Intellibox and random S88 reports.

[RoSoft]

Hi, I get with WDP (Demo) random reports of all closed contacts on serveral S88 modules in testing mode all TM-modules. Also in normal mode the program displays this random behaviour of all closed contacts. Is this problem known, and what is the solution.

Regards
RoSoft  

[Dietloff]

Hi RoSoft,

can you specify what kind of problem you get (when, where, what)?
In general, there´s no (known) bug regarding the S88-feedback contacts in conjunction with the Intellibox.
Usually problems will occur, if the amount of S88-modules in the WDP-system-settings do not correspond to the "real" amount of modules which are connected to the Intellibox.
Or if s88-modules are not wired in the right way to the IB (input/output of the data bus of the S88-modules).

Please give us some basic data of the equipment you use and when the problem occurs (e.g. only at the same contacts, only if a train passes by, etc.).
Please also tell us, which (Demo-) version do you use (incl. language).

Regards

Rüdiger
 

[RoSoft]

Some basic information

WDP Version 8.1.112-NL
WDP Editor Version 8.1.413-NL

Tested in the editor Test all S88-modules

Intellibox 1.302_1.300
Some original some home-made.

The S88-Bus is a open system so the Intellibox will never know how manny modules are connected in real live.Even so  the Märklin system. All not connected modules will respond as zero.
But I have connected 21 modules and then trouble begins.
If I disconnect 20 modules the problem remains, if I connect modules up to 25 and I don't tell there are more than 21 modules present the problem remains.

If I do this same test with another Intellibox and another Computer the results are the same. The respons is not stable.

If I use another brand software like RailRoad&Co or the Dutch Koploper or some of the homemade software there is no trouble at all and the IB working nice.

Regards
RoSoft    

[Dietloff]

Hi RoSoft,

first of all, we would appreciate if messages in this forum starts with a kind of "Hello" and ends with at least a (nick-) name. This is according to standard "netiquettes" in general   - and I think this is valid for all serious forums.

Nevertheless, my root question in my previous posting was, if you have entered the correct amount of S88 modules in the system-settings of WDP as described in the manual and if the S88 are wired in the correct way.
It is mandatory for WDP to enter the correct amount of S88 - even if the 16 inputs per S88 are not connected.

Regards

Rüdiger


   

[RoSoft]

Dear Rüdiger,

Please read me answer, and you will see that I entered the right amount. And it goes wrong above the 21 connected S88 modules. Never the less the Intellibox and the S88 itself is not aware of the amount of realy connected modules.  And the S88 modules are connected since 1986 in the right way. So this all is not relivant in my opinion. I believe there is a bug in the WDP software, or at least the way of thinking is not right. If Peter Petelin is using the P50 extended protocol it is just enough to scan the XEvents. There is no need to scan the S88 three times a second (300ms). This is slowing down the system without need. If the XEvent scanning way is used then the scanning time can be 10 times a second for all XEvents. So I believe that is the main course of this problem. And then there is no need anymore to specify the amount of connected modules.
For your information I am testing several Train programs for an overall view for a relation.
And I'm sorry too say that WDP is the only program how has manny problems. Regarding Intellibox and Lenz Digital Plus, with LDP is it even worse.

I only want to point this out.

Regards
RoSoft

   

[Stefano Chiti-Batelli]

Dear Rosoft (Wim Ros),

In Antwort auf:
 I believe there is a bug in the WDP software, or at least the way of thinking is not right. If Peter Petelin is using the P50 extended protocol it is just enough to scan the XEvents. There is no need to scan the S88 three times a second (300ms). This is slowing down the system without need. If the XEvent scanning way is used then the scanning time can be 10 times a second for all XEvents.

I remember performing a trace (with AsynMon by Rob Hamerling) of the data exchange btw a PC running WD and the IB. This happened a lot of time ago (years ago).
Well, even at that "early stage", WD did use "events" in order to be informed by the IB - among other stuff - about s88 status changes.
Therefore, your assumption is NOT correct: when configured to operate with an IB, WD does NOT use the P50 protocol for reading s88 modules. In this case, WD uses the P50X protocol, with full support for events - what other programs, to the best of my knowledge, do not support (yet?).

Anyway, back to the problem you reported.
I may have a suggestion for possible further investigation: please restart your WD and check whether the problem is still present ("random" s88 reports - i.e., I guess, unstable status reading from the s88 modules).
Now please verify what you see on the IB display (after having selected "s88 monitor" mode on the IB - using the [mode] key of the IB). Does the IB display also show "random" s88 reports?

If it does, well, the problem has nothing to do with WD itself, I'd say.

If it does not, then I have the following guess "ready for you": upon startup, WD addresses all locomotives which have been defined in its locomotive database (and are declared as being "on the layout"). Therefore, the refresh cycle of the IB (and, thus, the digital signal being generated by the IB), includes a lot of different locomotive addresses.
This affects the kind of electrical noise which is being generated by the whole layout (the "summing sound" which is typical of a digital layout).
I think that the rather long s88 bus which you have (21 s88 modules!) may be "selectively sensible" to that electrical noise - meaning: it may show "random" s88 status changes only if the digital signal present on the layout is of a given kind.

My suggestion is to try and:
- shield the s88 cable (using a "something" connected to
  ground);
- "terminate" the open end of the s88 cable by using some
  10KOhm resistors. These resistors would have to be
  placed btw the "clock", "data", "parallel/serial" and
  "reset" wires and the ground wire. (Since you home-
  built your s88 modules, I do not think I have to explain
  to you how to identify those wires, do I?)


Should you allow me a "commercial note": the problem(s) you are experiencing are one of the reasons which brought us (Uhlenbrock Elektronik GmbH) to develop the LocoNet-based feedback modules 63340 and 63350. In fact: LocoNet is practically immune from electric noise and - also very important - you can configure each sensor-input of each of those modules for a specific delay regarding the occupied->free and free->occupied status change.

Saluti,

Stefano Chiti-Batelli
(Uhlenbrock Elektronik GmbH)
 

[Dietloff]

 

In Antwort auf:
 Dear Rüdiger,

Dear Wim,

 

In Antwort auf:
 Please read me answer, and you will see that I entered the right amount.  

This was not quite clear to me, whether you have entered the correct amount, because then you changed the amount several times without telling this to WDP. In addition I assume you have selected the correct Digital System "Intellibox".

 

In Antwort auf:
 And it goes wrong above the 21 connected S88 modules.  

I suggest you should check your system regarding all S88 relevant connections, because a huge amount of users which operates more than 21 S88 modules have no problems with it.

 

In Antwort auf:
 I believe there is a bug in the WDP software, or at least the way of thinking is not right....  

Of course WDP uses the P50X protocol and be sure that there´s no need to poll all S88 anytime as it it necessary for e.g. the Märklin Interface…(P50)
And of course we all read your messages in the IBX-forum about this topic in September - but to be honest, this is really nothing new…But why should a programmer discuss internals about his software?
Would YOU do this? I think there´s a little difference, if a (private) person starts to program a SW on his own - starting today - and a SW which is established for 10 years now...

 

In Antwort auf:
 For your information I am testing several Train programs for an overall view for a relation.
 

Hm, sounds interesting. But if you try to carry out serious tests about several control software, why don´t you do this with "real" versions and of course "latest" versions (WDP V8.41) to ensure that your tests are in a correct manner? Or would it be appropriate to compare WIN-XP to DOS as "state of the art" operation systems???
Furthermore if you will test in a real appropriate environment wouldn´t it be meaningful to get in touch with the programmers instead of spreading your "suppositions" across a user forum, in which normally user problems and suggestions will be discussed and no protocol or development tasks?
So what´s the real purpose of your postings?

 

In Antwort auf:
 And I'm sorry too say that WDP is the only program how has manny problems.  

Is this your purpose? Hm, then I should translate this thread for the German Users and warn them NOT to use WDP. I believe thousands of WDP-users will be surprised, because until now they did not experience the problems you are describing…and WDP is at the least one of the most or THE most sold model railroad control software in Germany! And maybe not WDP has "many problems" but your test environment...

 

In Antwort auf:
 I only want to point this out.

Me too! But take into consideration, if you are really interested to execute tests to compare the several (more than 22 in Germany) software, you should do it in a correct way. This includes a testplan covering all topics and aspects and the tester of course should be independent and neutral without any prejudice against software he may not prefer personally.
If you just want to spread your personal opinion with a predefined outcome of an obvious "test" (let me guess, which SW you prefer) this is not serious - and it does neither help anybody not is it really interesting!

 

In Antwort auf:
 Regards
RoSoft
 

Cheers

Rüdiger
   

[RoSoft]

Dear Stefano,

The IB S88monitor is stable now flashing.
With other software the reading is stable.
there is not a problem with the connection.

This is tested in two different locations in different houses. The same results.

Regards
RoSoft
 

[RoSoft]

Dear Rüdiger,







This was not quite clear to me, whether you have entered the correct amount, because then you changed the amount several times without telling this to WDP. In addition I assume you have selected the correct Digital System "Intellibox".

No, of course not I'm blond.




Of course WDP uses the P50X protocol and be sure that there´s no need to poll all S88 anytime as it it necessary for e.g. the Märklin Interface…(P50)
And of course we all read your messages in the IBX-forum about this topic in September - but to be honest, this is really nothing new…But why should a programmer discuss internals about his software?
Would YOU do this?
_____________________________________________________________
Yes, I would.
__________________________________________________

Hm, sounds interesting. But if you try to carry out serious tests about several control software, why don´t you do this with "real" versions and of course "latest" versions (WDP V8.41) to ensure that your tests are in a correct manner? Or would it be appropriate to compare WIN-XP to DOS as "state of the art" operation systems???
Furthermore if you will test in a real appropriate environment wouldn´t it be meaningful to get in touch with the programmers instead of spreading your "suppositions" across a user forum, in which normally user problems and suggestions will be discussed and no protocol or development tasks?
So what´s the real purpose of your postings?

------------------------------------------------
I only use DEMO versions, because this is the first impression.



I only want to point this out.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Me too! But take into consideration, if you are really interested to execute tests to compare the several (more than 22 in Germany) software, you should do it in a correct way. This includes a testplan covering all topics and aspects and the tester of course should be independent and neutral without any prejudice against software he may not prefer personally.
If you just want to spread your personal opinion with a predefined outcome of an obvious "test" (let me guess, which SW you prefer) this is not serious -

--------------------------------
Tell me

I only report this in public so any other users will be able to give there commands.

Regards
RoSoft



   

[RoSoft]

Dear All,

I will end this discussion and which all of you the best.
I will retreive me completly form all activities concerning
this hobby.
This has nothing todo with WDP or with this forum.

I will thank you all for the respons given and wizz you all the best.

Regards
Rosoft
Wim Ros


 

[RoSoft]

Hi All,

One more respons.
For anybody how is interested, can download this software to look and scan his Intellibox with no need to specify the right amound of S88 modules.
http://people.zeelandnet.nl/rosoft/RoSoft.zip

The source is free. (VB6.0) just asked for it.

Regards
RoSoft
 

[Dietloff]

Wim,

your postings getting more and more ridicilous and really embarrassing!
In your last posting, you indicated that you will retire (even if you spelled it in an other way) and now you are back again? Hm, this sounds as strange as the way you are obviously "testing" software products.
This  does not sound very professional to me...

Then you stated WDP has "bugs" regarding the s88 bus > simply wrong.
You stated, WDP in conjunction with the Intellibox would not use the xEvent > again wrong.
Even the clear statements of Stefano (one of the inventors and programmer of the Intellibox at Uhlenbrock) were ignored by you > strange behaviour.

Now you are stating YOU have created a SW which does not need the exact amount of WDP...
This makes it really clear to me that you neither have read the instruction manual of WDP nor you are able to recognise and understand WHY WDP needs the mounts of connected S88-modules for e.g. the IB.
This brings me back to what I have mentioned in my previous posting, that it does really not sound professional how you are going to exercise tests, but now I´m pretty sure you even don´t have the skills to do that (I remember you mentioned the colour of your hair...Respect! This seems to be a truly "self_outing"...)

 

In Antwort auf:
... with no need to specify the right amound of S88 modules.
 

If you would have used WDP in anyway you will easily recognise that there are some S88-monitors available or that e.g. the DC-Editor always indicates the "real" amount of feedback contacts on an individual layout. Simply to make it clear arranged, because why should always be indicated the max. amount of feedback contacts if this does not belong to the layout???
So the entry of the correct amount simply limits the indicated feedback contacts - just to easen up the use and make it more efficient - espescially if you print out all the individual configurations...Is this now also clear to you?

Obviously the only purpose of your postings are to make statements that WDP is "buggy" and this is less than destructive. Even in the ridicilous way you do it.

To stop this never_ending_story please decide whether you want to be part of this brillant forum and we do anything with our best efforts to improve WDP and to help any user in anyway incase of trouble.
In case of this you are welcome!

If you proceed to spread your simply wrong and embarrassing statements just to be destructive then I strongly recommend to either unsubscribe or - in the case you still proceed - you will be the very first one who will be banned out of this forum. I really would hate to do that.

So please decide! I´m not willing to spend any more time to read and answer this crab.

There are enough platforms in the www where you can spread your "wise statements" or where you can advertise your SW. I never ever saw any ridicilous postings in the forum of the SW you prefer and I´m pretty sure Mr. F. would really not agree to that.

Regards

Rüdiger

   

[RoSoft]

Rüdiger,

Let me be clear.

1: This is not a advertise for any kind of SW. Simply because there isn't any. Only a 15 years old Dos program.

2: I have read the manual. It is very clear to me why the amount of TM-modules must be specified.

3: Only in testing mode,  monitor icon with question mark clicked, (Testmonitor for ALL tm-modules) It is possible to scan all S88 modules. And that is the place where it is going wrong. And that is also  the place, maybe the only place where the amount of modules doesn't matter. If I do the same with Lenz Digital Plus as digital system I will get 127 modules. And there is no place where I can specify how many modules are connected. So why not the same with the Intellibox, we are speaking about the testing mode, not the normal mode.

4: The clear statements from Stefano where in my opion, with respect, not relevant. Because the S88 string is stable with other SW products and also on the monitor of the IB itself. The S88 monitor display is also stable in the case WDP is scanning the S88 modules only the screen is showing something else.

That is what I was trying to tell this forum.

5: Don't tell me or others that WDP is bug free.

6: If banning is the solution for a bugfree program please do. That's very good for the PR. Better is to listen to the persons who tell you there is possible some strange behaviour detected in the SW. And I assumed the XEvent is not used because I can specify the timer interval for scanning the S88 modules. A bit strange if the XEvent is used.

The SW I prefer is not relevant in this case, and the SW I prefer is not the SW where you are thinking about.

This is for the improvement of WDP. And I believe I have the skills to help with that.

I hope it is clear to you.

With kind regards,
Wim.
 

[Dietloff]

Wim,

according to your previous posting, we processed a test over the weekend with a layout featuring

- IB 1.302-1.300 (2 IBs were available and both of them showed the same result)
- mixed DCC (some solenoid devices) and Motorola environment
- 27 S88 decoder (different vendors simultaneously)
- all s88-modules were arranged beside each other with feedback lines of at least longer than 20 metres.
- WDP V8.41 German (equal to the latest International Version)
- PC: PIII - 1GHz - 512MB-Ram and Win2000-prof.

We stressed either the "normal" mode in operations, with at least 12 locs moving at a time, whilst a lot of loc commands were sent AND s88 events occured and we tested the Test-Monitor within the track layout Editor.

Result: no problem!
After that we decreased the amount > no problem... and increased again: still no problem.

To be honest, I would habe been surprised if a bug would have occured with the s88-bus in conjunction with the IB and never ever anybody would have reported it from user side, but we def. wanted to know, because "meaning" is not "knowing" and my personal layout has less than 21 s88-modules as you have described in your mail

I never stated that WDP is bug_free and personally I don´t know a software in general and in whatever genre which is totally free of bugs. But if there are bugs which do not impact the use in anyway I neither notice it nor I do mind.

So, maybe you give us some more details about WHERE/WHEN/WHAT occurs at your layout, to give us a chance to help you finding the problem.

Have I got it right, that it just happen if you use the S88-test-monitor within the track layout or does it also occur at your layout, when you are in operating mode?

Regards

Rüdiger
   

[RoSoft]

Als antwoord op:
Dear Rosoft (Wim Ros),


I remember performing a trace (with AsynMon by Rob Hamerling) of the data exchange btw a PC running WD and the IB. This happened a lot of time ago (years ago).
Well, even at that "early stage", WD did use "events" in order to be informed by the IB - among other stuff - about s88 status changes.
Therefore, your assumption is NOT correct: when configured to operate with an IB, WD does NOT use the P50 protocol for reading s88 modules. In this case, WD uses the P50X protocol, with full support for events - what other programs, to the best of my knowledge, do not support (yet?).

Saluti,

Stefano Chiti-Batelli
(Uhlenbrock Elektronik GmbH)

Dear Stefano,

With all respect for all involved.

I have done some data tracing also.
In the case of the editorprogram and that is where we are talking about, the XEvent is not used. In the case of 31 modules chr(159) is send. This is the P50 command for reading all 31 S88 modules.

In the other case the WDP in normal mode is using the XEvent. The protocol used is Mixed Mode. Not P50x only (P50 disabled).

If Peter Peterlin is whilling to change the editor part in using only the XEvent scan, than his program is giving the right information to his users, and the reading of the S88 will be stable. The need to give the amound of S88 isn't there anymore. See the Lenz Digital part of his program.


Rudiger,
I had typed this message before your answer.
But I had some trouble with sending it to this forum.

Yes you got it right the trouble is only in editor mode. Because it is not using the XEvent, see above.
I Thank you for taking this serieus at I investigate it further. Perhaps I use the wrong version, it's possible, just let me know.