CyberBrick bug with LEDs

I have almost completed my CyberBrick vehicle, but a dumb “bug” with the LEDs means I may have to launch without any lights.

Have any of you experienced this, and better still, any suggestions?

The short version:

When I set some of the LEDs, they observe the colours I select; other times, they do not. Worse, they also scroll through colours I haven’t set each time I press the test button.

The test should generate four red LEDs, one in each of the housings.

However, I do not get red, I get other colours, different ones from each other. If I press the test button again, I get another set of different colours. The test that turns them all off doesn’t; one of them doesn’t illuminate.

I am used to testing things and ruling them out, here are just a few of the things I have done.

  • A reset of the board
  • A different receiver board
  • A different LED hub
  • A different LED hub cable
  • All different LEDs
  • Different LED port on the receiver
  • Using the UI
  • Using code

My test LED setup (not my final setup)

My test panel.

I have created a ticket, but as that often takes ages and they usually they me to perform tests I already have and documented to them, I thought I would also ask here.

Update

The problem only affects the LED1 (D1).

  • If I disconnect LED2 and only use LED1 the problem occurs.
  • If I disconnect LED1 and only use LED2 it works.

Would you happen to have a pre-release unit, with pre-release code? If so, try reflashing your A11 core with the recovery tool to get the latest MicroPython firmware flashed.

I did, but I was sent production unit replacements for them.

I swapped in retail units as well. I will open the new west box I received to see if that is any different. I purchased it after the kickstarter had ended.

I had:

  • 2 review units.
  • 5 kickstarter units
  • 1 post kickstarter, MakerSupply unit (will try this one).

I thought I would give this a quick try, but it failed.

The Intel Mac version will not expand, and the suggested “if something goes wrong” assumes the zip is unzipped; it isn’t.

I have tried the following firmware versions:

  • Receiver: v1.0.2.51 - All the tests above
  • Receiver: v1.0.2.58 - Doesn’t run ANY lights!!!

Update

I did not pair the new receiver to the transmitter.

I can now have the lights set up as I need.

All I had to do was open up yet another kit and grab its receiver.

I need them to fix the Intel Mac tool so it unzips and works, or my two V1.0.2.51 chips are useless.

This has wasted days!

Keep in mind, they sent me updated versions to fix the review version, which didn’t work, and they never bothered to tell me. Just like they never bothered to tell me the original review units would never work with the desktop or mobile apps.

This got me there. I couldn’t do what you said because of the issue above, but I used a new chip.

Glad to hear some progress though.

I am myself not using the original CyberBrick MicroPython stack much, instead am using my own code paired with an EdgeTX radio with CyberBricks (Controlling CyberBrick models from EdgeTX radio) so never noticed any issues with LEDs, as the hardware to control all 2x4 NeoPixels works just fine (at least in my case with my post Kickstarter campaign 3 unit pairs I have).

The whole thing is limiting. My experience with Arduino is extensive and I have controlled much more with no issues.

I wanted the first one to be able to run without changes for other users though.

Buy a CyberBrick lack and a few other components and go.

I would never have thought LEDs would have been such an issue when I typically control several runs of more than 500.

The software & UI limitations are also disappointing.

I am controlling RHB LEDs, but I have to set all four to the same colour or use code (which have no problem writing) that is poorly documented and assumes you know things they don’t provide.

The irony is, the results of problem I experienced would have been a good feature, stacking chosen colours up that appear in a schedule, but it was just a bug they never communicated to anyone,

I have never been told to upgrade the firmware and they clearly haven’t tested the firmware tool even works (which it doesn’t).

I’m on Windows atm, but was able to download and unzip CyberBrick_Flashing_Tool-MAC-Intel.zip without error, so either they have fixed it on the server, or the issue is with your download. Double check the file size of the zip, it should be approx 49.5MB (50,776KB).

It does download and unzip, but as I said, it is corrupted.

When you launch the tool, you get this error message.

They have not changed it since they originally uploaded it in July.

In their message to me, they stated they will not update it, and at some future point, they will build the flash update into the main desktop app.

There is no reason they couldn’t compress the file again and upload. Unless the tool doesn’t work or has never worked.

Laziness, ignorance, I have no idea.

It appears most of the KS shipped kits come with the KNOWN buggy firmware.

Even if I manage to get mine resolved, those who use my model will also need the latest firmware.

Currently, the v1.0.2.58 I got working has stopped functioning; it connects, it pairs, it will not drive LEDs, motors or servos.

This whole thing has been a massive letdown.

  • LEDs that can’t be controlled
  • Kit that stops functioning without any logic to it or error messages/lights.
  • Inability to set the LED hub LEDs to different colours.
  • Inability to set LED patterns that do not affect previously set patterns.
  • Horendous documentation
  • UI is appalling
  • Firmware tool that doesn’t even launch
  • Can’t control the motors with any precision (read control input and program output)
  • Support that is anything but
  • Unable to control a decent number of LEDs
  • Can’t add speakers/buzzers
  • Receiver can’t have inputs
  • Transmitter can’t have outputs
  • Can’t connect OLED or other screens.

The promise of this is far greater than the reality.

Ok, that is different. As you said before

both of which implied the zip file itself was corrupt.

While I’m not that conversant in things MacOS, I do know that the same error message can also come up due to MacOS security settings (Gatekeeper quarantine) … which is why there is the instruction to remove the flag that indicates the file is not local (i.e. was downloaded)… which you have to run after unzipping the file. I think another place to check might be “System Settings > Privacy & Security” (to see if it was overeager and deemed it a blocked app?)

sudo xattr -dr com.apple.quarantine CyberBrick_Flashing_Tool.app

Not trying to tell you how to suck eggs, but making sure something “simple” wasn’t missed… :crossed_fingers: … I did the same just yesterday… it said right there in the instructions to reset the module manually if it wasn’t flashing properly… naturally I didn’t do that and just repeated the same steps multiple times until I did read that! :man_facepalming:

This went long.

The first few times I tried, it failed to unzip.

Thus, the comments you refer to.

Later it did, thus the later comments.

The date/time reflects an old Zip and old contents; nothing has changed.

The SUDO command does not work now or before.

I do know what it does. I have been a developer for 35+ years and a Mac user for well over half of that. I knew what I was doing when I tried and shared technical info with them.

BL are shipping out new versions of the hardware to me after telling me they have no interest in fixing the problem with the application. They say they no longer support them and have no interest in testing, re-zipping, or anything else.

They plan on placing the firmware tools in the desktop apps used to configure the CB projects.

I can only hope they enable cut, copy and paste at the same time.

They said they rushed the software, and they clearly did.

I didn’t take it that way.

I would have loved it to be, but this damn model has been drawn out for issues I did not cause. I really want it out for people to say “nope, not interested.”

I tried everything with the tiny buttons.

I even bought some more cores to keep things moving, as BL is very slow in sending replacements.

I do know my issue is the v1.0.2.51 cores they shared with everyone, which have known bugs, and they refuse to help people resolve those with the firmware tool we have spoken about.

v1.0.2.58 works perfectly.

They shipped the faulty v1.0.2.51 cores with the CyberBrick stuff.

It means if any models use anything other than really basic LED control, it will fail and the users will blame themselves.

For my needs, I wanted to drive 8 LEDs with three colours, which is impossible without code, as you cannot set a single hub to show more than one colour at the same time in the UI.

My model lets users turn on the main lights (white for the front and red for the back) while also having indicators that work left and right.

It is impossible to achieve using the UI.

I can only wonder how many models have been compromised because there is no obvious way, even with V1.0.2.58 and impossible with v1.0.2.51.

Designers will think it is their fault.

The documentation is also incredibly bad. Making getting to the solution even harder.

I tried using the cores from my two time-lapse units; those were also the faulty v1.0.2.51.

The only v1.0.2.58 I had was from a package I purchased after the Kickstarter and from MakerSupply.

That means:

  • 2 x time-lapse cores
  • 5 x kits via kickstarter
  • 2 x review units

All had v1.0.2.51.

The time-lapse kicks can be forgiven as they have a fixed role.

The other 7 - not so much.

Keep in mind, the original review kits were even older and could not be firmware updated, even if that did work. They had to send out the first set of replacements for those because they were incapable of connecting to the desktop and mobile apps.

Again, they knew this and did nothing to inform anyone.

You may remember why they created the config files for all the first CB models. This is why the reviewers were unable to with what they had.

They didn’t tell any of them. They didn’t tell me.

By rights, there should have been a recall if they continue refusing to have a firmware update.

1 Like