View Single Post
Old April 1st, 2007   #2
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 430
Send a message via AIM to sblair Send a message via MSN to sblair


You could probably get away in many cases with a shorter than 176uS BREAK between successive NSC packets.

The reason for the increased BREAK times is to allow in-line devices such as splitters to detect the traffic and turn the line around.

Presumably, if a splitter sees a NSC packet it would not release the lines so it would maintain forward direction. I have seen some splitters that will float the lines during idle time between packets. However, a splitter such as this which had no intelligence would still have to function with non-RDM DMX512 gear as well, so it would need to be capable of driving the line quick enough.

We are trying to get everyone into using 176uS Breaks across the board because it is just a better practice in the RDM world. With RDM packets it is definitely a requirement as it will cause all kinds problems if the BREAK is too short and you'll probably be making the problem appear to be the spllitter when it is actually you.

Between 2 or more successive NSC packets I see it being a minor issue though.

Scott M. Blair
RDM Protocol Forums Admin
sblair is offline   Reply With Quote