Pixel Controllers and Amps question...

[RaZZlo]

I have a question in regards to Amp load on Pixel controllers.  I see that the PixCon16 states that it can drive up to 32 strings of 170 Pixels in E1.31 mode.  I am assuming that that is 2X170/channel.  Lets also assume that the average draw on a 50 Count string @ full on white is ~2.7-3A.  So if I had 340 Pixels /channel that would be ~9A/channel.  Based on this, is the Amperage rating on this board similar to other LOR boards ? 

 

The reason I am asking is that I am building 9 6' Pixel trees each with about 150-210 Pixels (haven't finalized the configuration yet), or about 1350-1890 pixels across the board.  Based on the description, and other comments from LOR, can I assume that it is safe to run ~200 pixels/channel on lets say 9 channels, and run all white, as long as it is not sustaining ?  Or will the "magic smoke" add a new feature to my display ?

 

I have seen the same with other boards, with high pixel count loading advertised, however the amp ratings do not compute with the maximum load which could be drawn on the channels or the board. 

 

Thoughts ? 

 

Thanks. 

 

 

[Ron Boyd]

I'm quite sure this is with proper power injection. I don't know of a single pixel protocol that will power 340 pixels from one end, or even with power at the other end.

So assuming proper power injection, it should not be a problem

Edited August 11, 2015 by Ron Boyd

[Charles Belcher]

I have a question in regards to Amp load on Pixel controllers.  I see that the PixCon16 states that it can drive up to 32 strings of 170 Pixels in E1.31 mode.  I am assuming that that is 2X170/channel.  Lets also assume that the average draw on a 50 Count string @ full on white is ~2.7-3A.  So if I had 340 Pixels /channel that would be ~9A/channel.  Based on this, is the Amperage rating on this board similar to other LOR boards ? 

 

The reason I am asking is that I am building 9 6' Pixel trees each with about 150-210 Pixels (haven't finalized the configuration yet), or about 1350-1890 pixels across the board.  Based on the description, and other comments from LOR, can I assume that it is safe to run ~200 pixels/channel on lets say 9 channels, and run all white, as long as it is not sustaining ?  Or will the "magic smoke" add a new feature to my display ?

 

I have seen the same with other boards, with high pixel count loading advertised, however the amp ratings do not compute with the maximum load which could be drawn on the channels or the board. 

 

Thoughts ? 

 

Thanks. 

Each output port is rated at 4amp.  Each bank of 8 output ports is rated at 32 amps.  The whole controller is rated at 64 amps.  

Whether or not you can hang 340 pixels off of any one output port will be decided, in part, by the voltage of the pixel strand you are using.  The lower the voltage=the higher the amperage draw and thus the less pixels you can drive.  I am sure those advertized counts are referring to 12v strands, but even going with 12v strands; power injection will be mandatory will high pixel count designs.

 

There is another part in determining how many pixels that can be driven by any one output port and that is how LOR decides to enable the features which are inherent but not necessarily available on the controller.  With the product now being released, we will soon see how this plays out.

 

I have (4) Pixcon16's coming to me, so the testing will begin.

 

╰(°ㅂ°)╯╰(°ㅂ°)╯╰(°ㅂ°)╯╰(°ㅂ°)╯

 

Charles

Edited August 11, 2015 by Charles Belcher

[plasmadrive]

I'm quite sure this is with proper power injection. I don't know of a single pixel protocol that will power 340 pixels from one end, or even with power at the other end. So assuming proper power injection, it should not be a problem

I power 270 pixels from one end.. Of course I am using 24v and each prop has a DC-DC converter on it.. hee hee..

[RaZZlo]

That helps.  I will be using 12V strands, just did not want to over-tax the individual channels which is what is the concern.  So with PI, of which I will be using anyway, the Amp Draw would be lessened from the board. 

I just know that there are theoretical maximums, and then reality.  :