WayneKremer Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 How many 16-channel controllers can be added on the receiving end of an ELL (wireless) and still have everything realistically responding to commands as it should? I already have an iDMX1000 and 4 Sixteen channel controllers on the receiving end and looking to add 4 more.If I have reached my maximum, is the fix to go off another network with their own set of ELLs on a different frequency?Thx!Wayne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBullard Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 I have 12 16 chan contollers receiving signals from 1 ELL receiver with no problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBullard Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 Double Posted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LightORamaDan Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 WayneKremer wrote: How many 16-channel controllers can be added on the receiving end of an ELL (wireless) and still have everything realistically responding to commands as it should? I already have an iDMX1000 and 4 Sixteen channel controllers on the receiving end and looking to add 4 more.If I have reached my maximum, is the fix to go off another network with their own set of ELLs on a different frequency?Thx!WayneThere is no limit.Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max-Paul Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 I hear you Dan, but just got to ask for clairification, sorry. So, you are saying that if I was to install a ELL slave unit, and no other branch circuits. That I could have 254 units in parallel with this one receiver?I know that you are suppose to have some much better RS-485 receiver chips than the old standard chips of years gone by. When back then the rule of thumb was 32 devices per wire segment. The only way to get more devices back then was to install a RS-485 repeater.You know, once your learn certain rules and limitations. And someone comes along and rips open that box that you learned was the way things are. Well, it takes a little more education to get it into your head to think outside of that box.ThanksMax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LightORamaDan Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 Max-Paul wrote: I hear you Dan, but just got to ask for clairification, sorry. So, you are saying that if I was to install a ELL slave unit, and no other branch circuits. That I could have 254 units in parallel with this one receiver?I know that you are suppose to have some much better RS-485 receiver chips than the old standard chips of years gone by. When back then the rule of thumb was 32 devices per wire segment. The only way to get more devices back then was to install a RS-485 repeater.You know, once your learn certain rules and limitations. And someone comes along and rips open that box that you learned was the way things are. Well, it takes a little more education to get it into your head to think outside of that box.ThanksMaxWe use 1/8 load RS-485 chips so you can have 8 x 32 or 256 nodes on the network. LOR only supports 240 unit IDs on a network.Those are theoretical numbers based on the specifications of the components used. However in real world you probably get more like 70 to 100 units on a network. The real limitation will be the number of channels and the activity level. The ELLs only support speeds up to 56kb while without them you can run the network at twice that speed.Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WayneKremer Posted July 3, 2009 Author Share Posted July 3, 2009 If I run the ELL's at the maximum speed (56K), will that be fast enough to control 8 sixteen channel and iDMX1000 controllers? I know I can connect a bunch of controllers, but question the amount that can be run off of one ELL without them dropping packets to control the channels. Thx! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 As to the network speed issue: It doesn't matter where you connect the controllers (either on the "receiving end" of the ELL or on the wire that connects the other ELL to the computer). If you put an ELL on your network, then the whole network is limited to 56k (the default, IIRC.)When a command is sent on the network, it travels to every controller on the network, even if the command is for a controller connected directly to the computer and the other controllers are on the other side of an ELL link.The only exception to this is multiple networks. Then the commands are only sent on the network where the controller is located. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WayneKremer Posted July 7, 2009 Author Share Posted July 7, 2009 Steven,OK, that makes sense. And to add to that, the more controllers you have, the more likely you are to have more commands sent out on the network. With the ELL's limited to slow speed, there must be some type of maximum amount of commands that can be sent out across the wire before they are either delayed or dropped. No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-klb- Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 You could probably figure out the average size of a command, and compute the maximum number of commands per second based on the network speed, but what will that really tell you? It doesn't really give you a number of controllers, as different sequences will have differing numbers of commands in a given interval. Also, chases will generate a lot of commands, but they are staggered in time. Turning off all of your green channels, and turning on all your red channels generates a huge number of commands that are supposed to execute at once, in a tiny fraction of a second. How do you evaluate that in terms of commands per second? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WayneKremer Posted July 7, 2009 Author Share Posted July 7, 2009 Good question...not sure myself. I would just expect that I could hook up 8 controllers and an iDMX1000 and crank away whatever commands I could throw at it without worrying about speed issues. I suppose that I'll find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts