Letter Report No. 3137704NYM-001 - citytheatrical.com DMX Lab Report.pdfCity Theatrical Inc. Page 4 of 43 Letter Report: 3137704NYM-001 Issued: 11/08/07 SD 12.1.2 (3/22/07) Informative

An Independent Organization Testing for Safety and Performance Page 1 of 43 This report is for the exclusive use of Intertek’s Client and is provided pursuant to the agreement between Intertek and its Client. Intertek’s responsibility and liability are limited to the terms and conditions of the agreement. Intertek assumes no liability to any party, other than to the Client in accordance with the agreement, for any loss, expense or damage occasioned by the use of this report. Only the Client is authorized to permit copying or distribution of this report and then only in its entirety. Any use of the Intertek name or one of its marks for the sale or advertisement of the tested material, product or service must first be approved in writing by Intertek. The observations and test results in this report are relevant only the sample tested. This report by itself does not imply that the material, product or service is or has ever been under an Intertek certification program.

Intertek Testing Services NA, Inc. 40B Commerce Way Totowa, NJ 07512

Telephone: 1-973-785-9211 Fax: 1-973-785-9499 Web: www.intertek-etlsemko.com SD 12.1.2 (3/22/07) Informative

11/09/2007 Letter Report No. 3137704NYM-001 Revision: 11/12/2007: Page 43 Revision: 11/14/2007: Page 13, 27, 33, 35 Project No. 3137704 Revision: 12/17/2007: Page 2, 6, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42 Revision: 04/10/2008: Page 43 Mr. Larry Dunn Ph: 201-549-1160 City Theatrical Inc. Fax: 201-549-1161 475 Barell Avenue email: [email protected] Carlstadt, NJ 07072, USA Dear Mr. Dunn, Intertek has completed the evaluation of your Wireless DMX Transmission Systems to the standard American National Standard E1.11 – 2004 Entertainment Technology USITT DMX512-A Asynchronous Serial Digital Data Transmission Standard for Controlling Lighting Equipment and Accessories. Issuance of this report completes work anticipated by this phase of Intertek Job No. 313770 We appreciate your interest in Intertek’s engineering services; if we could be of further assistance please feel free to contact the undersigned, or your account representative. The following are the results of the evaluation: Sincerely, Reviewed by,

Walter Regal Thomas F. Connaughton Project Engineer Reviewer

City Theatrical Inc. Page 2 of 43 Letter Report: 3137704NYM-001 Issued: 11/08/07

SD 12.1.2 (3/22/07) Informative

Table of Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Referenced Documents ................................................................................................................. 3 3. Terms used in this document......................................................................................................... 3 4. The Tests ....................................................................................................................................... 3

4.1. WiFi Performance:................................................................................................................. 3 4.2. Data Integrity: ........................................................................................................................ 5 4.3. Integrity Test:......................................................................................................................... 5 4.4. Fragment Test: ...................................................................................................................... 6 4.5. Account Test: ........................................................................................................................ 6

5. Test 1: WiFi Baseline performance............................................................................................... 9 6. Test 2: WiFi performance with RC4 Magic ................................................................................. 13 7. Test 3: WiFi performance with Wireless Solution W-DMX Black Box ........................................ 17 8. Test 4: WiFi performance with Wireless Solution W-DMX Pro................................................... 19 9. Test 5: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (125mW, Full Bandwidth)...... 21 10. Test 6: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (10mW, Full Bandwidth) ........ 23 11. Test 7: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (125mW, Limited Bandwidth) 25 12. Test 8: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (10mW, Limited Bandwidth) .. 27 13. Test 9: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (125mW, Limited Burst) ........ 29 14. Test 10: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (10mW, Limited Burst)......... 31 15. Test 11: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (125mW, Limited Burst, Limited Bandwidth) ............................................................................................................................... 33 16. Test 12: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (10mW, Limited Burst, Limited Bandwidth)............................................................................................................................................ 35 17. Test 13: Data Integrity with RC4 Magic ...................................................................................... 37 18. Test 14: Data Integrity with Wireless Solution W-DMX Black Box ............................................. 39 19. Test 15: Data Integrity with Wireless Solution W-DMX Pro........................................................ 40 20. Test 16: Data Integrity with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX..................................................... 41 21. Integrity Test Summary................................................................................................................ 42 22. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 43 Figure 1, WiFi Baseline Setup Schematic .............................................................................................. 5 Figure 2, WiFi w/ System UT Setup Schematic ..................................................................................... 5 Figure 3, Integrity Test Setup Schematic ............................................................................................... 7 Figure 4, Intertek Semi-Anechoic Chamber Test Arrangement ............................................................. 8 Figure 5, Passmark Network test screen ............................................................................................. 10



1. Introduction The following tests were performed in the Semi-Anechoic Screened Room test chamber at Intertek in Totowa, NJ on November 1

st 2007.

Each procedure was developed to test a specific performance parameter of a Wireless DMX512-A Transmission System, and these procedures have been devised to be appropriate for any system that claims to deliver ESTA/ANSI compliant DMX512-A Data via a wireless transmission method. 2. Referenced Documents

• ANSI E1.11-2004 Entertainment Technology USITT DMX512-A Asynchronous Serial Digital Data Transmission Standard for Controlling Lighting Equipment and Accessories, © 2004 Entertainment Services and Technology Association

3. Terms used in this document DMX, DMX512, DMX512-A: All references to DMX and DMX512 in this document refer to the DMX512-A protocol as defined in ANSI E1.11-2004 Entertainment Technology USITT DMX512-A Asynchronous Serial Digital Data Transmission Standard for Controlling Lighting Equipment and Accessories. ESTA: Entertainment Services and Technology Association FHSS: Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum ISM: Industrial, Scientific and Medical radio band mW ETSI: RF broadcast power rating post-antenna in milliWatts, as per the standards established by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute; the common broadcast power rating method used in Europe mW FCC: RF broadcast power rating pre-antenna in milliWatts, as per the standards established by the Federal Communication Commission of the United States of America; the common broadcast power rating used in North America Packet, DMX Packet: One complete transmission of a full set of DMX512-A Data bytes, consisting of the Start (00) Byte and up to 512 Data Bytes. Refresh Rate: the rate in Hertz at which the DMX Data packets are sent. The maximum possible refresh rate for full length (513 byte) DMX packets is 44.1 Hz. Receiver UT: The Receiver Under Test System UT: The System Under Test Transmitter UT: The Transmitter Under Test WiFi: IEEE 802.11 wireless Ethernet connection technology 4. The Tests

4.1. WiFi Performance:

As the use of RF technologies in entertainment becomes more popular, the effect these systems have on each other becomes a more significant issue, particularly as many of the data delivery technologies operate in the 2.4 GHz ISM radio band. Both WiFi and FHSS systems continue to grow in popularity for a range of entertainment applications. Many anecdotal reports suggest that WiFi signals can be impacted by other transceivers operating in the same environment, including



reports of problems caused by FHSS systems. These tests are intended to measure how WiFi performance is impacted by operation in the same environment with the different Systems UT.

The PassMark Advanced Network Test software(which is part of PerformanceTest) is designed to test the data transfer rate between two computers both of which must be running Performance Test. One of the computers must act as the server and will sit waiting for a connection. The other computer acts as a client. It connects to the server machine and sends data to it for the duration of the test. To test bi-directional data throughput, the computers will be tested in both server and client roles.

The network benchmark test will work with any type of TCP/IP connection. In these tests, a WiFi link will be used. The software has been optimized to use a minimum amount of CPU time, allowing high speed gigabit ethernet connections to be benchmarked.

The results of these tests will be presented as a graph showing the transfer rate over time and the average transfer rate for the duration of the test (90 seconds). The following hardware will be used for the WiFi tests. It will remain consistent throughout the tests and in the same locations. See figure 1 and 2 for WiFi test schematics.

o Computer 1 – Dell Latitude D520 laptop, Broadcom 440x 10/100 integrated controller

o Computer 2 – HP Pavilion zv5000 laptop, Broadcom 802.11b/g WLAN card (internal)

o WiFi Access point – Linksys WRT54G Wireless G broadband router

WiFi

Wireless Access Point

(WAP)

Network Switch

Ethernet

Server

Computer 1

Computer 2

Client

Wireless Ethernet Broadcast

Ethernet Cable

Ethernet Cable

10' minimum

WiSpy Monitor

Computer 3



Figure 1, WiFi Baseline Setup Schematic

Server

Computer 1

Computer 2

Client

Wireless Ethernet Broadcast

Ethernet Cable

Ethernet Cable

Under Test

ReceiverTransmitter

Under Test

DMX Tester

Wireless

Wireless DMX Broadcast

10' minimum

10' minimum

Computer 3

WiSpy Monitor

WiFi

Wireless Access Point

(WAP)

Network Switch

Ethernet

Figure 2, WiFi w/ System UT Setup Schematic

4.2. Data Integrity:

Wireless DMX delivery systems work by receiving a hardwired DMX signal (the Input DMX), converting that DMX to a wireless broadcast, receiving that broadcast, and converting that wireless broadcast back to hardwired DMX (the Output DMX). In the Data Integrity tests, the input DMX is compared to the output DMX for different Systems UT. Results are given for a range of Packet Error types, Packet Loss, and for input vs. output Refresh Rate.

A diagnostic tool is required to allow metrics-based testing of any wireless DMX delivery system that consists of a DMX512-to-wireless Transmitter and a wireless-to-DMX512 Receiver. The wireless DMX tester used for these tests outputs packets of ESTA-compliant DMX512-A data to the Transmitter under test (Transmitter UT), receives the DMX coming out of the Receiver under test (Receiver UT), compares the received data to the sent data, and reports the results. Each test was run for five minutes and then the data was collected. There is a temporal margin of error of plus or minus 5 seconds on the gathering of the test results. Descriptions of the tests performed by the wireless DMX tester are shown below. See figure 3 for a schematic of the test setup. 4.3. Integrity Test:

This test determines if DMX512 packets are transmitted and received correctly, or if the packet is modified or corrupted in some way as it moves through the wireless system under test. The



Wireless DMX Tester outputs a continuous stream of unique 512 byte data packets in which the first 510 bytes contain unique data and the final 2 bytes contain a sum check value for the packet. The system outputs these packets to the Transmitter UT, checks the sum check values of the packets returning to the Wireless DMX Tester from the Receiver UT, and counts valid sum checks as good packets and invalid sum checks as Packet Errors. Average and Min/Max results are calculated and displayed. This test repeats until stopped by the Test operator.

4.4. Fragment Test:

This test measures the number of bad bytes per DMX packet or packets that are fragmented (partially corrupted in some way) as they pass through the System UT. This test is structured as follows:

The Wireless DMX Tester outputs 10 packets containing all 0s to prime the System UT. The Wireless DMX Tester outputs 1 packet containing all FFs to the System UT. The Wireless DMX Tester checks the contents of the packet received from the System UT to confirm whether or not it contains all FFs. Average and Min/Max results are calculated and displayed. This test repeats until stopped by the test operator.

4.5. Account Test:

This test measures the number of packets that are lost during wireless data transmission. This test is structured as follows:

a. The Wireless DMX Tester outputs 10 packets containing all 0s to prime the System UT. b. The Wireless DMX tester outputs 256 packets with first byte in each packet containing

the packet number (1-256), the next 509 bytes as random data and the last two bytes as checksum.

c. The Wireless DMX tester receives the data from the Receiver UT and compares the results with the originally transmitted data.

d. After the 256 packets have been sent and the results received and checked, the Wireless DMX tester presents the following result data:

• Packet Errors: Number of packets received where the checksums were incorrect

• Extra packets: Number of duplicate packets received

• Dropped Packets: Number of packets lost (missing packet ID number) This test repeats until stopped by the test operator. Each repetition of this test takes ~ 6 seconds to complete and update the display. In a five minute test at a refresh rate of 44Hz, a total of 13,200 packets will be transmitted.



Under Test

ReceiverTransmitter

Under Test

DMX Tester

Wireless

10' minimum

Computer 3

WiSpy Monitor

Figure 3, Integrity Test Setup Schematic



2'-11" [0.9M]

2'-11" [0.9M]

1'-3" [0.4M]

11'-4" [3.5M]

2'-5" [0.7M]

1'-7" [0.5M]

1'-2" [0.4M]

Transmitter UT

Antenna Position

1'-7" [0.5M]

1'-2" [0.4M]

Receiver UT

Antenna Position

Transmitter UT

and Computer 1

Test Position

Test Position

and Computer 2

Receiver UT

Computer 3

Test Position

21'-5" [6.5M]

Figure 4, Intertek Semi-Anechoic Chamber Test Arrangement



5. Test 1: WiFi Baseline performance

This test is intended to establish baseline performance for 802.11G wireless Ethernet connection technology (“WiFi”) under the test session conditions. Data collected will be used comparatively in subsequent tests.

Equipment: 1. Laptop PC Computer (Computer 1) 2. Ethernet Switch 3. LinkSys WRT54G WiFi WAP 4. Laptop PC Computer with WiFi wireless adapter installed (Computer 2) 5. Laptop PC Computer with WiFi wireless adapter and Metageek WiSpy installed (Computer 3) 6. (2) Ethernet connection cables (CAT 5e UTP) 7. AC Mains Power for all equipment

Software:

• Passmark Performance Test V6.1 Setup (refer to fig 2, WiFi Baseline setup schematic):

1. Install Passmark Performance Test Software on both Computer 1 and Computer 2 2. Locate Computer 1, Ethernet Switch, and WiFI WAP in close proximity at one end of the test

area 3. Locate Computer 2 at lease 10’ from WAP at the other end of the test area 4. Locate Computer 3 centrally in the test area 5. Mark positions of WAP and Computer 2 so that the positions may be maintained/restored

through out the tests 6. Connect Power to all equipment 7. Power up all equipment and test functions to assure proper operation 8. Configure WiFi system to operate on WiFi channel 11 9. Configure Comp 1 and Comp with static IP Addresses of the same subnet (recommended

settings Comp1= 192.168.1.1, Comp2= 192.168.1.2)

Procedure:

1. Launch WiSpy Software on Computer 3 2. Launch Performance Test on comp 1 & 2 3. Select “Networking Test” under advanced menu 4. Set Computer 1 to act a Server 5. Set Computer 2 to act as Client 6. Set both machines to execute a TCP Test over a period of 90 seconds 7. Set computer 2 to communicate w/ Comp 1 via IP Address (enter this data in the Host field as

shown in Figure 4) 8. Press GO to start test on Server computer 9. Press GO to start test on Client computer

Performance Test will execute test and display result as average transmission rate Press VIEW GRAPH button to display performance test data as a graph

Copy the resulting graph and paste into a report document for later reference

1. Reconfigure Computer 1 as a client 2. Reconfigure Computer 2 to act as a server 3. Repeat steps 5-8 above



Performance Test will execute test and display result as average transmission rate Press VIEW GRAPH button to display performance test data as a graph Copy the resulting graph and paste into a report document for later reference WiSpy will display 2.4 Ghz RF activity during the test. Save the test file for later reference.

Figure 5, Passmark Network test screen



Performance test graph: Computer 1 as Server

Computer 2 as Client



WiSpy Graph: Computer 1 as Server


Notes/Observations: The WAP transmits with greater power as evidenced by the higher amplitudes (more red) shown in the Spectral and Topographic views of the second WiSpy images. The throughput of the baseline system was between 23023 Kbits/s and 22774 Kbits/s.



6. Test 2: WiFi performance with RC4 Magic

In this test, the WiFi system UT performance is measured while an RC4 Magic wireless DMX system is operated in the same environment. Note: Repeat this procedure for all WiFi performance with wireless DMX systems tests. Equipment:

1. PC Computer (Computer 1) 2. Ethernet Switch 3. LinkSys RT54G WiFi WAP 4. Laptop PC Computer with WiFi wireless adapter installed (Computer 2) 5. Laptop PC Computer with WiFi wireless adapter and MetaGEEK WiSPY installed (Computer

3) 6. (2) Ethernet connection cables (CAT 5e UTP) 7. Wireless DMX Tester 8. Transmitter UT 9. Receiver UT 10. 5’ DMX cable 11. 25’ DMX cable 12. AC Mains Power for all equipment

Software:

• Passmark Performance Test V6.1

Setup (refer to fig 3, WiFi Performance setup schematic): 1. Install Passmark Performance Test Software on both Computer 1 and Computer 2 2. Locate Computer 1, Ethernet Switch, and WiFI WAP in close proximity at one end of the test

area 3. Locate Computer 2 at lease 10’ from WAP at the other end of the test area 4. Mark positions of WAP and Computer 2 so that the positions may be maintained/restored

through out the tests 5. Connect Power to all equipment 6. Power up all equipment and test functions to assure proper operation 7. Configure WiFi system to operate on WiFi channel 11 8. Configure Comp 1 and Comp with static IP Addresses of the same subnet (recommended

settings Comp1= 192.168.1.1, Comp2= 192.168.1.2) 9. Configure Transmitter UT and Receiver UT as required for communication 10. Connect the Transmitter UT to the SHoW DMX Tester with the 5’ DMX cable 11. Connect the Receiver UT to the SHoW DMX Tester with the 25’ DMX cable 12. Locate the Receiver UT 21’5”away from the Transmitter at the other end of the test area 13. Mark positions of Transmitter UT and Receiver UT so that the positions may be

maintained/restored through out the tests

Procedure:

1. Launch WiSpy Software on Computer 3 2. Start the wireless DMX tester Integrity test 3. Scroll to the packets received display to confirm that the WDS system is passing data 4. Launch Performance Test on comp 1 & 2 5. Select “Networking Test” under advanced menu 6. Set Computer 1 to act a Server 7. Set Computer 2 to act as Client



8. Set both machines to execute a TCP Test over a period of 90 seconds 9. Set computer 2 to communicate w/ Comp 1 via IP Address (enter this data in the Host field as

shown in fig 4) 10. Press GO to start test on Server computer 11. Press GO to start test on client computer

Performance Test will execute test and display result as average transmission rate Press VIEW GRAPH button to display performance test data as a graph Copy the resulting graph and paste into a report document for later reference

12. Reconfigure computer 1 as a client 13. Reconfigure computer 2 to act as a server 14. Repeat steps 5-8 above

Performance Test will execute test and display result as average transmission rate Press VIEW GRAPH button to display performance test data as a graph Copy the resulting graph and paste into a report document for later reference. WiSpy will display 2.4Ghz RF activity during the test. Save the test file for later reference.









Notes/Observations: While the RC4 System did not operate in the same frequency as the WiFi system, a small reduction was noticed in the WiFi throughput. The reduction in WiFi throughput was between 12% and 3%.



7. Test 3: WiFi performance with Wireless Solution W-DMX Black Box

Performance test graph: Computer 1 as Server No data available Computer 1 as client





Notes/Observations: The W-DMX AFHSS (Adaptive Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum) system did not adapt to allow the lower powered transmitter on the client (Computer 2 – laptop with internal WiFi card) to send data. Thus the test software was unable to complete as no data was passed to the server (Computer 1 through WAP). The transmitter on the WAP was more powerful and able to pass data to the laptop. The throughput of that data was reduced, however, by 35%.



8. Test 4: WiFi performance with Wireless Solution W-DMX Pro

Performance test graph: Computer 1 as Server No data available Computer 1 as client:





Notes/Observations: The W-DMX AFHSS (Adaptive Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum) system did not adapt to allow the lower powered transmitter on the client (Computer 2 – laptop with internal WiFi card) to send data. Thus the test software was unable to complete as no data was passed to the server (Computer 1 through WAP). The transmitter on the WAP was more powerful and able to pass data to the laptop. The throughput of that data was reduced, however, by 35%.



9. Test 5: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (125mW, Full Bandwidth)

Configure SHoW DMX system for 125mW Broadcast Power and Full Bandwidth Broadcast mode.







Notes/Observations: The Show DMX system allowed WiFi Data to pass in both directions. The reduction in WiFi throughput was between 62% and 40%.



10. Test 6: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (10mW, Full Bandwidth) Configure SHoW DMX system for 10mW Broadcast Power and Full Bandwidth Broadcast mode.







Notes/Observations: The Show DMX system allowed WiFi Data to pass in both directions. The reduction in WiFi throughput was between 50% and 32%. This is better WiFi throughput than a full powered SHoW DMX System.



11. Test 7: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (125mW, Limited Bandwidth)

Configure SHoW DMX system for 125mW Broadcast Power and Limited Bandwidth broadcast where an optimal limited bandwidth sub-band has been selected for broadcast.







Notes/Observations: While the SHoW DMX System did not operate in the same frequency as the WiFi system, a reduction was noticed in the WiFi throughput and data was passed in both directions. The reduction in WiFi throughput was between 58% and 21%. This is better WiFi throughput than a full powered or reduced power SHoW DMX System.



12. Test 8: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (10mW, Limited Bandwidth)

Configure SHoW DMX system for 10mW Broadcast Power and Limited Bandwidth broadcast where an optimal limited bandwidth sub-band has been selected for broadcast.







Notes/Observations: While the SHoW DMX System did not operate in the same frequency as the WiFi system, a minor reduction was noticed in the WiFi throughput and data was passed in both directions. The reduction in WiFi throughput was between 23% and 9%.



13. Test 9: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (125mW, Limited Burst)

Configure SHoW DMX system for 125mW Broadcast Power, Full Bandwidth broadcast mode, and Limited Burst mode (1-30).







Notes/Observations: The SHoW DMX System in a limited burst mode (30 DMX channels) has an unperceivable impact on WiFi performance



14. Test 10: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (10mW, Limited Burst)

Configure SHoW DMX system for 10mW Broadcast Power, Full Bandwidth broadcast mode, and Limited Burst mode (1-30).







Notes/Observations: The SHoW DMX System in a low power, limited burst mode (30 DMX channels) has an unperceivable impact on WiFi performance



15. Test 11: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (125mW, Limited Burst, Limited Bandwidth)

Configure SHoW DMX system for 125mW Broadcast Power; Limited Bandwidth broadcast mode, and Limited Burst mode (1-30).







Notes/Observations: The SHoW DMX System in a limited bandwidth, limited burst mode (30 DMX channels) has an unperceivable impact on WiFi performance



16. Test 12: WiFi performance with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX (10mW, Limited Burst, Limited Bandwidth)

Configure SHoW DMX system for 10mW Broadcast Power, Limited Bandwidth broadcast mode, and Limited Burst mode (1-30).







Notes/Observations: The SHoW DMX System in a low power, limited bandwidth, limited burst mode (30 DMX channels) has an no impact on WiFi performance



17. Test 13: Data Integrity with RC4 Magic

In this test, the integrity of the DMX512 Data delivered by the System UT is measured for a range of Data Integrity, Fragmentation, and Packet Loss parameters. Equipment:

o Wireless DMX tester o RC4 Magic Transmitter (Transmitter UT) o RC4 Magic Receiver (Receiver UT) o 5’ DMX cable o 25’ DMX cable o AC Mains Power for all equipment

Setup (refer to fig 1, WiFi Performance setup schematic):

1. Connect Power to all equipment 2. Power up all equipment and test functions to assure proper operation 3. Configure Transmitter UT and Receiver UT as required for communication 4. Connect the Transmitter UT to the wireless DMX tester with the 5’ DMX cable 5. Connect the Receiver UT to the wireless DMX tester with the 25’ DMX cable 6. Locate the Receiver UT 21’5”away from the Transmitter at the other end of the test area 7. Mark positions of Transmitter UT and Receiver UT so that the positions may be

maintained/restored through out the tests Procedure:

1. Perform Integrity test for five minutes 2. Record results 3. Perform Fragment test for five minutes 4. Record Results 5. Perform Packet Loss test for five minutes 6. Record Results 7. Perform Account test for five minutes 8. Record Results



RC4 Magic - 5 min test

Integrity Test

Total # of errors 11560

% error avg 99

% error min 94

% error max 99

Error rate avg 39

Error rate min 19

Error rate max 40

Refresh Rate

Tx 41Hz 38.5

Tx 32Hz 38

Tx 21Hz 37.75

Fragmentation

# bad bytes avg 307

# bad bytes min 146

# bad bytes max 510

% of packet wrong avg 63

% of packet wrong min 29

% of packet wrong max 100

Account

Packet Errors 10510

Extra 1

Dropped 12026

Intertek Semi-Anechoic Chamber



18. Test 14: Data Integrity with Wireless Solution W-DMX Black Box

Repeat above test with W-DMX Black Box Transmitter as Transmitter UT and W-DMX Black Box Receiver as Receiver UT

Integrity Test


% error avg 32

% error min 32

% error max 39

Error rate avg 13

Error rate min 1

Error rate max 20

Refresh Rate

Tx 41Hz 42

Tx 32Hz 42

Tx 21Hz 42

Fragmentation

# bad bytes avg 102

# bad bytes min 0

# bad Bytes max 511




Account

Packet Errors 3736

Extra 0

Dropped 4232


WDMX Black Box - 5 min test



19. Test 15: Data Integrity with Wireless Solution W-DMX Pro

Repeat above test with W-DMX Pro Transmitter as Transmitter UT and W-DMX Pro Receiver as Receiver UT.

Integrity Test


% error avg 33

% error min 28

% error max 34

Error rate avg 15

Error rate min 3

Error rate max 22

Refresh Rate

Tx 41Hz 42

Tx 32Hz 42

Tx 21Hz 42

Fragmentation

# bad bytes avg 78

# bad bytes min 0

# bad bytes max 511




Account

Packet Errors 3905

Extra 0

Dropped 4408


WDMX Pro - 5 min test



20. Test 16: Data Integrity with City Theatrical, Inc. SHoW DMX

Repeat above test with SHoW DMX Transmitter as Transmitter UT and SHoW DMX Receiver as Receiver UT. Set the Power output of the Transmitter to 50mW to approximate the output power of other devices.

Integrity Test

Total # of errors 0

% error avg 0

% error min 0

% error max 0

Error rate avg 0

Error rate min 0

Error rate max 0

Refresh Rate

Tx 41Hz 41

Tx 32Hz 32

Tx 21Hz 21

Fragmentation

# bad packets avg 0

# bad packets min 0

# bad packets max 0




Account

Packet Errors 0

Extra 0

Dropped 0

Intertet Semi-Anechoic Chamber

SHoW DMX - 5 min test



21. Integrity Test Summary

Test 13 Test 14 Test 15 Test 16

Integrity Test Integrity Test Integrity Test Integrity Test

Total # of errors 11560 Total # of errors 4083 Total # of errors 4273 Total # of errors 0

% error avg 99 % error avg 32 % error avg 33 % error avg 0

% error min 94 % error min 32 % error min 28 % error min 0

% error max 99 % error max 39 % error max 34 % error max 0

Error rate avg 39 Error rate avg 13 Error rate avg 15 Error rate avg 0

Error rate min 19 Error rate min 1 Error rate min 3 Error rate min 0

Error rate max 40 Error rate max 20 Error rate max 22 Error rate max 0

Refresh Rate Refresh Rate Refresh Rate Refresh Rate

Tx 41Hz 38.5 Tx 41Hz 42 Tx 41Hz 42 Tx 41Hz 41

Tx 32Hz 38 Tx 32Hz 42 Tx 32Hz 42 Tx 32Hz 32

Tx 21Hz 37.75 Tx 21Hz 42 Tx 21Hz 42 Tx 21Hz 21

Fragmentation Fragmentation Fragmentation Fragmentation

# bad bytes avg 307 # bad bytes avg 102 # bad bytes avg 78 # bad bytes avg 0

# bad bytes min 146 # bad bytes min 0 # bad bytes min 0 # bad bytes min 0

# bad bytes max 510 # bad bytes max 511 # bad bytes max 511 # bad bytes max 0

% of packet wrong avg 63 % of packet wrong avg 11 % of packet wrong avg 18 % of packet wrong avg 0

% of packet wrong min 29 % of packet wrong min 0 % of packet wrong min 0 % of packet wrong min 0

% of packet wrong max 100 % of packet wrong max 100 % of packet wrong max 100 % of packet wrong max 0

Account Account Account Account

Packet Errors 10510 Packet Errors 3736 Packet Errors 3905 Packet Errors 0

Extra 1 Extra 0 Extra 0 Extra 0

Dropped 12026 Dropped 4232 Dropped 4408 Dropped 0

Anechoic Chamber

WDMX Pro - 5 min test

Anechoic Chamber

SHoW DMX - 5 min test

Anechoic Chamber Anechoic Chamber

WDMX Black Box - 5 min testRC4 Magic - 5 min test



22. Conclusion

End-to-end measurements were made of several wireless DMX512 lighting control systems both in the presence of and also without interference from a commercial 802.11b 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi access point and client device. Impairment of Wi-Fi communications was determined from network test software. Impairment of DMX512 communications was determined from a hardware test set connected to the ANSI E1.11-2004 wireline data streams entering and exiting the DMX512 terminals. Received data fidelity was determined from: data integrity (packet checksum errors), fragmentation (packet correctness) and account values (packet loss). Of the systems tested, the City Theatrical SHoW DMX system demonstrated the highest degree of data fidelity on the recovered ANSI E1.11 output. In the Integrity Test, SHoW DMX showed no errors at all over a five-minute period, while three other tested products had between 4,273 and 11,560 DMX packets with errors. In a five minute test at a refresh rate of 44Hz, a total of 13,200 packets will be transmitted. SHoW DMX had no errors at all while all other tested systems had errors of some sort in 32% to 88% of all DMX packets. In the Fragmentation Test, SHoW DMX had no errors over a five-minute test, while three other tested products averaged between 78 and 307 bad bytes out of 512 per DMX packet. All systems, including SHow DMX, operating at full power and full bandwidth caused reductions in Wi-Fi throughput, but SHoW DMX was the only system that was user configurable, and could be configured to cause the least throughput reduction of the systems tested. In tests of performance with a simultaneously operating 802.11b (WiFi) network with a base line throughput of 23MBps, SHoW DMX could be configured to reduce interference with the WiFi system, allowing a minimum WiFi throughput of 16.8MBps (10mW, Limited Bandwidth, Computer 1 as client) up to 22.4MBps (10mW, Limited Bandwidth, Limited Burst, Computer 1 as client) when used with the weaker WiFi source (Computer 1 as client). Two of the other tested systems generated significant interference, reducing WiFi throughput from a base line of 23MBps to between 0MBps/no data available in one direction (Computer 1 as client) and 13.9MBps in the other direction (Computer 2 as client).