Powered Pixel Over Cat5 (PPOC5)

N

ngen33r

New member
Hello everyone, I am working on a new hobbyist design that I am calling now calling PPOC5. I am a hobbyist / enthusiast and want to share my progress with everyone. I am not aware of all central web forums where I can blog this and the HolidayCoro folks deleted my facebook blog on their group. As I stated there, I am not trying to sell these just work on and share a design with some community feedback. The intention is to have a central controller and not have to have power injection supplies next to every object and have it all handled by a single cable for each object. I am not sure if the ethernet connector will be in the final version as a 4 wire terminal block might be a better approach. But here is the design and please provide ideas and feedback.
Prototype PCBs were ordered 2/5/20 for testing.

UPDATE 3/1/20
Well here is the 12V version assembled. It was not fun to solder those 0603 parts, but it worked first try and I am beginning testing. I took it up to 48W and will begin testing there. Monday I will take it to work and bump it to 72W and finally 144W. The current capacity of the cat 5 will be the limitation but I am using 6 of the 8 strands for power. Initial estimates in cold weather usage is 120W over the cat 5. Minimum operating voltage is 26V under that the module powers down. Recommended voltage is 48 so plenty of headroom for voltage drop. I will have to do some long range testing when the weather breaks to find optimal usage distances.


The testing at 72W is going great. I am doing some thermals on the board but so far so good. I will post the results when I am finished. I need to purchase a spool and do some range testing at this power level.

The 5V version seems to be a hot request so I will continue to work on the PCB for the 5V version.
 

Attachments

  • POE PIXEL.jpg
    POE PIXEL.jpg
    78.4 KB · Views: 200
  • 89001614_2665542593563042_6960955669604204544_o.jpg
    89001614_2665542593563042_6960955669604204544_o.jpg
    77.7 KB · Views: 199
I had a little time to layout the universal TX board. This board will accept power input and data and send that over the CAT5 cable to the receiver. The inputs for now will be screw terminals so the power can be daisy chained or paralleled as needed. I am still testing the power supply on the receiver so I will know what the proper rating will need to be. I at some point will need some beta testers. I would prefer well known users or leaders the group/forums that will really put it through hell and back. I want to make sure the design is robust before I release the files. I also need to find a board house that will do the surface mount fab after 5 of these, I don't want to touch another 0603 resistor. I already am aware of some modifications to the receiver side and will be implementing them.

Any other thread that I can post this that will get some excitement? TX boards are going to fab today.
 

Attachments

  • PPOC5 TX.JPG
    PPOC5 TX.JPG
    72.3 KB · Views: 120
I'll sub to follow along. I use PoE daily as a network admin. I have often thought of trying to design a PoE switch meant for controlling and powering pixels.
 
Glycerine said:
I'll be honest, I'm not sure I see an advantage. What kind of distances are you thinking?
Click to expand...

I am looking for 144W at 500' minimum with data and power on a cat 5 cable. The advantage is I don't want 5V & 12V power bricks all over my yard with 5000' of extension cords at 120VAC. The ideal application is small ornaments and arches. My design requirement is to power 2 x 5M 5050 WS2812 LED strips (600 pixels).
 
Litebrite said:
I'll sub to follow along. I use PoE daily as a network admin. I have often thought of trying to design a PoE switch meant for controlling and powering pixels.
Click to expand...

This doesn't follow the traditional POE standard. I am using 6 conductors for power so I can source the buck with more amperage. Pins 5 & 6 I am using for differential data.
 
ngen33r said:
I am looking for 144W at 500' minimum with data and power on a cat 5 cable. The advantage is I don't want 5V & 12V power bricks all over my yard with 5000' of extension cords at 120VAC. The ideal application is small ornaments and arches. My design requirement is to power 2 x 5M 5050 WS2812 LED strips (600 pixels).
Click to expand...

Ok, at 500ft, I get it. I'd volunteer to help you test, but I have a small yard.
 
Awesome. I will let you know when I have a receiver built and tested. I need to purchase a Falcon controller. I have a Coro controller, but I currently don't want to use their products.
 
So I had more time to play with this and I need to change the mosfets and add some heatsinking. The supply is stable with 48V input and a 1 ohm load drawing close to 12A drawing and 3A from the 48V supply. So once I get the thermals happy this should power 2 600 pixel WS2812 12V LED strips if feeder lines are added in the middle and end. While the supply is efficient, I know the 12V strips are not so I will continue to work on the 5V version. I will most likely switch to a thru hole mosfet to make adding heatsinks easier. I don't have the space on the board for 6sqcm of thermal plane for each mosfet and even with that, I am about at the dissipation limits of the device. Custom machined heatsinks are out of the question for a hobby device.
 
Turns out the thermal issue was related to one of the fets being shorted. The supply still regulated with only 1 fet and a heavy load, which is kinda cool. I am going to replace that fet and resume testing. Work has been kicking my ass so I haven't had much time.
 
Network Engineering is my day job...I'm highly interested in your project. I think you're on to something here and I'm a big fan of not having a bunch of gear in my yard where an ether run would do...sub'g!
 
HEMISixty said:
Network Engineering is my day job...I'm highly interested in your project. I think you're on to something here and I'm a big fan of not having a bunch of gear in my yard where an ether run would do...sub'g!
Click to expand...

I agree. 120V extensions are a pain and in the snow they get wet and add in some neighbor kids and you have the potential for something bad. I am re-rolling the board with TO-220 devices. I will expedite the boards so I can get some prototypes assembled. I really want to get at least 144W out of these.. While I am at it I will make some improvements too adding power and data LEDs
 
Very Interested. Watching.
I don't have a problem with cat5, but I do have a problem with 12 to 16 cables coming out of a controller box just for a mega tree. I have
started over the last few years power injecting 12v pixels and only Data and V- from the board. A whole lot less wire!
 
HEMISixty said:
Network Engineering is my day job...I'm highly interested in your project. I think you're on to something here and I'm a big fan of not having a bunch of gear in my yard where an ether run would do...
Click to expand...
This is not Ethernet

Litebrite said:
I use PoE daily as a network admin. I have often thought of trying to design a PoE switch meant for controlling and powering pixels.
Click to expand...
This is not PoE
 
Last edited:
HEMISixty said:
I think pixelpuppy was just being a little padantic...I got a chuckle out of it...
Click to expand...
LOL ... its PEDANTIC.... and that definitely describes me :devilred: Sorry, its a bit of an occupational hazard for me :blush:

Glycerine said:
???
Click to expand...
I was pointing out that calling this "Ethernet" and/or "PoE" (Power over Ethernet) is incorrect. This is neither Ethernet nor PoE which are both well-defined industry standards, completely different than (and incompatible with) the proprietary product described in this thread (PPOC5)
 
Last edited:
pixelpuppy said:
LOL ... its PEDANTIC.... and that definitely describes me :devilred:
Click to expand...

Not my first typo, probably not my last...

I was pointing out that calling this "Ethernet" and/or "PoE" (Power over Ethernet) is incorrect. This is neither Ethernet nor PoE which are both well-defined industry standards, completely different than (and incompatible with) the proprietary product described in this thread (PPOC5)
Click to expand...

LOL I knew what you meant, hence the chuckle... Our industry widely accepts the interchangeability of several of our standards’ nomenclature. It’s almost “slang”, in my humble opinion, just as long as you’re typing “config t” more than white papers...

I’m looking forward to reading the topic’s progression...however it’s referred to...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top