Is there a way...

[whitebuck]

 
It is an important distinction when dealing with LOR and other controllers, because two different and non-compatible protocols use the same type of cable. 
Category 5 (or category 6) twisted-pair cable (often called "cat5" or "cat6") is the cable in question.  It is usually terminated with RJ-45 connectors on each end. 
That cable is used to carry:
RS-485 signals from a computer through an adapter (generally USB to RS-485 adapter) to an LOR controller
Ethernet from a computer to a router via the computer's ethernet (network) port
DMX over Ethernet ("E1.31") - generally from a computer's ethernet port to a DMX controller. 
 
...So if you try to plug an LOR controller into your computer's Ethernet port, the cable will physically connect, but you will likely damage one or the other - or at best, not have it work.    Same if you connect an RS-485 adapter to an ethernet device like an AlphaPix DMX controller.   That's why it's important to know these details - if you are working with RGB lights, anyway.  If all you have is LOR controllers, then really all you need to know is that your cables are not carrying ethernet and should never be plugged into your computer's ethernet port.
 
Ethernet itself is simply a network protocol that is commonly carried over cat5/cat6 cable - hence why the cable is sometimes (erroneously) called "ethernet cable".   In fact, Ethernet can be carried over coaxial cable (although no one does this anymore) or via radio (you call that "wifi").  
 
 

So, will the ELL work if your using DMX E1.31?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jtomason]

5 minutes ago, whitebuck said:

So, will the ELL work if your using DMX E1.31?

 

As far as I know, the ELL is only RS-485, so no, it won't (shouldn't) work.   Many sources have also said not to run E1.31 over WiFi - which makes a lot of sense to me as it is both not as fast, can have packets be delayed, or - at worst - the signal can be swamped/jammed by someone else's WiFi, intentionally or not. 

I have my show computer (a laptop) right next to the window, and have 2 runs of flat cat6 cable (available at Walmart) out the window - one attached to the LOR USR to RS-485 adapter for the LOR controllers and one from the Ethernet port going to my AlpaPix smart pixel controller.   I have single-hung windows and the cables work quite well, even if the window locks are a tad tougher to engage.   

[k6ccc]

9 minutes ago, whitebuck said:

So, will the ELL work if your using DMX E1.31?

No.  E1.31 is DMX over ethernet.  E1.31 can be carried over ethernet  WiFi however.

 

[k6ccc]

I should followup on what I said and as jtomason said.  E1.31 can be carried over WiFi - HOWEVER there are some issues.  Likely the biggest (especially with older WiFi) is network congestion.  WiFi has less data capacity than a wire.  Do you want your show to have dropouts because your two teenagers are watching YouTube - or worse, your wife bitches that Netflix is not working whenever the light show is running?

Here is one of my standard pieces of advise about wireless stuff (and remember that radio is my livelyhood):  Wireless is great WHEN YOU NEED wireless - however if you don't NEED wireless, a wire is almost universally better.

 

[Mr. P]

1 hour ago, k6ccc said:

 

Here is one of my standard pieces of advise about wireless stuff (and remember that radio is my livelyhood):  Wireless is great WHEN YOU NEED wireless - however if you don't NEED wireless, a wire is almost universally better.

 

I agree with this statement 150%. There are many on here who are always asking about running their entire show over ELLs. Wire will always be better then ELLs as ELLs were actually made to be used where wire was not physically possible such as over streets. ELLs should be used as an addition to your network not as the mainstay.

[jtomason]

2 hours ago, k6ccc said:

I should followup on what I said and as jtomason said.  E1.31 can be carried over WiFi - HOWEVER there are some issues.  Likely the biggest (especially with older WiFi) is network congestion.  WiFi has less data capacity than a wire.  Do you want your show to have dropouts because your two teenagers are watching YouTube - or worse, your wife bitches that Netflix is not working whenever the light show is running?

Here is one of my standard pieces of advise about wireless stuff (and remember that radio is my livelyhood):  Wireless is great WHEN YOU NEED wireless - however if you don't NEED wireless, a wire is almost universally better.

 

If one were going to use E1.31 over WiFi, I'd absolutely recommend using a 5Ghz WiFi network over a channel not in use nearby.   That would maximize your bandwidth and minimize the potential for interference.   However - it's still a "fragile" medium, and for applications that rely on exacting timing, you really don't want that potential delay.   A few more milliseconds to load a web page is no problem.  A few more to fire a circuit is.  

[whitebuck]

Ok, thanks for the info, this is what I thought, I saw the thread and thought I would try to find the minimum impact on across sidewalk solution to wires


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ClarkGriswold69]

If you want to minimize costs, this idea is something I came up with this year.  I created a Cat5 junction box on the outside of my house.  I drilled a hole to my den and strung two Cat5 cables.  I then spliced each cable with jacks...much like a electical receptical.  I did this to the outside and inside.  In essence I created something that currently doesn't exist on the market.  The outside is secured in an all weather box.  The inside is basically a wall plate.  I daisy chained all my controllers and plugged #1 to the outside box and then ran a Cat5 cable from the wall to my computer which controlled my lights.  Doing this allowed me to free up the lap top and use the PC as the main computer.  Since the PC is always in my den it worked out quite well and I've had no issues.  It's not WiFi, but it elimated the costs of having to change controllers.  The system worked perfect and had zero issues with it.  Total cost was about $15 and two hours of labor.  Just an idea.

[dibblejr]

On ‎1‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 0:08 PM, whitebuck said:

Ok, thanks for the info, this is what I thought, I saw the thread and thought I would try to find the minimum impact on across sidewalk solution to wires


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is that a private or public sidewalk? If private you can take a landscape timber and cut it to the width, then do the same thing with 3/4" pressure treated plywood and make a ramp type bridge to cover the cables. That was my plan but medical problems had a different plan so I wasn't able to do it. All of my wires were ziptied together to make 2 giant looking logs going across the sidewalk and yet the delivery people still kept tripping on them! Next year my plan will be in action. Lord wiiling.

JR

[k6ccc]

Quite a few years ago my city replaced the broken sidewalk in front of my house.  They removed the old concrete one day and the next day poured the new concrete.  That night I was out there and installed two pieces of pipe at each end of the cutout sidewalk.  One was 1/2 inch PVC water pipe for future sprinklers to the parking strip, and the other was 3/4 electrical PVC for just plain future with no real plan for it.  I have not used either one yet, but it's there and capped.  I did extend the electrical conduit into my DC column when I built the planter and columns - the two capped conduits on the left:

 

[jtomason]

On 1/3/2017 at 3:08 PM, whitebuck said:

Ok, thanks for the info, this is what I thought, I saw the thread and thought I would try to find the minimum impact on across sidewalk solution to wires


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For the amount of time the display is out, perhaps something like this would work?

 

http://www.homedepot.com/p/Wiremold-Legrand-Corduct-5-ft-1-Channel-Over-Floor-Cord-Protector-Ivory-CDI-5/100095586

[whitebuck]

For the amount of time the display is out, perhaps something like this would work?
 
http://www.homedepot.com/p/Wiremold-Legrand-Corduct-5-ft-1-Channel-Over-Floor-Cord-Protector-Ivory-CDI-5/100095586

That was my plan, but I found that it wasn't wide enough for all my wires.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dibblejr]

Its also really easy to dig under a sidewalk.

Start with a small shovel and dig about 1' down.

Take your waterhose and just shoot a tunnel under it. Keep in mind, if close to a home there may be a lot of excess concrete underneath.

If you have extra wide sidewalks or to assist and making the job easier to can get a section of PVC pipe. Put a threaded end on it that will connect to your water hose. On the other end you can affix either nothing or any strong nozzle to blast under. I did a lot of "under" driveways and sidewalks while I helped a friend while in the USMC. Installed Rain Bird irrigation systems. He has a special drill that would do this but I quickly learned the water technique.

Once you get close water should start coming out on the other side. Once done clean it out enough to get whatever and how many pieces of conduit you wish to place in the hole. Cap them off for future use.

BTW- Now a days I'd use a pressure washer and get the job done even quicker. But for a small 3' sidewalk and in great soil (not the clay we have here) might take you 15 mins with a hose.

It is a very dirty job.

JR

Edited January 4, 2017 by dibblejr

[saxon]

dibbleJR has a +1 from me. They sell nozzles meant for tunneling with your garden hose and work great, like $10<. However I would never purposely create a sink hole under my driveway but a pedestrian sidewalk, blast away!