SVSI - Using Serial and IR ports on encoders/decoders

Hello everyone,

Lately I've been using SVSi encoders/decoders for control. These devices are bound to a master via the netlinx tab. I'm not using a telnet socket to access the serial port like was required before the native netlinx integration.

The trouble I've had is that certain IR channels will stay "On" even though in studio the device reports channel "Off'. I can use a camera to verify the IR bug is emitting well after the channel reports as being "off".

Also, the serial ports have displayed erratic behavior. For instance, I have an Extron IN1606 that seems to lock up every so often. My thought is that the port is putting out rogue strings and the 1606 is waiting on a CR or some other ETX character. The 1606 will not respond to commands until it receives a CR or LF to clear its 232 rx buffer. I plan to do some troubleshooting to see if I can figure this out.

I wanted to put this out there to see if anyone has experience the same behavior.

Jim

Comments

  • ericmedleyericmedley Senior Member - 3709 Posts Posts: 4,152
    I did see this issue at one installation. however, a firmware update solved the problem on the SVSi boxes. With the current firmware I've not had any issues with either serial or Ir working as expected.
  • jpedersen5473jpedersen5473 Junior Member Posts: 3
    Thanks for the reply.......

    For the IR issues, I went ahead and just used an EXB-IRS4. I will look at the firmware and see if that fixes my serial port issue.

    Jim
  • ericmedleyericmedley Senior Member - 3709 Posts Posts: 4,152
    Thanks for the reply.......

    For the IR issues, I went ahead and just used an EXB-IRS4. I will look at the firmware and see if that fixes my serial port issue.

    Jim

    I wonder how much stiff like this just ends up never being resolved? I think most of us have those situations where we just left the workaround in place instead of spending the time to fully resolve the problem. I find most integrators have little patience and even less resource to spend time sassing out these kinds of issues. I then contemplate things like the Voyager Probes and how many workarounds might be on them as they are billions of miles away just dealing with them.
  • fogled@mizzou[email protected] h4x354x0r Posts: 547
    ericmedley wrote: »
    I wonder how much stiff like this just ends up never being resolved? I think most of us have those situations where we just left the workaround in place instead of spending the time to fully resolve the problem. I find most integrators have little patience and even less resource to spend time sassing out these kinds of issues.

    Off topic, but... Cue me, always whining about how cumbersome and resource-intensive it is to call AMX to resolve some issue. It's generally much easier, and more certain to have a resolution in a specific timeframe, to just throw more hardware at the problem and route around it, instead of actually pinning down and resolving the original issue. I'm obviously not the only one who uses that approach to problem solving.

Sign In or Register to comment.