Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
November 19th, 2020
|
Replies: 5
Views: 6,441
Port turn-around and timing
I concur with Eric's comments.
Irrespective of any sniffers, some form of digital scope with a trigger to capture traffic and port control timing will be an essential base level tool, to get you...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
November 17th, 2020
|
Replies: 5
Views: 6,441
Discovery response.
Welcome to RDM!!
In the first instance, I'd recommend equipping your self with a scope and monitoring the A/B of the 485 bus, to ensure that your response is genuinely being transmitted. If your...
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
July 30th, 2019
|
Replies: 6
Views: 13,658
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
July 29th, 2019
|
Replies: 6
Views: 13,658
Hi Scott, little while no speak!
Could...
Hi Scott, little while no speak!
Could you share a couple of practical examples of a real product that implements RDM defined slots in this way? I'm curious.
I foresee that the permutations...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
March 4th, 2019
|
Replies: 9
Views: 19,957
Hi Majid
A repeater can be considered an a...
Hi Majid
A repeater can be considered an a single port splitter. With any splitter, other responders may be placed on the responder port of the splitter or several splitters all on one bus.
...
|
Forum: RDM User Discussion
April 10th, 2018
|
Replies: 0
Views: 7,372
EU Lighting Controls Plugfest
Hi all.
Just a reminder that the annual EU based Plugfest will be taking place again this year at a new venue in Gatwick.
The Plugfest is a 3 day event, from Wednesday 25th April through Friday...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
September 7th, 2017
|
Replies: 3
Views: 11,208
Logo = RDM Operable
Hi there.
In my opinion, adding the RDM logo suggest that your product is RDM operable, which, as you suggest, it is not. Far from being potentially useful, it would be misleading and detract from...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
July 22nd, 2016
|
Replies: 9
Views: 16,323
Not sure I'm quite on the same page, the...
Not sure I'm quite on the same page, the standard, as it is written, may not be entierly expicit.
If as is suggested, null termination is generally acceptable, then I would expect the relevant...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
July 22nd, 2016
|
Replies: 9
Views: 16,323
Corresponding to the Parameter Data Length
Section 10.1 states:
The Parameter Data Length shall accordingly be set to match the actual size of the text string being sent.
The statement covering what shall be done in the case that a NULL...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
July 22nd, 2016
|
Replies: 9
Views: 16,323
A NULL is a character, so 32 + a NULL is not...
A NULL is a character, so 32 + a NULL is not allowed in any situation.
One on the problems created by using a NULL, is that on sending 32 characters, your NULL will be lost which then generates...
|
Forum: RDM Marketplace Discussion
February 5th, 2016
|
Replies: 4
Views: 21,292
Support
Hi John.
Thank you for you contact on the forum.
Quick answers to your questions:
GetSet will notify you when updates are available, alternatively, you may access all details and downloads...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
January 18th, 2016
|
Replies: 7
Views: 16,519
A controller has it's own UID, used in all...
A controller has it's own UID, used in all commands to responders. Responses to the controller are addressed to the controller by it's UID.
There's nothing, that I'm aware of in the standard, to...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
January 18th, 2016
|
Replies: 7
Views: 16,519
Controllers
It's responders that respond, not the controller.
It may be that your controller is behaving as a responder.
Responders will respond with ACK_TIMER if they require additional time
to process the...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
January 10th, 2016
|
Replies: 3
Views: 10,710
485 IO Interrupt driven buffering
Hi Cyril
Two main factors that determine what clock speed is required to meet the requirements of RDM.
First, IMO, set up interrupt tasks for buffering IO/485 data, thus allowing you to run...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
June 4th, 2015
|
Replies: 9
Views: 16,323
My thoughts are more practical than conformal....
My thoughts are more practical than conformal. Technically, I would suggest that it should respond with DATA_OUT_OF_RANGE. Having said, null character terminators are prevalent, and IMO, as a matter...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
March 10th, 2015
|
Replies: 2
Views: 8,880
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
April 1st, 2014
|
Replies: 1
Views: 8,261
The standard does not specify the required...
The standard does not specify the required behaviour, however, I would suggest that the better option would be to maintain your configuration setting on power fail.
The way your dimmer behaves...
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
June 25th, 2013
|
Replies: 7
Views: 14,418
The problem domain is a little less complicated...
The problem domain is a little less complicated than that. The Root device has no real DMX slots, just virtual ones that represent the sub-devices, but only when the sub devices are contiguous. So:
...
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
June 25th, 2013
|
Replies: 7
Views: 14,418
Eric.
Thanks for pointing out the error in...
Eric.
Thanks for pointing out the error in my last, referring to a root device when I really meant a sub-device :eek:
I'm trying to figure out what trap I'm going to fall in to if I drive a...
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
June 25th, 2013
|
Replies: 7
Views: 14,418
DMX_BLOCK_ADDRESS (Set)
In E1.37 Section 3.3, the final statement reads:
This message shall not have any effect on the DMX512 Start Address for the root device, only the sub-devices.
:confused: :confused: :confused:
...
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
June 13th, 2013
|
Replies: 14
Views: 18,940
Allowed Responses
Hi Eckart
The information you require to answer your question can be found in table
Table 6-7: Response Type Field Allowable Values from Responder
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
May 7th, 2013
|
Replies: 14
Views: 18,940
Advisory, not Error
This is my take on it.
I see nothing in the book to mandate that a responder must return the same label as was set. To suggest this rule would cause problems with PIDs such as RESET_DEVICE. Also...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
January 4th, 2012
|
Replies: 11
Views: 15,215
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
December 16th, 2011
|
Replies: 3
Views: 10,319
DMX Footprint
From what I think I understand, you require your devices to operate in different modes, according to the number of pixels being driven.
I would expect an RDM responder to elect its DMX footprint...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
September 17th, 2011
|
Replies: 4
Views: 10,790
The Zero88 logo pointed to by Eric are the ones...
The Zero88 logo pointed to by Eric are the ones we have been using at the RDM Conectivity stands at LDI and PLASA. Although not official, I see it being used more widely and would encorage others to...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
February 23rd, 2011
|
Replies: 16
Views: 23,150
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
February 23rd, 2011
|
Replies: 16
Views: 23,150
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
February 23rd, 2011
|
Replies: 16
Views: 23,150
Tim.
Few of the devices I worked with or...
Tim.
Few of the devices I worked with or tested have any self tests. In answer to you question, no, not yet. I have however seen self tests from one manufacturer being different on different...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
February 23rd, 2011
|
Replies: 16
Views: 23,150
Hi Tim.
This part of RDM was not well...
Hi Tim.
This part of RDM was not well thought out, if at all.
I've run in to this problem before, the biggest problem is finding a way to implement this in a generic controller, see the link for...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
January 29th, 2011
|
Replies: 13
Views: 18,885
Scott
Just to confirm, this is a 16 bit...
Scott
Just to confirm, this is a 16 bit timer value?
I think I may have posted in the wrong thread here, it was ACK_TIMER that I had in mind.
On the upload front, it is going to be done in...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
January 28th, 2011
|
Replies: 13
Views: 18,885
The time has come.
It has now become apparent that I will have to implement ACK_TIMER for FW upload over RDM, ug.
This post is just to report a minor documentation detail 6.3.3 Page -28- ACK_TIMER response (PD) =...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
January 7th, 2011
|
Replies: 8
Views: 15,813
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
January 7th, 2011
|
Replies: 9
Views: 21,570
Alternative suggestions?
This is exactly the reason I've not implemented this. For every user of the control software that I'm aware, the facility for the vendor commands would become useless, not that I'd rate it as being...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
October 29th, 2010
|
Replies: 4
Views: 9,320
Eric
So far, I have done fairly much as much...
Eric
So far, I have done fairly much as much as you have you have suggested and to a point it works. The 'well enough' part is what concerns me. My problem here is that I can not foresee what...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
October 28th, 2010
|
Replies: 4
Views: 9,320
SENSOR_DEFINITION - User Defined
At LDI, I found a responder with a user defined Unit (Table A-13 Manufacturer-Specific Units) So far so good. What appears to be missing in respect of this, is a 'SENSOR_UNIT_DESCRIPTION' PID.
...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
October 28th, 2010
|
Replies: 4
Views: 9,986
Scott
This is the thread detailing the...
Scott
This is the thread detailing the problem I have with the replaceable parameters that I didn't explain accurately at the last CPWG
Again, this is an issue that I would like to make some...
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
October 28th, 2010
|
Replies: 28
Views: 32,826
Still to be resolved
This issue is one that remains open and one I discussed at the thin end of the CPWG on Monday. Anyone who was at the last Plugfest may have witnessed the result of testing for 255 self tests, not a...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
July 27th, 2010
|
Replies: 10
Views: 12,718
An alternative approach
Fan speed is something I've just implemented... and by looking for ' RPM ' in the description. You'd never guess it wasn't in the standard!
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
March 31st, 2010
|
Replies: 28
Views: 32,826
Cardinal Index
A PID SUPPORTED_SELFTESTS would in this case be in lieu of SELFTEST_COUNT so no real difference in overhead.
I make the assumption that any responder supporting many self tests will not see an...
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
March 30th, 2010
|
Replies: 28
Views: 32,826
Permitting a cardinal index may be put in the...
Permitting a cardinal index may be put in the same context as for personalities. For consistency, I would suggest that indexes be ordinal from 1.
In the case that an responder does not utilise a...
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
March 30th, 2010
|
Replies: 28
Views: 32,826
BTW
http://www.rdmprotocol.org/forums/showthread.php?t=24
Looks like this one is doing a lap of honour;)
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
March 30th, 2010
|
Replies: 28
Views: 32,826
Going Forwards
Looking toward the future, making SELFTEST_DESCRIPTION mandatory when SELFTEST are supported would be the minimum, adding SELFTEST_COUNT would make everything beautifully simple.
I don't see a...
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
March 30th, 2010
|
Replies: 28
Views: 32,826
You never know!
Gerry
I'm working from the perspective of a generic controller and therefore have to cater for all eventualities. I'd recommend the exercise to anyone who likes a challenge, its like a box of...
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
March 29th, 2010
|
Replies: 28
Views: 32,826
Multifarious consideration
Hi Eric.
Yes, while I agree that's true, would it not also be true to say that a well designed standard would foresee this, as it does (to some extent) with required PIDs?
I have here, a...
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
March 29th, 2010
|
Replies: 28
Views: 32,826
Poke & Hope!
Hi Eric
Agreed.
The unfortunate consequence is that it makes the control application look somewhat hapless. In the event of no description being available, the user must be eloquently asked to...
|
Forum: RDM Interpretation Questions
March 29th, 2010
|
Replies: 28
Views: 32,826
Ouch
A small point to add here, I have found that the PID SELF_TEST_DESCRIPTION may not be implimented.:confused:
This is an area of the standard that could definately benefit from a revision.
...
|
Forum: RDM Marketplace Discussion
March 8th, 2010
|
Replies: 4
Views: 21,292
JESE DMX-TRI RDM USB Controller
Hello to all.
We manufacture generic RDM Control solutions for interrogating and configuring RDM compliant equipment.
The RDM-TRI (http://www.jese.co.uk/product/002) and JESE GetSet...
|
Forum: RDM General Implementation Discussion
March 8th, 2010
|
Replies: 4
Views: 9,986
Status Message Markers
Here is a problem that I've come up against when parsing Status messages with the % replaceable parameters.
In Table B-1 there are two format Markers, %d & %x and there is one Specifier %L for a...
|