Facebook
youtube
Home
What's new
New posts
New display videos
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Wiki
Search wiki pages
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Display videos
New display videos
Search display videos
Display locations
Displays by region
Members
Current visitors
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Close Menu
New to Christmas lighting?
Get started with the
AusChristmasLighting 101 Manual
Home
Forums
Welcome
101 display basics
Wiring Pixels to Falcon F16V3
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="i13, post: 116979, member: 21708"] 12V pixels often use a similar amount of current (amperage) compared to 5V pixels. The extra power is dissipated as heat so you can't have as many pixels per power supply. If they draw less then that's because they're running the LEDs at a lower current and therefore a lower brightness. If your amperage concern is on the mains power side then 5V would draw less there. 5V pushes the power injection limit unless you inject somewhere above the base so it still isn't a perfect option. Using custom wire spacing with the thickest available wire between the pixels is a good idea regardless of voltage. Remember to include some headroom but longer wires between the pixels results in more voltage drop. 5.94 amps would blow a 5 amp fuse. If you happened to choose pixels that draw a lower current than 0.0555A then you might get away with having 108 pixels per output. That's a good point about exceeding the F16's current rating; I'm not sure where you found out about the 64A limit but I believe you. One option to get around this might be to use an expansion board and run 32 separate strings. The expansion board would then handle half of the total current and each output would have 54 pixels instead of 108. Checking the calculations in your image, I get different values. A strand of 54 pixels should draw 50 × 0.0555A = 2.775A. Multiplying this by 12V is 33.3 watts per strand. Multiplying this by 32 is 1065.6 watts for the tree. Again, I'll point out that 0.555A is a pessimistically high value so it is likely to be a bit lower in reality. I personally don't design pixel power systems to run at below 100% brightness but I have seen it done successfully. Brightness is an available but imperfect tool. You just need to keep in mind that you're relying on the data signal to limit power consumption. Pixel flicker can happen due to bad data or a faulty pixel and flickering pixels might exceed your power consumption limits. If the worst thing that could happen at 100% brightness is voltage drop causing slightly incorrect colours then that's okay. If something would get damaged when the pixels turn on at 100% brightness (e.g. too much current through the Falcon or a thin wire) then it is riskier. I run my pixels at 100% brightness and yes, they are bright. I have not heard of that sequencer before. What is the hardware and signal protocol that your existing display items use? xLights might be able to control them. [/QUOTE]
Verification
The title of our introductory lighting manual contains a three digit number. What is that number? Clue: Display basics forum
Post reply
Home
Forums
Welcome
101 display basics
Wiring Pixels to Falcon F16V3
Top