel of shrink to do this with.

Splicing is applicable for all the elements. Pixels, rectangles, squares and to some extent strips (adding on the connectors/extended wire).

I agree with Steve about spares, particullarly ordering 15 -20% more than you think you need, extra SSCs, TH2010 tester etc.

Discussions here are to solve problems, sometimes they sound terrible but someone usually comes up with a solution. Sometimes its operator error, sometimes it is a simple hardware/software mod that is needed.

I hope this helps guide you through the DIY experience. The end result is quite satisfying. 

[Corey872]

Another thing to consider would be are all testers / test hardware created equal?

I know the SSC in test mode sends one set of color data, waits 1 second, then sends another set of color data.  If any node misses or misinterprets that data, the node color is off for that full second until the next data comes along. A very severe test.

What I don't know is how the other testers function.  If they are sending data continuously, say every 50ms, as a normal show, then the node has 20 chances each second to get the color right.  If it misses one command, you may only see a tiny 'flicker' of incorrect color - or may not even see it at all.

I suspect a person would have a much better result if a 'show' was programmed to display R, G, B, W...with the associated 50ms timing, vs having the SSC test do the same sequence where the data is at 1 sec or 1000ms intervals.

[zwiller]

Am I the only one who sees this differently?

I only bought maybe 200 or various nodes from Ray but all mine work just fine (knock wood).  The way I see I see it, I am certain Ray is testing the nodes before shipping with his controller, not RJ's.  Every time I see a post about bad nodes, the OP says they work fine with Ray's controller.  The TH2010 controller is rock solid at controlling the nodes.  Ray's controller fades (and other functions) are much more smooth than the SSC v1.  At first I thought the SSC and TH2010 were basically the same thing, but they are not.  So, I think it is actually not Ray's problem... but ours.  For some reason, no one seems to see it this way.  I really hope that v2 SSC fixes these issues. 

[jnealand]

Also remember that you do not generally see posts here from folks who have not had problems and I'm sure they are out there.  The posts here are mostly for troubleshooting or for new ideas.

[Steve Gase]

Am I the only one who sees this differently?

The question is whether a more aggressive test is a true indicator or field issues.

An update of 1/sec will help make an intermittent problem more observable instead of clearing itself 50ms later.  Do I want to know about those dropped packets?  I think so.  If I fix it now and avoid problems when the strings are high on the tree, it will make my experience much better.

I don't know if a less stressful test is needed.  Your experience zwiller, is certainly relevant. 

[MrChristmas2000]

Testing update.

I discovered an interesting phenomenon today.

I had connected a bundle of pixels to my PC -- e-Dongle --- Active Hub - SSC - - - 85 pixel string run by xLights test setup and it was exhibiting the random color miss and even some of the pixels not even coming on. When I picked up the bundle the problem stopped almost. There was still a couple of pixels misbehaving but I would not have expected such a change with just picking up the bundle. When I laid the bundle back down the lights went back to misbehaving as before. Seems like the capacitance induced by picking up the bundle corrected the data transmission.

I then popped open my SSC and by lightly touching the back of the PCB I could introduce enough capacitance from my fingers to make the lights change behavior.

I then unbundled the same grouple of pixels and they seemed to work but occassionally during the Red, Green, Blue, White rotation the red would randomly show as orange instead of red etc.

Will continue testing. I've got to make a decision on how many of these lights to declare as bad.

[pk]

Try unbundling the string and stretch it out on the floor and see how it does.  I have an idea what it is going on but it is too technical to post.

[caretaker]

I think there have been a couple of posts here that have hit the nail on the head.
 1. Pixels (Smart Strings) done the DLA way while they are not cheap they are a lot less expensive than say buying a pre-built system from say Stella Scapes. With that said if your order a set from Stella Scapes you would expect to receive them and have them all work right out of the box.  While you shouldn't expect to have bad pixels when your order from Ray the reality is that there may be a bad pixels here or there but Ray is always willing to work with your if you have problems. basically your not going to get a $250 dollar product for $25 and not expect a few issues.
2. We are still on the cutting edge of RGB stuff and software and hardware design is trying to keep up even big time shows with huge budgets have run into problems that needed to be worked out.
3. Last year was supposed to be the first year of my RGB megatree but due to problems with both the pixels (mine are all IP67) and software (LSP2) I decided to forgo the pixels and just ran my regular mega tree. This has allowed me to come up with a better design to hand the pixels and waterproof them better.
As other before me have said Smart Strings are not for the faint hearted.

[MrChristmas2000]

Try unbundling the string and stretch it out on the floor and see how it does.  I have an idea what it is going on but it is too technical to post.

Yes that seems to work better. However I do have several string bundles that are rock solid functioning bundled and have had them running for several days.

I agree that particullarly the pixel strings are a little bit of a challenge at times.

I had LSP and 16 strings of 80 pixels ea Mega tree that I got working very well (running the show with xLights). During the season I only had an additional couple of pixels go flakey but unless you had owl eyes you would never have spotted them. My biggest problem was with getting a power supply that was hefty enough to run the tree.

The key is to get this initial testing out of the way as fast as possible so replacement parts can be obtained. Ray has been great at dealing with failures. Be sure you have tested and burned in all your strings before you ask for replacements because he does promply send replacements upon notice.

[MrChristmas2000]

UPDATE.

Just to reiterate I am using 3 test beds.
1. The TH2010
2. A SSC programmed with RJs test code.
3. PC -- e-Dongle --- Active Hub - SSC - - - 85 pixel string run by xLights XTester, RGB Cycle, A-B-C-All with Cycle Speed set to 95.

I began my testing using setup 2. Once I came across a string that exhibited the Rainbow pixeling I would remove it and test it on test bed 1. If the string worked as expected without any Rainbowing I would then connect it to test bed 3. In ALL cases of Rainbowing, that effect was NOT seen with the same string using test method 1 or 3.

If it was a speed problem with the SSC I would have expected the string to exhibit the effect on both setup 2 and 3 but that is not the case.

IMHO and conclusion I would NOT trust just testing the string with the SSC programmed with the test code.

If you have not ever had any Pixelnet and are are in the process of purchasing pixel strings from Ray be sure to also purchase the TH2010 tester so you can first test your strings when you receive them and have a backup method to using the SSC test mode.

[zwiller]

Great info.  Thanks for taking the time to test and post this.  I think you are onto something...

[Steve Gase]

In my burn-in environment I have a dozen or more SSCs that I have leveraged.  I am trying to "requalify" SSCs to know that they are good as well (after the last season).  When I see problems on a string, I swap the SSC with one that I trust more to see if I am seeing the same results.

After a number of problems where the SSC was swapped, I thought for sure that the string was bad.  I'd swap in a new string and get the same problems.  Different strings, different SSCs, same issues.  I swapped out the water-proof connectors, still a problem.

The problem I've seen:  connect the lights to a SSC with test firmware, and they cycle through a couple colors -- then stop moving.  It's as if the data (blue) wire is not passing the signal.

Well there is one thing consistent each time.  My alligator clips that bring my 3C water-proof connector to the new light strings.  I put that set of 3 alligator clips off to the side and all is now working.  The clips are heavy duty, and they are not warm to the touch.  And they work for a few color changes -- but there is something going on.

My problems with the new lights are now limited to length.  If I do 128 pixels, I get rainbows.  If I do 85, they do great.

I do have a lot of repeating problems with my strings from last year -- all IP68.  I've had about 25 repeated situations where the wires have come free from the soldering points on the bulb.  This has happened DESPITE using paracord to reduce the tension on the lines.

My corrections:

Adding zip ties every 2 bulbs. 
Ensure that the paracord is always the shortest patch between my zip ties (in other words, i make sure the tension is NOT on the wire)
Ensure that all zip ties are cleanly cut off at the nub and not providing a catch-point for other strings to snag on.

Still, I will have to see how much the strain from last year has weakened the strings from last year.

[MrChristmas2000]

Steve,

You do realize that the para cord stretechs. I didn't realize that till this year and I was stretching out some to change the spacing on my pixels. I put the cord under tension while attaching the lights so that when installed and tension is applied the spacing will not change very much but not put any tension on the pixels wire.

I haven't gone as far as trying to sort out my SSCs yet. I just want to feel good about the newest pixels I just received that I don't have any potential failures and not have Ray We send enough replacements.

On the wires coming out of the pixels, I have found that even in the ones I just received that there are some pixels that didn't get enough selant in the case leaving the connections exposed. I am filling those with white gorilla glue and spraying them with plastic spray (as apposed to the dip) to be sure they are sealed.

[chrisatpsu]

so in summary, some of the strings acting up on the ssc with test code, then worked on an ssc running a sequence?