jskoro Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Does anyone know if there is a minimum unit id spacing with CCP? I seem to have some falsing from CCP with IDs to close in number schemes? For example, unit 1 and unit 10 would false for me, but I could change these two unit 1 and unit 20 and not have any problems. I ran CCRs the last couple of years with no problems, but as I have added 5 CCP this year and I'm running into this issue. I've verified in my hardware utility to make sure that my units are working in normal mode and not legacy mode. They are all running on the same network for now - though I'm not running my CCR at the moment so I don't think my 5 CCP would be overloaded on USB485 network. I see a setting for dual normal - is that something I need to investigate? My CCP are pretty spread out too and I'm running into the same light falsing and transition as other posts so not sure if the issues are related. Running 3.7 but just downloaded 3.8 to see if that helps. Any suggestions would be great. Thxs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Simmons Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 I'm not sure exactly what you mean by a minimum unit ID spacing. CCPs with 100 pixels need the dual normal setting and they need to be assigned consecutive Unit IDs. If you have 5 sets of CCPs - meaning 5 controllers with 100 pixels each, that's 1545 channels total, which I believe is waaaay over the limit for one network. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ainsworth Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 George is right on. I have 3 CCPs running on 1 network and if I have all 3 are very busy doing things they have issues. My CCPs are sequencial as far as unit id, the problem is the netwrok traffic is overwhelming. Split your 5 CCPs into 2 networks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jskoro Posted November 29, 2012 Author Share Posted November 29, 2012 Thanks guys - just want to confirm: dual normal setting for CCPs. Not more than 3 per network and all must be set to sequential unit ids...meaning Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3. I find this surprising as I ran 4 CCR without an hitches with my other 16 LOR controllers last year on one network - though they were sequential in order and I used Superstar to program my CCR...so not sure if they was more efficient. I ran two CCPs with 5 LOR controllers for Halloween without any hitches and the Ids were not consecutive. Is this a requirement in the manual that I missed or is this a learned experience? Thanks for all the help. BTW - my plan was to run my existing network with 4 CCR with LORs on a regular network, and an additional 7 CCP and two additional CCR that I'm adding this year...so I would probably need 4 networks total then? I've seen comments that run more than 5 cosmic devices per network...saw quite a few posts claiming this...Thxs again John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Simmons Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 What matters to the network is channel count and traffic - traffic being the number of commands being sent at any given time. Like Bruce, I sequence my CCDs manually, which typically results in seeing lags and missed commands with far fewer channels per network than average.Keep in mind that the CCR's are only 50 pixels each, but the CCPs and CCBs are 100 pixels each. 157 total channels per CCR and 309 total channels per CCP/CCB. Adds up fast.Your previous experience with unit assignments notwithstanding, I'm just parroting what LOR says to do. I've found their advice to be quite impeccable when it comes to using their components. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jskoro Posted November 29, 2012 Author Share Posted November 29, 2012 Thanks George ! We'll give it a try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jskoro Posted November 29, 2012 Author Share Posted November 29, 2012 No luck with the sequential ids on the CCPs. When I have two units sequentially on the same network - the subsequent units seemed to be knocked out and i have recyle the power to get them to appear again. This is why I asked the original question - I can make them work with 5-10 unit id spacing. As noted previously, i didn't have to do this with my CCRs. I also divided the five that I'm currently working on into 2 networks. For now I'm going to space them again to try and resolve my other issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Farmer Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 jskoro,I too had some funny things happening with my CCB's using sequential ID's. I changed them to have a spare ID between them and the problems went away. My CCB id's are 80, 82, 84, 86. They are all on a seperate network and are now running flawlessly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jskoro Posted November 30, 2012 Author Share Posted November 30, 2012 Frank,Your little tip did the trick. No where in the manual or set up guides does it talk about leaving the second CCP unit id blank for the sequential id. It was mentioned above with George, but I didn't get it. Note to Dan and LOR team. Please update the manual in unit id set up for dual normal where you need to leave the subsequent id open. I'm sure it would work other ways - but a simple example as Unit 1 with 100 bulbs/pixels - two strings, you leave next unit id open e.g. "2" and then program your next physical unit id 3 and leave unit id 4 blank and so forth. Obviously this could be anything like your "80" unit sequences above... But this would have save me a lot of confusion about sequential ids and I was thinking physican units, not logical units !!! Thanks again to you and the other for helping ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts