E1.20 RDM (Remote Device Management) Protocol Forums  

Go Back   E1.20 RDM (Remote Device Management) Protocol Forums > RDM Developer Forums > RDM General Implementation Discussion

RDM General Implementation Discussion General Discussion and questions relating to implementing RDM in a product.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old April 10th, 2008   #1
svanciel
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 16
Default Anyone with Coemar?

Just wondering if there is any one with Coemar on the forum?
I have been trying to get our iFlex Spot, Wash and Profile luminaires to communicate with the DR2 through a bi-directional splitter. Limited sucess so far. Even though the technical manual for the lights says that the protocol is "RDM", these units were manufactured several years ago, long before the standard was completed.

Steve Vanciel
WDW, Florida
svanciel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14th, 2008   #2
prwatE120
Task Group Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 179
Default

Steve

please excuse my ignorance - what is the DR2 your refer to. Since you mention RDM, I presume it is some form of RDM controller. Please elaborate.

As you say, the Coemar units were made before the standard was completed. All "pre-release" RDM implementations need at the very least a firmware upgrade to be compliant with the standard, as the RDM Start Code was not issued until the standard had been approved.

Peter Willis
prwatE120 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14th, 2008   #3
svanciel
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 16
Default

The DR2 is Coemar's "display replicator" box that provides remote display and control of their products. One of the challenges with using it is that there is NO documentation for it. There are some passing references to it in the luminaires manual and in the booklet for their bi-directional splitter.

The unit works perfectly well when hooked up to an individual light, it just will not successfully complete the discovery process when the data path goes through a DMX/RDM splitter to multiple units.

During LDI, here in Orlando, Milton came out with his scope and found that there was a timing problem during discovery when we went through the DF BiDi8 splitter. Since then, Coemar sent me their splitter to try, but we get the same result. Recently, Jorge, from Inner Circle Distribution, came by and we tried a DR2 with updated software and updated the software in the luminaires but there are still issues with multiple units on multiple splitter outputs.

We are still waiting to hear from Italy regarding our latest tests.

SteveV
svanciel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14th, 2008   #4
prwatE120
Task Group Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 179
Default

Steve

thanks for the update. You may be aware that I was the co-ordinator for the ESTA sponsored "Connectivity" pavillion at LDI last year, where we had a number of different manufacturers gear all sucessfully talking RDM. Coemar was not present - partly because they did not contact me - and I had no direct contact names to chase them.

I am planning a similar display at LDI again this year, so if you can send me any contact details for technical people at Coemar, I will invite them to participate. Please send any names/email to me off-list and I will chase. This may also help rasise their profile and understanding of RDM !

Are Coemar claiming that they are using RDM - or just something similar ?

regards

Peter Willis
prwatE120 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14th, 2008   #5
sblair
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 413
Send a message via AIM to sblair Send a message via MSN to sblair
Default

Peter,

My recollection at the time was that it was heavily based on the first draft of RDM that went out. It has never been clear exactly what they did, but the timing of them releasing it and my discussions with them at the time all indicated that it was something very similar to the very first draft of the protocol.

I don't believe they are claiming it as being RDM.
__________________
Scott M. Blair
RDM Protocol Forums Admin
sblair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2008   #6
svanciel
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 16
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sblair
I don't believe they are claiming it as being RDM.
There is one statement buried in the luminaires' manual that includes the letters "RDM" in reference to the DR2 communications. But, this was published at least 5 years ago.

I'm waiting now to receive some new versions of their DMX pcb to see if it will fix the glitch. Since our luminaires are still under warrantee, I'm trying to get as many bugs worked out as I can before it expires.

As to contacts, I am only dealing directly with the US distributor of Coemar products. Noel Duncan is the head of Inner Circle Distribution in Sunrise, Florida. Jorge Bombino is their lead technical person. They were at the LDI in Orlando last fall with a good size booth. Maybe you could see if they plan to be in LV and would be willing to connect.

SteveV
svanciel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2008   #7
sblair
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 413
Send a message via AIM to sblair Send a message via MSN to sblair
Default

Steve,

Anything that stated "RDM" 5 years ago most certainly is not really RDM without at least getting a software update at a minimum.

To avoid compatability problems we did not select the official Start Code for RDM until after the Standard was finalized. This helped prevent equipment with draft versions of RDM from creating interoperability issues with true RDM product.
__________________
Scott M. Blair
RDM Protocol Forums Admin
sblair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2008   #8
svanciel
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 16
Default

So, is there currently any sort of field test that can be run to confirm "true RDM" compatability for a product?

Is anyone adding this to their DMX testing devices?

SteveV
svanciel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2008   #9
sblair
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 413
Send a message via AIM to sblair Send a message via MSN to sblair
Default

Knowing what Start Code is being used for communication is the first best indicator. RDM uses the 0xCC Start Code. Anything that was released prior to RDM formally being approved will either use a Manufacturer's own registered Start Code or the ESTA development Start Code.

From a development perspective, the product I use to see exactly what is going on the wire back and forth is the Enttec RDM Sniffer. It's a very useful tool for putting on the wire and watching all the traffic back and forth. If you really want to learn how RDM works at a very detailed level it is useful for understanding what is actually going on.
__________________
Scott M. Blair
RDM Protocol Forums Admin
sblair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2008   #10
bswinnen
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1
Default

Just for your info.
We have a bidirectional splitter that is RDM compatible, but which is a non-proxy splitter. So no intelligence but just the right timing to provide correct turn around of the bus.
At the time we tested it with several bidirectional units, DR1 was one of them.
Have a look at these units:

http://www.luminex.be/products_overview.php?cat=0
http://www.luminex.be/products_details.php?cat=0∏=0100010&display=description
http://www.luminex.be/products_details.php?cat=0∏=0100006&display=description

Regards
__________________
Bart Swinnen

LUMINEX Lighting Control Equipment
Ethernet & DMX solutions
bswinnen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.