Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Some confusion on setup, a few pixelsticks

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    10
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Some confusion on setup, a few pixelsticks

    Quote Originally Posted by mrGrumpy View Post
    Pixelstick start channels are universe based. Do not count any channels used in universe 1...a u2 pixelstick does not see them

    Pixelsticks start counting channels at 1 on the defined universe. So even pixelstick for universe 12 starts at 1 typically

    If I wanted pixelstick to start at channel 520, then starting would be 10. (Assuming blasť is 510, not 512)

    OK, this makes sense to me. On the xlights side, is it like that also or do I start at 511?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    10
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Some confusion on setup, a few pixelsticks

    Started fresh again this morning and got it working, thanks everyone.
    ESPixelstick config is universe 1 or 2, size of 510, then i set correct pixel counts below that.

    In xLights, I set back to unicast, universe 1 or 2 and the channels and everything works great!

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    10
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Some confusion on setup, a few pixelsticks

    BTW: I went with an F48 and 4 receivers to start. My plan is to have the F48 mounted in my garage with my pi (for automating the show), and then I can have a PSU at each area for a receiver. Right now, I think I need 3 controllers just for my roof, a long section on main roof line and one on each of the separated roof peaks from second floor. I also will have one for my porch for some stuff.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Folsom, CA, USA
    Posts
    2,114
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Some confusion on setup, a few pixelsticks

    Quote Originally Posted by fffizzz View Post
    Started fresh again this morning and got it working, thanks everyone.
    ESPixelstick config is universe 1 or 2, size of 510, then i set correct pixel counts below that.

    In xLights, I set back to unicast, universe 1 or 2 and the channels and everything works great!
    Actually, for wifi Multicast is best. In unicast you cannot split/pack/duplicate a universe, plus multicast is best for wireless overall.

    Try this on your test bench:
    Send a full universe (say #1) of data from xLight via Multicast.
    PixelStick 1 set to Universe 1, and start 1 and 50 pixels
    PixelStick 2 also set to Universe 1, but start 151 and 50 pixels
    Pixelstick 3 also set to Universe 1, but start 301 and 50 Pixels
    PixelStick 4 also set to Universe 1 , but now duplicate some channels so starting 75 and 50 pixels. This will use the second half (25 pixels/75 channels) of PixelStick 1 and the first half (25 pixels/75 channels) of pixelStick 2

    When using multicast you just tell the Pixelstick were to start and how many pixels. You could start U1 Channel 400 and 100 pixels. This would start in universe 1 but because you have more pixels than are left in the universe 1, the balance are automatically carried over to U2 (U1 400-510, U2 1-190 - - - assuming 510 is your boundary)
    In Lights Therapy

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    503
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Some confusion on setup, a few pixelsticks

    I think you also need to check your #of pixels in the EspixelStick setup for your strips. You said you had a 300 ct LED strip with 3 leds per node. So that is 100 pixels in the setup. I believe you have 200 listed in the picture. While it will work for testing, when you start adding other controllers and pixels you could have some over lap.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    10
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Some confusion on setup, a few pixelsticks

    Quote Originally Posted by mrGrumpy View Post
    Actually, for wifi Multicast is best. In unicast you cannot split/pack/duplicate a universe, plus multicast is best for wireless overall.

    Try this on your test bench:
    Send a full universe (say #1) of data from xLight via Multicast.
    PixelStick 1 set to Universe 1, and start 1 and 50 pixels
    PixelStick 2 also set to Universe 1, but start 151 and 50 pixels
    Pixelstick 3 also set to Universe 1, but start 301 and 50 Pixels
    PixelStick 4 also set to Universe 1 , but now duplicate some channels so starting 75 and 50 pixels. This will use the second half (25 pixels/75 channels) of PixelStick 1 and the first half (25 pixels/75 channels) of pixelStick 2

    When using multicast you just tell the Pixelstick were to start and how many pixels. You could start U1 Channel 400 and 100 pixels. This would start in universe 1 but because you have more pixels than are left in the universe 1, the balance are automatically carried over to U2 (U1 400-510, U2 1-190 - - - assuming 510 is your boundary)
    Thats the best explanation I've seen yet on why to use multicast. Thank you! I'm a control freak so that's why I liked Unicast. haha

    Quote Originally Posted by Braveit1 View Post
    I think you also need to check your #of pixels in the EspixelStick setup for your strips. You said you had a 300 ct LED strip with 3 leds per node. So that is 100 pixels in the setup. I believe you have 200 listed in the picture. While it will work for testing, when you start adding other controllers and pixels you could have some over lap.
    Ya, I got that fixed up when I started fresh above. 60/m on a 5 meter strip, 300 leds, but 3 per ic chip, so 100 controllable rgb channels.


    My next thing, I'm going to work on my bottom roof line first, 42 linear feet wide (houses in colorado are squished together), 3 rgb strips, and I plan to use aluminum channels with difusers, but using 30/m ws2812b ip65. I've seen videos with it installed and its invisible almost during day. I plan to leave up year round and the difusers also give a nice effect. ( https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...W82NYEDM&psc=1 )


    So the current plan, once the f48 arrives, install it and one of the smart receivers at end of garage closest to garage door (inside), and run 3 wire and extra power up along the brick to the gutter. Its almost in the middle so I can have one strip go one way and the other go the other way with the power wire for injection at the end. All of that supposedly fits in the channel.

    Phase two would be to do the second floor roof peaks which are separated and not sure how I'm gonna handle that one completely yet. I'll likely be taking a pic of the roof area and double checking my thoughts and asking for some more advise.

    Edit: and the reason I chose ip65 was due to it fitting in channel better and being protected by channel. the ip67/ip68 stuff is really thick and not as flexible.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Newtown CT
    Posts
    4,200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Some confusion on setup, a few pixelsticks

    While packing is interesting, it is not the reason for using multicast on WiFi.

    On WiFi, a uni-cast packet is scheduled out the of the radio ordered by station (receiver) and each transmission must have an acknowledgement returned from the receiving station to the AP. This adds additional WiFi overhead and in a noisy environment the packet may be re-transmitted by the AP multiple times until it is acknowledged. This means the AP does not send anything else out until the packet is acknowledged. This adds delay to the packet delivery process. The next delay is caused by the IP layer. In unicast the station would send an additional IP level acknowledgement back to the show player. This adds more delay into the WiFi since the station has to request a time slot, be granted access to the WiFi by the AP and then send to IP Ack to the AP which then needs a WiFi level acknowledgement. Confused yet? Thats ok. All one needs to know is there are a lot of steps in sending unicast data.

    Multicast (aka broadcast) traffic is sent from the show player to the AP in a single packet. No Ack at the WiFi or IP levels. The AP schedules the packet out of the radio and transmits it without making sure there are any stations ready to receive it. Then the AP moves on to the next packet.

    Just the difference in the length of the explanations should make it clear why multicast is better for WiFi. There is an additional problem with multicast that needs to be fixed in the AP configuration.
    • Most APs send broadcasts at a 1Mb rate. That means it does not take a lot of broadcast traffic to saturate a WiFi network. When WiFi was designed, broadcast traffic was expected to be minimal and would most likely be meant for a lowest common denominator station that could not handle higher data rates.
      • Some APs allow you to configure multicast traffic to be sent at a higher rate.

    • Some APs send broadcast traffic at a lower power level (this is a bit rare now, but the older APs did this)
    Last edited by MartinMueller2003; 02-19-2020 at 08:19 AM.


    2020 Full sized show reworked for the new location. Only adding (famous last words) 13 RBLs that I finally got converted to using pixels
    2019 - Just moved into a new home (yet another change of plans). Will be dim but not dark. Too much to do at the new place to leave time for a show. Dim show (3000 pixels) had regular visits most nights.
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyX...ttrsZNARkUce0Q

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    10
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Some confusion on setup, a few pixelsticks

    Should I enable either of these on my router?
    -Enable multicast routing (IGMP Proxy)
    -Enable efficient multicast forwarding (IGMP Snooping)

    Running an r7000 with xwrt-vortex firmware

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Newtown CT
    Posts
    4,200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Some confusion on setup, a few pixelsticks

    There are many terms involved here. The big issue is "Does your equipment support IGMP". If I remember correctly, the Pixel stick software from Shelby had the ability to send IGMP End Station announcements. If that is still true then turning on snooping may help. The best thing you can do is set up a bunch of universes that will use about 10Mb worth of bandwidth (on an AC WiFi) and then see if the lights on the Pixel Sticks work properly / smoothly.


    2020 Full sized show reworked for the new location. Only adding (famous last words) 13 RBLs that I finally got converted to using pixels
    2019 - Just moved into a new home (yet another change of plans). Will be dim but not dark. Too much to do at the new place to leave time for a show. Dim show (3000 pixels) had regular visits most nights.
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyX...ttrsZNARkUce0Q

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Chicago - Southwest Suburbs
    Posts
    7,961
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Some confusion on setup, a few pixelsticks

    Quote Originally Posted by fffizzz View Post
    Should I enable either of these on my router?
    -Enable multicast routing (IGMP Proxy)
    -Enable efficient multicast forwarding (IGMP Snooping)

    Running an r7000 with xwrt-vortex firmware
    Not familiar with that router but yes. You should have IGMP snooping enabled. And in order for it to function you need one IGMP proxy or IGMP querier running on your network. So yes. Enable both options.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •