Oveview of SmartString Universe

[chrisatpsu]

on pg 1 you might mention that a channel can also be a single color of a multicolor LED instead of stating only an individual LED.

On pg6 you state that the passive hub must have its own 12v power supply.  I believe that is incorrect.  It must have a 12v input source, but as I understand it you can feed it using the 12v opt jacks from the active hub. I have put a meter on the opt power input jacks and have measured 12v.  Of course one must be aware that the total power draw of all nodes connected to the hub ps must be taken into consideration.  In my case most of my SSCs use less than 70 nodes, and I am not even using all 16 ports, so I am not pushing capacity.  I use additional SSCs because of physical geometry requirements of my display.   Too much work to figure out where to start and stop a display element in the middle of a string and it fouls up the use of string mode for a single color choice on one display element.

added info explaining a node is three channels, and that they are each color of the node.

i changed my wording of the power requirement of the passive hub. I intended to mean that it does need power from an external source. not that is had to have it's own seperate power supply.

[Zeph]

The passive hub can be daisy chained into other passive hubs, as other the pixelnet is being sent. as far as the power, you have to supply power to each passive hub as it doesn't get carried.

In another smart string post, RJ has mentioned that you need the active hub (as of this writing), to be able to use the 4 port passive hubs.

No on the four port since that is not its primary role. It is for splitting a already existing hubs output in to four.

The 16 port passive that is coming out next will have passthrough for the pixelnet. It will not be active repeating so there is some limits on it but they are minor and having to do with how many can chain and how far they can go.

RJ

This is a good example of where it's useful (for me at least) to understand the why, and not just try to memorize the results.  I was bad at history in high school (at that level, it was taught more like trivia with the goal being to memorize lots of names and dates; yes I now know it doesn't have to be taught like that).  I was good at math (I could grasp the underlying concepts and re-derive the equations I didn't recall, or validate my memory).

Concept: The power from the incoming Pixelnet distribution cable is not passed through the passive hub to the outputs; therefore the power for the four outgoing Pixelnet distribution cables must be separately supplied to the passive hub via the screw terminals.

Concept: If you connect a Pixelnet backbone cable to the input of a passive hub, the data on first pair cannot be distributed to the four output Pixelnet distribution cables; you must have an active hub between the control source (USB Pixelnet dongle or EtherDongle) and the passive hub.  (I don't yet know the reason, tho)

How about using a Lynx Combiner in reverse to split Pixelnet backbone cabling (4 pairs of data) to more than one Active Hub? [I think this would work, if the line lengths are OK, assuming my understanding of the underlying technical issues is correct.]

How about using a Lynz Combiner in reverse to split Pixelnet distribution (1 pair data, 6 conductors power) to multiple SSCs (if the power limit is observed; say if there were 3 string of 25?)  [I think it's just a passive splitter with all pairs connected, so I think this would work, IFF my understanding is right.]

I support RJ's goal of making DLA accessible for non-technical users, but it might be helpful to those same users if there was a way to keep the more technical users accurate in their understandings, so they will give correct information - if there's a way to keep technical discussions in a contained area with appropriate caution tape around it.

[Jeffl]

When you all get done, please save it as a .pdf.  And make sure it has lots of pictures for people like me.   

Thanks for taking this on. 

[Steve Gase]

how about a section of the forum that is available to Sr Members? ...use some level of time in the forum or number of posts -- to grant access to this place.

[chrisatpsu]

how about a section of the forum that is available to Sr Members? ...use some level of time in the forum or number of posts -- to grant access to this place.

When people start to get technical, then you end up running into people that feel very strongly about their way of doing something, then when debates arise they get personal very quickly. This has been seen time and time again on other sites. I think this is on of the reasons for this site being created was for people to find a friendly atmosphere to learn about how to do blinky flashy. RJ puts a lot of work into the designs he makes, and for the average person joining the site, we can have perfectly good blinky without having to know the exact resistance on pin 39 of a resistor arrray.

As far as the technical side of things, discussions can still be had, it would just need to be in pm, email or chat, as long as chat didn't intimidate others that would be in there at the time. for example, i've learned a lot about the nodes, and the circuits in the node itself. If people wanted to talk about that, we can't do it on here.
Of course, I'm not a mod, admin, staff, or even a coop manager, so this is all my opinion.

[chrisatpsu]

Concept: The power from the incoming Pixelnet distribution cable is not passed through the passive hub to the outputs; therefore the power for the four outgoing Pixelnet distribution cables must be separately supplied to the passive hub via the screw terminals.

yes, the passive hub can have it's own power supply, or you can connect it to the 12v power from another Hub.

Concept: If you connect a Pixelnet backbone cable to the input of a passive hub, the data on first pair cannot be distributed to the four output Pixelnet distribution cables; you must have an active hub between the control source (USB Pixelnet dongle or EtherDongle) and the passive hub.  (I don't yet know the reason, tho)

The pixelnet cable as the output from a EtherDongle needs the active Hub to choose which universe to use for it's outputs. the passive hub is designed to be connected to the powered pixelnet ports of a hub.

How about using a Lynx Combiner in reverse to split Pixelnet backbone cabling (4 pairs of data) to more than one Active Hub? [I think this would work, if the line lengths are OK, assuming my understanding of the underlying technical issues is correct.]

you can use a combiner (in reverse) to split the 4 universes of Pixelnet from the output of a EtherDongle. this would be useful, if you wanted to go in different directions from your etherdongle (example, left side of yard, right side of yard) however if your active hubs are near each other, you can just pick (via jumpers) on the active hub, your universe for the hub to use.

How about using a Lynz Combiner in reverse to split Pixelnet distribution (1 pair data, 6 conductors power) to multiple SSCs (if the power limit is observed; say if there were 3 string of 25?)  [I think it's just a passive splitter with all pairs connected, so I think this would work, IFF my understanding is right.]

if you try to split the output of a powered pixelnet port you will have 4 ports of unpowered pixelnet without a way of supplying power to the nodes.

I support RJ's goal of making DLA accessible for non-technical users, but it might be helpful to those same users if there was a way to keep the more technical users accurate in their understandings, so they will give correct information - if there's a way to keep technical discussions in a contained area with appropriate caution tape around it.

answered this with my last post.

[tbone321]

Concept: The power from the incoming Pixelnet distribution cable is not passed through the passive hub to the outputs; therefore the power for the four outgoing Pixelnet distribution cables must be separately supplied to the passive hub via the screw terminals.

This is excelent wording and makes it clear what needs to be done.

Concept: If you connect a Pixelnet backbone cable to the input of a passive hub, the data on first pair cannot be distributed to the four output Pixelnet distribution cables; you must have an active hub between the control source (USB Pixelnet dongle or EtherDongle) and the passive hub.  (I don't yet know the reason, tho)

This is incorrect.  If you connect the pixelnet backbone to a passive hub only the first universe will be seen.  The passive 4 port hub has no way to select the universe you want it to work with.  The pasive hub also has no amplification, regeneration or termination capabilities which makes it a poor choice for signal distribution.

How about using a Lynx Combiner in reverse to split Pixelnet backbone cabling (4 pairs of data) to more than one Active Hub? [I think this would work, if the line lengths are OK, assuming my understanding of the underlying technical issues is correct.]

The purpose of the combiner is to utilize the 4 pairs of the ethernet cable to carry 4 universes of pixelnet or DMX data.  Doing this would connect a seperate pair (universe) to each hub.  I would guess in a specific situation where you had 4 hub in different areas and each working with a seperate universe and a central area between them that this might work but the combiner does not have any amplification or regeneration capabilities like the active hub does and you may have too much signal loss.  It is easier and more reliable to daisy chain the hubs and use the hubs jumpers to select what universe that they are working with.

How about using a Lynz Combiner in reverse to split Pixelnet distribution (1 pair data, 6 conductors power) to multiple SSCs (if the power limit is observed; say if there were 3 string of 25?)  [I think it's just a passive splitter with all pairs connected, so I think this would work, IFF my understanding is right.]

That would not work.  The combiner only works with data pairs.  The input uses all eight connections but each output only has pins 1 and 2 connected.  The other pins are open.  What you are describing is the passive 4 port hub and the reason that it doesn't carry power from the hub is to prevent people from drawing to much current.  It is easy to say to "observe the power limit" but it is also way to easy to forget or to get it wrong.  Forcing the ue of an external power connection enforces this requirement.

[Zeph]

Thanks - your responses explain the Passive Hub and Combiner well.  It all fits together now.

As for the aversion to having any more technical section anywhere in the wiki or forums based on invoking bad behavior thereby (versus the other reason of not discouraging new or non-technical users which we all seem to support, and which may have some win/win fixes), I am new here so I have to assume that the long term folks have had many bad experiences on other forums before my time.  I've been reading a bunch of old messages on many of the forums on this and other sites related to this hobby (with a focus on technical and construction ones), and I've found only a small number with acrimony and argument related to technical issues - but the number of old messages I've read is still in the low 4 digits, which is a small sample from the huge number in the archives!  I'm sure there's much I've missed.

It's disappointing that this hobby would bring out bad behavior when technical issues are allowed to be discussed; I view or participate in many other technical sites which are mostly courteous and helpful.  But if that's the way it goes in this niche, I defer to others here with more experience.

Would there be any problem with having somewhat more technical discussions or descriptions of Pixelnet etc on other sites which do allow such discussions (and which are ready to deal with the consequences there)?  I'm still looking for that win/win where the needs and mission of this community are respectfully met, for both the technical and non-technical members.

[chrisatpsu]

you're best bet for more technical information is to use pm to another member that would know, or to be in chat.

i believe the idea behind it was also for the person that saw a video of someone doing christmas blinky, then went online to find a site that did it.

would you be more willing to participate in a site that was all  "E=IR" or "I=E/R" when you didn't know what E, I or R was?
or would you more likely go to a site that does, "to get blinky, start off with a dowhizzer, then add a couple of hickeybangs, and just put a cable in between, it's as easy as that!

as far as getting technical, there's a lot of people that can be proud or passionate about there way to do things, and sometimes there's more than one way to do something. It can get to the point where someone' defensive, or just doesn't see a point in changing their ways. and then it can get heated. and that leaves a bad "PR image", if you say, for the whole activity, to those wanting to get started in this hobby. and that leaves less blinky in the world.

my advice, log into chat from time to time, log onto teamspeak from time to time when you see people on. start to get to know people and catch a few conversations that are going on, and you'll be able to ask questions. I made a post in my smart string project a week or so ago. I had mentioned that I received help from a few people. This info from them all came from PM, or chat, or Teamspeak. It does help provide a way for people to get technical without intimidating new users from participating. 

Sometimes a new user might feel like, "with all this technical talk, what do i have to add to the mix? I'm just starting out!" RJ definately wants us participating. 2,985 membes don't want to hear ME talk all the time! 

[tbone321]

They might not want to hear it but that's not stopping you now, is it    I fully understand and agree with RJ's points and they are working but there are some negative sides to it as well.  I just wonder how many really creative people have come and gone because they could not get the technical help that they wanted or needed to create some really impressive items.  I know that the short term answer is to use email or chat rooms but dong that is more of a disservice than a help.  The problem with chat rooms is that it only helps the people in the session and once the session ends, all is gone forever.  Email is a little more permanent but it's only between the two and nobody else even knows about it.  The problem with both is that there is no information store and that causes people to constantly have to reinvent the wheel and wait for a chat session or a reply from someone else to do it.  On the other hand and as RJ said many times, he doesn't want people getting into the forum and become overwhelmed with tech speak and give up thinking that it is way over their heads. 

I believe that there is a way to do both and it has already been done to a degree with the coop managers.  They have their own area that is only seen and accessed by coop managers.  I believe that a similar setup would work well for a technical area as well.  That area would only be seen by members of that group so guests surfing the forum, newbies, and members with no interest in the technical side would not see it at all.  I would set some simple rules to become a member of that area such as being a senior member and either asking to join or being invited by existing members.  This way the members of that area have posted enough to have a good idea how things work here, actually have an interest in DLA, and are seeing it because they want to.  This should eliminate driving people away from the forum because they feel that they are over their heads and will also help to retain people that may have a lot to contribute to the forum in new ideas and designs such as the Bobcat tester and servo controller boards. 

There is a lot of potential here that could create even more involvement in the forum by people on all sides of the technical areas as well.  You could have sections on board design, circuit design, pick coding, software design an these are just off of the top of my head.  These are of course just my opinions and if ignored I will take no offense to that.  I just think that there i a way to help both side and help the forum grow in a more productive way that would also allow RJ to spend more of his time doing the things that he really wants to do and offload some of the support and mundane things to others.

[Steve Gase]

They might not want to hear it but that's not stopping you now, is it    I fully understand and agree with RJ's points and they are working but there are some negative sides to it as well.  I just wonder how many really creative people have come and gone because they could not get the technical help that they wanted or needed to create some really impressive items.  I know that the short term answer is to use email or chat rooms but dong that is more of a disservice than a help.  The problem with chat rooms is that it only helps the people in the session and once the session ends, all is gone forever.  Email is a little more permanent but it's only between the two and nobody else even knows about it.  The problem with both is that there is no information store and that causes people to constantly have to reinvent the wheel and wait for a chat session or a reply from someone else to do it.  On the other hand and as RJ said many times, he doesn't want people getting into the forum and become overwhelmed with tech speak and give up thinking that it is way over their heads. 

I believe that there is a way to do both and it has already been done to a degree with the coop managers.  They have their own area that is only seen and accessed by coop managers.  I believe that a similar setup would work well for a technical area as well.  That area would only be seen by members of that group so guests surfing the forum, newbies, and members with no interest in the technical side would not see it at all.  I would set some simple rules to become a member of that area such as being a senior member and either asking to join or being invited by existing members.  This way the members of that area have posted enough to have a good idea how things work here, actually have an interest in DLA, and are seeing it because they want to.  This should eliminate driving people away from the forum because they feel that they are over their heads and will also help to retain people that may have a lot to contribute to the forum in new ideas and designs such as the Bobcat tester and servo controller boards. 

There is a lot of potential here that could create even more involvement in the forum by people on all sides of the technical areas as well.  You could have sections on board design, circuit design, pick coding, software design an these are just off of the top of my head.  These are of course just my opinions and if ignored I will take no offense to that.  I just think that there i a way to help both side and help the forum grow in a more productive way that would also allow RJ to spend more of his time doing the things that he really wants to do and offload some of the support and mundane things to others.

everything he said...