Official FutureBit Apollo LTC Image and Support thread

[jstnryan]

Does this occur when you only access the Apollo from outside your local network, or does it happen from your local IP as well? If it only happens outside it could be a bug, as I have not tested this case.

If its happening in both cases then sounds like the SD card got corrupted and is not accessing your already configured flag.

I am able to reach the dashboard normally if using the LAN address, however when using the WAN address I am prompted for Initial Setup regardless of whether I am physically connecting via LAN side or WAN side. I've re-imaged the SD card (the checksums match, written with balena Etcher, no other settings changed), and the problem remains. The port redirect is simply WAN_IP:81 -> LAN_IP:80; confirmed in multiple browsers, cookies, etcetera.

Using Chrome DevTools, I was able to enter my password in the form (behind the Initial Setup modal), and submit. The password input is replaced with the "Loading..." indicator, but never goes beyond that. I get XMLHttpRequest timeouts in the console.

[michelem]

Does this occur when you only access the Apollo from outside your local network, or does it happen from your local IP as well? If it only happens outside it could be a bug, as I have not tested this case.

If its happening in both cases then sounds like the SD card got corrupted and is not accessing your already configured flag.

I am able to reach the dashboard normally if using the LAN address, however when using the WAN address I am prompted for Initial Setup regardless of whether I am physically connecting via LAN side or WAN side. I've re-imaged the SD card (the checksums match, written with balena Etcher, no other settings changed), and the problem remains. The port redirect is simply WAN_IP:81 -> LAN_IP:80; confirmed in multiple browsers, cookies, etcetera.

Using Chrome DevTools, I was able to enter my password in the form (behind the Initial Setup modal), and submit. The password input is replaced with the "Loading..." indicator, but never goes beyond that. I get XMLHttpRequest timeouts in the console.

mmm I think we have to look at this because as said by John this wasn't tested before. I think that connecting to "external" IP it continues to relay on "internal" ones so you get timeouts. Thanks for notice this, don't waste other time, I will check it and hope to solve this by next release.

[johnstewart]

Hi everyone i updated my psu for a cooler master MWE gold 650 for my two Apollos today but i can't make it run i don't know how to process ....  any suggestion ?


UPDATE :

For those who will buy it : you have to plug it on a motherboard for the initial run then it works .....

[devincrypt]

From an earlier post someone mentioned sticking a 20mm heatsink on the MCU. As it's getting warmer/hotter here I'd like to keep things as cool as possible.

Found this on Amazon - would this be the correct type? With thermal tape (0.15 or 0.25?) I'd presume. Would thermal compound be better than tape?

https://www.amazon.com/Karcy-Aluminum-Heatsink-Cooling-Raspberry/dp/B07QLM1C48/ref=sr_1_5

[jstnryan]

I've found another odd behavior in the UI. It seems the device settings are stored (cached) in the UI, and can fall out of sync with actual device settings.

Environment used for testing:
Chrome 74 for MacOS and iOS

Steps to reproduce:
1. Set Apollo to Eco mode; save (leave window open)
2. Using another device or browser change Apollo to Balanced mode; save
3. Return to original window (step 1); refresh settings page

Observed:
The UI still shows Eco mode, while the device is in Balanced mode. The workaround is to log off and log back in.

Expected:
The UI should show Balanced mode after page refresh (a page refresh on the settings page should fetch current, actual settings).

[jstnryan]

From an earlier post someone mentioned sticking a 20mm heatsink on the MCU. As it's getting warmer/hotter here I'd like to keep things as cool as possible.

Found this on Amazon - would this be the correct type? With thermal tape (0.15 or 0.25?) I'd presume. Would thermal compound be better than tape?

The H2+ on the Orange Pi Zero is 14x14mm. There's probably no harm in oversizing the heatsink, except that the micro-USB connector may be in the way. The real issue is available height, since it is mounted below the hash board.

You may want to consider a small fan, instead. Airflow underneath the unit will help far more than a heatsink in stagnant air. In casual testing, I've found that simply blowing air across an Apollo (from a desk fan, for example) has a significant effect on MCU temperatures.

[devincrypt]

From an earlier post someone mentioned sticking a 20mm heatsink on the MCU. As it's getting warmer/hotter here I'd like to keep things as cool as possible.

Found this on Amazon - would this be the correct type? With thermal tape (0.15 or 0.25?) I'd presume. Would thermal compound be better than tape?

The H2+ on the Orange Pi Zero is 14x14mm. There's probably no harm in oversizing the heatsink, except that the micro-USB connector may be in the way. The real issue is available height, since it is mounted below the hash board.

You may want to consider a small fan, instead. Airflow underneath the unit will help far more than a heatsink in stagnant air. In casual testing, I've found that simply blowing air across an Apollo (from a desk fan, for example) has a significant effect on MCU temperatures.

I have my 2 Apollos on a wire rack shelf. Turns out blowing air from the bottom-up cools the miners significantly - more than other options I tried, including USB fans blowing into the front of each, window fan blowing directly into the fronts, etc. Bottom-up is best. Thanks for your feedback!

[jstefanop]

From an earlier post someone mentioned sticking a 20mm heatsink on the MCU. As it's getting warmer/hotter here I'd like to keep things as cool as possible.

Found this on Amazon - would this be the correct type? With thermal tape (0.15 or 0.25?) I'd presume. Would thermal compound be better than tape?

The H2+ on the Orange Pi Zero is 14x14mm. There's probably no harm in oversizing the heatsink, except that the micro-USB connector may be in the way. The real issue is available height, since it is mounted below the hash board.

You may want to consider a small fan, instead. Airflow underneath the unit will help far more than a heatsink in stagnant air. In casual testing, I've found that simply blowing air across an Apollo (from a desk fan, for example) has a significant effect on MCU temperatures.

I have my 2 Apollos on a wire rack shelf. Turns out blowing air from the bottom-up cools the miners significantly - more than other options I tried, including USB fans blowing into the front of each, window fan blowing directly into the fronts, etc. Bottom-up is best. Thanks for your feedback!

There is no need to worry about MCU temps (unless they are over 80c). These are designed so you don't have to worry about crazy cooling solutions to keep them cool.

[jstefanop]

HELP, I am a newborn miner( well not yet ). I started by just grabbing 10 Moonlander 2's, which I have sitting next to me... I should be running them... But I have read so much conflicting information about which unit/power source I should use(and that 75% of the power sources are basically crap)   I would be happy running 5-6...or 3 of whatever is the best option these days(price is definitely something that is important but not (do or die) .... I've read it all and can't figure out, which way to turn..   If anyone has an opinion please tell me, which unit(s)  you would use.   Links would be ExcellenT... I have 5 options that I believe are good,, but truthfully, I could be buying an extended wall outlet for all I know.  I can run 3 * x units or simply one That holds them ALL,,,,,,, or even two units.... but I don't know where to turn  (The big companies won't give a straight answer (basically they are Switzerland when I ask..)... Almost all of the information on most threads is now far outdated... Please and thank you for anyone that has a response ----- to not only help me but many others that are facing the same question...   
Respectfully,


~

You should probably start with reading the Moonlander Support thread here and posting your question there...this thread is for Apollo support.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2420357

[TopMiningMiner]

Hey there,

No idea what I'm doing, however I got excited and preordered an Apollo last night! Woke up this morning and realized I probably should have waited to order until after I had read through this thread. lol

But I must say, I ordered it is because I've been curious about this whole mining thing for awhile. And the fact that its Litecoin, (which I assume has a much lower difficulty to mine than bitcoin) relatively cheap, and simple to set up sold me on it! - Also, I have "free" electricity, so why not?

Anyways, I have a few questions:

Q1: Solo Mining vs Pool Mining

From what I've read, pool mining seems to be the way to go with these, right? (Since the hashing power is rather limited and the potential of finding a block is much smaller.)

However it seems that with pool mining, you'll earn something roughly like .11 LTC/month/Apollo right? - While if you solo mine, you earn nothing unless you find the block, at which point you earn the 25 LTC reward. At least until the halving.

Is that correct? If so, then the choice to pool vs solo mine really comes down to if you want a stable income vs gambling to find the block?
-

Q2: What would be the optimal way to Solo mine with the Apollo?
From what I've seen, it doesn't look like full node support is currently available? But when it is, how will that work? Would you need to dedicate an Apollo solely to act as a node (and therefore it doesn't mine?)
-

Q3: Moon Landers…?
I saw someone mention these things a few times and it took me longer than I care to admit to realize what they were… Because I thought they were just little foam pads/skis they put under their Apollo. lol

That said, are they worth picking up and plugging into the Apollo? If so, what's the ideal Lands per Apollo? And is the USB on the Apollo have any other plans in store?

Thanks!

[jstnryan]

No idea what I'm doing, however I got excited and preordered an Apollo last night! Woke up this morning and realized I probably should have waited to order until after I had read through this thread. lol

You picked a good product, in my opinion, to get started. The price per hash-rate is higher than other miners, but in exchange you get compact physical size, somewhat lower noise level, ease of management, and energy efficiency. Assuming this is your first mining hardware, you could have done worse.

Q1: Solo Mining vs Pool Mining

Your assertions are correct, but the choice to solo vs. pool are really a personal choice. The way I look at it, it's a decision between taking a chance and "winning big" in the solo mining lottery (the reward for finding an LTC block will far outweigh the cost of electricity and hardware for a long time, yet odds are against you "winning" anything), or taking the conservative pool route, and slowly "earning" back your investment. If you can dismiss the hardware costs, personally I find solo mining more exciting -- making money is nice, but it accumulates so slowly at this scale that it gets dull rather quickly.

Q2: What would be the optimal way to Solo mine with the Apollo?

The Apollo does not currently work as a full node. I won't speculate too much about how it will work when the FutureBit folk get it all sorted out, but I can almost guarantee the intention is that it will be a "node" and a "miner" at the same time (technically, they're the same thing, but that's another discussion). ASICs use specialty chips which would be useless if it didn't mine.

If you want to solo mine with the lowest barrier to entry, the way to go would be to find a mining pool which allows solo mining. "Solo mining pools" (despite the contradiction) are a sort of hybrid between pure solo mining and pool mining. The pool does the 'hard work' of setting up the hardware so all you have to to is point your miner at the pool (just like regular pool mining), and in exchange takes a small fee from the larger block reward.

Q3: Moon Landers…?

A few people have had success running one or more Moonlanders from the USB port on the Apollo, but it's a more involved process than just managing the Apollo by itself. You'll probably need a separate powered USB hub, and you'll definitely need to "get your hands dirty" in the command line interface. I'd suggest playing around with just the Apollo first, before jumping into USB miners. There's plenty to learn from the Apollo, first, and then you can better decide which direction you want to go.

[devincrypt]

Q1: I have 2 Apollos and get about $40 from pool mining - based on the current LTC price of about $134. While this isn't enough to quit your job I look at it a different way. I would have to have $24,000 in a savings account paying 2% interest to make $40/month (30 days). So I leave my Apollos churning away without having to come up with that $24,000! Another item is the potential price growth of LTC. When I started less than a year ago it was $20ish.

The pool I use shows the # of blocks I captured, which currently = 0. If I would have been mining at a site that only paid when a block was found I'd be sitting here with $0.00!

Q2: Patience (from what I've been told). Solo mining does not mean you'll find a block easier. It will reduce your network latency.

Q3: I have 5 Moonlanders because I bought them pre-Apollo. They do their little part on a powered USB hub connected to a cheap Rasp. Pi. If you bought 10 Mooners they would crank out maybe 40 MH/s - and you'll need a few powered hubs connected to a computer. For the same price you can buy one standalone Apollo that, in Balanced mode, will give you 3x that for about the same price without all the extra hubs and computer.

[whiteogre]

Q1: Solo Mining vs Pool Mining
However it seems that with pool mining, you'll earn something roughly like .11 LTC/month/Apollo right?

That will vary and it can vary a lot. Most likely the LTC difficulty will still keep slowly increasing so the LTC/month/Apollo will decrease and eventually it comes to the value of LTC itself. The history graph below shows the 24 hour reward for the last 3 months from litecoinpool with a single Apollo running 24/7. As you can see, the LTC/day is decreasing but USD/day far more unpredictable.

Q3: Moon Landers…?
That said, are they worth picking up and plugging into the Apollo?

From efficiency point of view, it's not worth it. The Apollo can be tuned to run around 1.1 W / MH/s where as the Moonlander 2s I had were somewhere around 2.5 W / MH/s. On the other hand, there's the learning aspect of getting the Moonlander running in the Apollo which may be worth something.

[TopMiningMiner]

Thanks jstnryan, devincrypt, and whiteogre! All great information and also some differing points of views!

I'll skip on Moon Landers and focus on the Apollo. - Which, I have another question, right now I have an Apollo + PSU + Card combo ordered. However the PSU from FutureBit only supports 1 Apollo. Are there any PSU that support 2 or 3 Apollos at a time?


I also was going to give solo mining a shot since the returns seemed bigger… however after some quick basic math, it seems that at the current rates, you would earn half as much as you would with pool mining if it did indeed take 14+ years to mine your first block!

Expected Rewards
24 hours   0.00491237 LTC   0.67 USD

Solo Mining Stats
Expected Time per Block   5190 days 23 hours

[jstnryan]

Are there any PSU that support 2 or 3 Apollos at a time?

I'm currently using an HP server power supply and Parallel Miner breakout board: https://www.parallelminer.com/product/baikal-bk-n70-power-supply-750w-110-240v-80-gold-92-efficiency/ At 750W, it could support 3 to 6 Apollos, depending on how you run them. On ECO mode 5 would be pretty safe; on TURBO it could handle 3 with a good margin of safety. You'd have to measure your power draw, and do some math to be sure.

[jstefanop]

Thanks jstnryan, devincrypt, and whiteogre! All great information and also some differing points of views!

I'll skip on Moon Landers and focus on the Apollo. - Which, I have another question, right now I have an Apollo + PSU + Card combo ordered. However the PSU from FutureBit only supports 1 Apollo. Are there any PSU that support 2 or 3 Apollos at a time?


I also was going to give solo mining a shot since the returns seemed bigger… however after some quick basic math, it seems that at the current rates, you would earn half as much as you would with pool mining if it did indeed take 14+ years to mine your first block!

Expected Rewards
24 hours   0.00491237 LTC   0.67 USD

Solo Mining Stats
Expected Time per Block   5190 days 23 hours

Youll earn the same solo mining vs pool if you have enough hash rate within a certain amount of time. Remember mining is probabilistic...on average though there is no difference, your just reducing your "variance" by pool mining.

This is why people solo mine with small devices, because your betting on that variance (ie hoping that you hit that block next week instead of in 14 years). You essentially are buying one lottery ticket every day that has a 1/~5k chance of winning, which are much nicer odds than the real lottery 

[TopMiningMiner]

Right on!  Thanks everyone!

I think for now I'll stick to the single Apollo+PSU I have already ordered, and well see what happens after it arrives!

[dwood443]

Youll earn the same solo mining vs pool if you have enough hash rate within a certain amount of time. Remember mining is probabilistic...on average though there is no difference, your just reducing your "variance" by pool mining.

This is why people solo mine with small devices, because your betting on that variance (ie hoping that you hit that block next week instead of in 14 years). You essentially are buying one lottery ticket every day that has a 1/~5k chance of winning, which are much nicer odds than the real lottery  

Would this thinking also apply to solo mining on zergpool? with zerpool I've made 0.73 litecoin in 7 weeks with 3 miners running middle mode which is making some profit ($70 after power costs). And there is still a chance I'd hit a litecoin block. Would this be the same as going back to litcoinpool and making nothing until/if a block is found?

[jstnryan]

Would this thinking also apply to solo mining on zergpool? with zerpool I've made 0.73 litecoin in 7 weeks with 3 miners running middle mode which is making some profit ($70 after power costs). And there is still a chance I'd hit a litecoin block. Would this be the same as going back to litcoinpool and making nothing until/if a block is found?

There is almost zero chance you'll hit a Litecoin block on Zergpool if you're using their merged/multi-currency switching (for example, unless you specify a coin to mine with mc=LTC). Because of "profitability" your miner(s) will be served work for the other coins far more often than LTC, if you get assigned any LTC work at all.

[peetee]

Hi everyone. I had a nice long run with my Apollo on 1.0, with few to no issues. About a month ago I moved it to a new location which I visit once a week or so, and upgraded it to 1.1. Since then, on two occasions it has stopped mining. Because this is a remote site, I put an IP-enabled power switch at the location so I could remotely power cycle equipment at the site. Unfortunately, my Apollo is connected to an HP server power supply with a breakout board, which requires me to *also* physically press a button to turn power back on.

Anyhow, on the first occasion I tried power cycling the IP-enabled power switch, forgetting that the breakout board meant that I couldn't get the system restarted. So I don't have much diagnosis to go on. But on the second occasion when it stopped mining, I happened to be at the remote site. Before power cycling it, I could not get into the Apollo at all -- it wouldn't respond to SSH, ping, etc. It was down hard. I can presume, but cannot confirm, that the first lockup was similar.

I've since rebooted it and it is now mining successfully again. Is there anything I can look at -- log files, journal, etc. -- that may help diagnose what caused it to lock up? I had several months of successful running on 1.0 with no issues, and now two lockups on 1.1 within a month. (It may be mere coincidence, I'm just pointing it out.)

I'd like to get to the bottom of it, since I won't have the ability to remotely power cycle this thing except on weekends... until my Futurebit PSU shows up :-)