NanoFury Project - Open Source Design

[Taugeran]

If zadig is installed is it still seen as a HID device?

For cgminer? Negatory.

After zadiging it, run cgminer. Should auto detect.  Also I'm not sure if cgminer has support for multiple chip NFY devices...yet

[adib]

Not yet but i offered o send the FRANKENSTEIN to ckolivas for research.
Post no. 262.

[-ck]

Or if there was support for multiple bf chips in cgminer...

I don't have one so cannot write the support for it. I only have 2 single chip icefuries.

I could send you a fully populated H-card+adapter, like you see in the picture all with good chips.
Default speed or a little overclocked from 25ghs to 30ghs(in chainminer).

pm me the address ... wish you were in Europe... but its probably US

Thanks for that. I don't have the power to run much more in my house and I'd hate to see hardware go to waste. Maybe the 2-6 units alone are enough to get me going.

Con - PM me a mailing address please - I have a few NF2s from my engineering units and I might be able to repair a few more. I'll send you also one of the engineering NF6 boards.

Thanks vs3, I'll take you up on your offer.

[vs3]

I figured out what was wrong with the 6th chip :-)

bfgminer version 3.99.0 - Started: [2014-04-05 02:07:05] - [  0 days 00:09:16]
Manage devices Pool management Settings Display options
Connected to stratum.mining.eligius.st diff 16 with stratum as user
Block: ...484af8b3 #294330  Diff:5.01G (35.84Ph/s)  Started: [02:14:47]
ST:8  F:0  NB:3  AS:0  BW:[203/ 27 B/s]  E:20.23  I:40.96uBTC/hr  BS:1.72k
1/6           |  9.72/ 9.55/10.65Gh/s | A:75 R:2+0(2.6%) HW:43/3.0%
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NFY 0a:       |  1.64/ 1.66/ 1.77Gh/s | A:17 R:1+0(5.6%) HW: 6/2.4%
NFY 0b:       |  1.64/ 1.65/ 1.91Gh/s | A:12 R:0+0(none) HW:14/4.7%
NFY 0c:       |  1.53/ 1.54/ 1.59Gh/s | A:10 R:1+0(9.1%) HW:15/6.4%
NFY 0d:       |  1.57/ 1.61/ 1.66Gh/s | A:11 R:0+0(none) HW: 4/1.9%
NFY 0e:       |  1.64/ 1.66/ 1.83Gh/s | A:12 R:0+0(none) HW: 5/2.1%
NFY 0f:       |  1.68/ 1.70/ 1.83Gh/s | A:15 R:0+0(none) HW: 0/none
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2014-04-05 02:12:52] Accepted 0c1ee27c NFY 0c Diff 21/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:52] Accepted 099ab634 NFY 0d Diff 26/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:52] Accepted 0c06c938 NFY 0d Diff 21/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:52] Accepted 0d599353 NFY 0e Diff 19/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:54] Accepted 0ce9c358 NFY 0e Diff 19/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:57] Accepted 0826a4eb NFY 0b Diff 31/16
[2014-04-05 02:13:05] Accepted 047c994e NFY 0a Diff 57/16
[2014-04-05 02:13:06] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
[2014-04-05 02:13:10] Accepted 0dae182d NFY 0e Diff 18/16

I'll have to try with a different hub tomorrow as this one is quite crappy (at 1.15A dropping down to 3.9V).

[simoncc]

I figured out what was wrong with the 6th chip :-)

bfgminer version 3.99.0 - Started: [2014-04-05 02:07:05] - [  0 days 00:09:16]
Manage devices Pool management Settings Display options
Connected to stratum.mining.eligius.st diff 16 with stratum as user
Block: ...484af8b3 #294330  Diff:5.01G (35.84Ph/s)  Started: [02:14:47]
ST:8  F:0  NB:3  AS:0  BW:[203/ 27 B/s]  E:20.23  I:40.96uBTC/hr  BS:1.72k
1/6           |  9.72/ 9.55/10.65Gh/s | A:75 R:2+0(2.6%) HW:43/3.0%
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NFY 0a:       |  1.64/ 1.66/ 1.77Gh/s | A:17 R:1+0(5.6%) HW: 6/2.4%
NFY 0b:       |  1.64/ 1.65/ 1.91Gh/s | A:12 R:0+0(none) HW:14/4.7%
NFY 0c:       |  1.53/ 1.54/ 1.59Gh/s | A:10 R:1+0(9.1%) HW:15/6.4%
NFY 0d:       |  1.57/ 1.61/ 1.66Gh/s | A:11 R:0+0(none) HW: 4/1.9%
NFY 0e:       |  1.64/ 1.66/ 1.83Gh/s | A:12 R:0+0(none) HW: 5/2.1%
NFY 0f:       |  1.68/ 1.70/ 1.83Gh/s | A:15 R:0+0(none) HW: 0/none
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2014-04-05 02:12:52] Accepted 0c1ee27c NFY 0c Diff 21/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:52] Accepted 099ab634 NFY 0d Diff 26/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:52] Accepted 0c06c938 NFY 0d Diff 21/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:52] Accepted 0d599353 NFY 0e Diff 19/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:54] Accepted 0ce9c358 NFY 0e Diff 19/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:57] Accepted 0826a4eb NFY 0b Diff 31/16
[2014-04-05 02:13:05] Accepted 047c994e NFY 0a Diff 57/16
[2014-04-05 02:13:06] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
[2014-04-05 02:13:10] Accepted 0dae182d NFY 0e Diff 18/16

I'll have to try with a different hub tomorrow as this one is quite crappy (at 1.15A dropping down to 3.9V).

I have ever tried 5-chipped NFx. (NF5?!) last week with bfgminer and gotten 12+G/h. But I forgot to take a picture to show what I said...sorry.

[yslyung]

looking fwd for a diy kit for nf6. rework station & some v2 bfchips too is on its way.

[simoncc]

I figured out what was wrong with the 6th chip :-)

bfgminer version 3.99.0 - Started: [2014-04-05 02:07:05] - [  0 days 00:09:16]
Manage devices Pool management Settings Display options
Connected to stratum.mining.eligius.st diff 16 with stratum as user
Block: ...484af8b3 #294330  Diff:5.01G (35.84Ph/s)  Started: [02:14:47]
ST:8  F:0  NB:3  AS:0  BW:[203/ 27 B/s]  E:20.23  I:40.96uBTC/hr  BS:1.72k
1/6           |  9.72/ 9.55/10.65Gh/s | A:75 R:2+0(2.6%) HW:43/3.0%
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NFY 0a:       |  1.64/ 1.66/ 1.77Gh/s | A:17 R:1+0(5.6%) HW: 6/2.4%
NFY 0b:       |  1.64/ 1.65/ 1.91Gh/s | A:12 R:0+0(none) HW:14/4.7%
NFY 0c:       |  1.53/ 1.54/ 1.59Gh/s | A:10 R:1+0(9.1%) HW:15/6.4%
NFY 0d:       |  1.57/ 1.61/ 1.66Gh/s | A:11 R:0+0(none) HW: 4/1.9%
NFY 0e:       |  1.64/ 1.66/ 1.83Gh/s | A:12 R:0+0(none) HW: 5/2.1%
NFY 0f:       |  1.68/ 1.70/ 1.83Gh/s | A:15 R:0+0(none) HW: 0/none
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2014-04-05 02:12:52] Accepted 0c1ee27c NFY 0c Diff 21/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:52] Accepted 099ab634 NFY 0d Diff 26/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:52] Accepted 0c06c938 NFY 0d Diff 21/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:52] Accepted 0d599353 NFY 0e Diff 19/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:54] Accepted 0ce9c358 NFY 0e Diff 19/16
[2014-04-05 02:12:57] Accepted 0826a4eb NFY 0b Diff 31/16
[2014-04-05 02:13:05] Accepted 047c994e NFY 0a Diff 57/16
[2014-04-05 02:13:06] Stratum from pool 0 requested work update
[2014-04-05 02:13:10] Accepted 0dae182d NFY 0e Diff 18/16

I'll have to try with a different hub tomorrow as this one is quite crappy (at 1.15A dropping down to 3.9V).

I have ever tried 5-chipped NFx. (NF5?!) last week with bfgminer and gotten 12+G/h. But I forgot to take a picture to show what I said...sorry.

I do not use any hub, but use a kit I made. It's simple and works.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23682587/DSC_0223.JPG
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23682587/DSC_0222.JPG

[simoncc]

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23682587/cgminer-bitfury-3chips.png

3-chipped NanoFury (NF3!?)

I will post 5-chipped picture later...

[vs3]

Okay, I think it's time to get some feedback from the public -

the 6-chip design will most likely be limited to around 12GH. The reason being is - with 6 chips each chip gets around 0.8V in which case the bitfury chips do around 2-2.2GH max. For more gigahashes we need higher voltage. (the NF1/NF2 are running with 0.86V).

And the 0.8V per chip is the ideal case - most USB hubs will probably crap out and instead of 5V will provide somewhat less (thus even lower voltage per chip and lower gigahashes).

The alternative is to try a 5-chip chain. In this case we'll have around 1V per chip and they will do significantly more than 2GH/chip (likely in the vicinity of 3GH+).

Pros and cons:
6-chip:
pros: relatively low power usage of around 1-1.2A, probably 1.5A max when pushed, resulting in relatively low heat production
cons: wasting an extra chip ($5-6)

5-chip:
pros: will almost certainly do more gigahashes with one less chip per miner
cons: will use a lot more power (likely over 3A) and will be very very very hot


so - the question is - should we even bother looking at a 5-chip version, or stick with the 6-chip even though it has some disadvantages?

[TheRealSteve]

so - the question is - should we even bother looking at a 5-chip version, or stick with the 6-chip even though it has some disadvantages?

Considering neither configuration is going to ROI unless a lot of crazy things happen, NF6 design is well underway, doesn't require active cooling (which the 5-chip one sounds like it probably would) which tends to be something people seek to avoid if they're just doing it for fun, and the 5-chip*~3Ghash/s would only be 3Ghash/s faster,  I'd say don't bother.
Would it not be easier (not sure if feasible with the string design) to optionally allow an external power source to use a higher voltage for those wanting it running faster / daring enough to overclock?

Are there any other pros/cons you can think of?

Though if a 5-chip chain is possible, I guess those DodecaFury panels could be sold separately after all

[Taugeran]

so - the question is - should we even bother looking at a 5-chip version, or stick with the 6-chip even though it has some disadvantages?

Considering neither configuration is going to ROI unless a lot of crazy things happen, NF6 design is well underway, doesn't require active cooling (which the 5-chip one sounds like it probably would) which tends to be something people seek to avoid if they're just doing it for fun, and the 5-chip*~3Ghash/s would only be 3Ghash/s faster,  I'd say don't bother.
Would it not be easier (not sure if feasible with the string design) to optionally allow an external power source to use a higher voltage for those wanting it running faster / daring enough to overclock?

Are there any other pros/cons you can think of?

Though if a 5-chip chain is possible, I guess those DodecaFury panels could be sold separately after all

lol @ dodecafury.


i concur with steve. the NFY i have presently dont need active cooling but perf is better with it.  same with the OneStringMiners. the DIY0 with no heatsink no A/C does about 25-27Ghash. with some A/C and vga heatsinks, jumped to 30-33

[adib]

Im all in for max heat max power max ghs

As for my plans for the H-card-usb converter....
An H-card can take 12 chips@0,9...0,95V and you get about 30ghs/card this way.
My plan is to split them in 6+6 on two usb converters/card.

Thats is if cgminer doesnt change the playground.

[vs3]

so - the question is - should we even bother looking at a 5-chip version, or stick with the 6-chip even though it has some disadvantages?

Considering neither configuration is going to ROI unless a lot of crazy things happen, NF6 design is well underway, doesn't require active cooling (which the 5-chip one sounds like it probably would) which tends to be something people seek to avoid if they're just doing it for fun, and the 5-chip*~3Ghash/s would only be 3Ghash/s faster,  I'd say don't bother.
Would it not be easier (not sure if feasible with the string design) to optionally allow an external power source to use a higher voltage for those wanting it running faster / daring enough to overclock?

Are there any other pros/cons you can think of?

Though if a 5-chip chain is possible, I guess those DodecaFury panels could be sold separately after all

lol @ dodecafury.


i concur with steve. the NFY i have presently dont need active cooling but perf is better with it.  same with the OneStringMiners. the DIY0 with no heatsink no A/C does about 25-27Ghash. with some A/C and vga heatsinks, jumped to 30-33

Okay, so we'll stay the course with the NF6 :-)

I personally prefer the option that uses less power - 1-1.2A is just above USB3-specs for power and most "mining-tailored hubs" would have no issues with 1.5A, but going for 3A+ will be a completely different challenge by itself (plus most cheaply-made connectors may not take that very well).
So in terms like that the 6-chip is much more end-user friendly (although not necessarily very geeky ).

As for over-voltaging - that is a viable geeky option - most PC electronics will tolerate up to 5.5V. So if they do let's say 5.4V this will result in 0.9V/chip where they can definitely perform a lot faster (almost certainly beyond 2.5-2.7GH/chip).
Alternatively, they can do a relatively easy board mod and remove the fuse and supply any external voltage they want (although I would caution against going with much over 5.5V as there are some inter-chip dependencies and with higher voltage things may very quickly go beyond what chips can tolerate)

[TheRealSteve]

Just out of curiosity - would that (the geeky 'over'-volting, or at least stable-volting, not going above 5.5V) be as simple as disconnecting the USB Vcc (cut the trace/whatever) || dropping in a schottky, hooking up the external power supply and share the USB GND, or are there some other considerations?

[vs3]

Just out of curiosity - would that (the geeky 'over'-volting, or at least stable-volting, not going above 5.5V) be as simple as disconnecting the USB Vcc (cut the trace/whatever) || dropping in a schottky, hooking up the external power supply and share the USB GND, or are there some other considerations?

yup - exactly as simple as that

[TheRealSteve]

Just out of curiosity - would that (the geeky 'over'-volting, or at least stable-volting, not going above 5.5V) be as simple as disconnecting the USB Vcc (cut the trace/whatever) || dropping in a schottky, hooking up the external power supply and share the USB GND, or are there some other considerations?

yup - exactly as simple as that

Yeah, then I definitely recommend just sticking to the NF6 design.  If it is still in the design phase, you could make that a little easier by including two pads to solder some external power leads into/onto (bonus points if you can make it fit some common connector part), but I'd suspect there should be some pads for parts that could be soldered as well, just a bit more tricky for people new to soldering

[-ck]

I hope the NF* variants have a unique identifier on USB to make them easy to distinguish on USB.
The nanofury currently nicely identifies itself as:

Code:

iProduct                2 NanoFury NF1 v0.7

Managing variant devices is much easier when some forethought goes into it by the hardware devs thanks

[simoncc]

I hope the NF* variants have a unique identifier on USB to make them easy to distinguish on USB.
The nanofury currently nicely identifies itself as:

Code:

iProduct                2 NanoFury NF1 v0.7

Managing variant devices is much easier when some forethought goes into it by the hardware devs thanks

I can send you my code if you like. I modified cgminer 4.2.3 for NFx already.
I get the number of chips by finding "NFx" where x is for chips, i.e. NF1 for 1 chip, NF2 for 2,
NF3 for 3,...NF5 for 5, NF6 for 6...and so on...
The freq of all chips are the same. I have no idea to add an optional to set different freq for each
chip. As the picture I showed that is tested on "NF3".
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23682587/DSC_0226.JPG
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23682587/DSC_0227.JPG

Later, I will show NF5...

[adib]

I hope the NF* variants have a unique identifier on USB to make them easy to distinguish on USB.
The nanofury currently nicely identifies itself as:

Code:

iProduct                2 NanoFury NF1 v0.7

Managing variant devices is much easier when some forethought goes into it by the hardware devs thanks

I can send you my code if you like. I modified cgminer 4.2.3 for NFx already.
I get the number of chips by finding "NFx" where x is for chips, i.e. NF1 for 1 chip, NF2 for 2,
NF3 for 3,...NF5 for 5, NF6 for 6...and so on...
The freq of all chips are the same. I have no idea to add an optional to set different freq for each
chip. As the picture I showed that is tested on "NF3".

Later, I will show NF5...

I would be intrested in the code if youd like to share it, id like to test it on the h-card-usb thing.
Just point me where i have o change the numbers.

Thanks

[simoncc]

I hope the NF* variants have a unique identifier on USB to make them easy to distinguish on USB.
The nanofury currently nicely identifies itself as:

Code:

iProduct                2 NanoFury NF1 v0.7

Managing variant devices is much easier when some forethought goes into it by the hardware devs thanks

I can send you my code if you like. I modified cgminer 4.2.3 for NFx already.
I get the number of chips by finding "NFx" where x is for chips, i.e. NF1 for 1 chip, NF2 for 2,
NF3 for 3,...NF5 for 5, NF6 for 6...and so on...
The freq of all chips are the same. I have no idea to add an optional to set different freq for each
chip. As the picture I showed that is tested on "NF3".

Later, I will show NF5...

I would be intrested in the code if youd like to share it, id like to test it on the h-card-usb thing.
Just point me where i have o change the numbers.

Thanks

Download this tool to modify the product string of MCP2210 :  http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/MCP2210Utility_v1.2.1.zip
Read, modify and configure... quite easy. If you use zadig to access MCP2210, you have to remove/uninstall it and change to windows default HID driver such that microchip can access MCP2210 correctly. I will put my source to github here tonight, 'cause that is at home, not in office.